Category Archives: Uncategorized

As The Health Care Reform Turns

18 Thursday Mar 2010

Posted by in Congress, Democrats, health care, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

In today’s episode of  “As The Health Care Reform Turns”:

“House Democrats are inching toward the majority they need to pass health care legislation, giving them added confidence as they work out the last details of the bill and gird for a showdown as soon as this weekend.”

“Details” like what’s in the bill and how much it costs:

“House Democratic leaders on Wednesday night said the long-awaited Congressional Budget Office score of the reconciliation bill will not come out until Thursday, forcing an acknowledgment that a Saturday healthcare vote is likely off the table…But leaders are still hoping for a score on Thursday, and are still preparing for a possible vote before the end of the weekend.

…Rep. Robert Andrews (D-N.J.)…said that the delay is the result of numerous technical issues involved, and stressed that, despite any rumors to the contrary, the delays are not the result of policy problems.”

Translation: The delays are the result of policy problems. Just a hunch—Pelosi has seen the CBO numbers and they ain’t good. Hence the need to raise the tax on benefits:

“AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka is headed into a meeting with President Obama this afternoon after the White House and Congressional leaders have begun to discuss a higher-than-expected excise tax on some health care plans, in order to maintain their claim that health care legislation will reduce the deficit, a source involved in health care talks said.”

Policy problems like President Obama’s support for the so-called “Louisiana Purchase”:

“That provision, which I think should remain in, said that if a state has been affected by a natural catastrophe, that has created a special health care emergency in that state, they should get help,” Obama told Fox News’s Bret Baier…”

And since PhRMA has agreed to spend $6 million on pro-reform advertising, it’s safe to assume that the not-so-secret deal between the White House and the drug industry will be in the elusive bill as well.

So, where does HCR stand today? Pretty much in the same place its been:

“Democratic leaders say they have not nailed down the 216 votes they need for passage, but they are pressing ahead in the belief that they can get them.”

Health Care “Sleight of Hand”

16 Tuesday Mar 2010

Posted by in Congress, financial reform, health care, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

If members of Congress have any question as to why they rank somewhere below used car salesmen on the trustworthy scale, there are 2 shining examples relating to 2 pieces of proposed legislation in today’s news—one on health care reform and one on financial reform—which should make it crystal clear. First there’s this from the Washington Post:

“After laying the groundwork for a decisive vote this week on the Senate’s health-care bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested Monday that she might attempt to pass the measure without having members vote on it.”

Wait a minute, I thought President Obama said it was time for an up or down vote on health care reform? Que pasa? I guess that only applies when the votes are there. Failing that, the need for an alternative procedure arises. Such as:

“Instead, Pelosi (D-Calif.) would rely on a procedural sleight of hand: The House would vote on a more popular package of fixes to the Senate bill; under the House rule for that vote, passage would signify that lawmakers “deem” the health-care bill to be passed.”

Note to Speaker Pelosi: For future reference, any time the words “sleight of hand” are used in relation to an action by Congress, it doesn’t exactly inspire confidence that what you’re trying to do is on the up and up.

“The tactic — known as a “self-executing rule” or a “deem and pass” — has been commonly used, although never to pass legislation as momentous as the $875 billion health-care bill. It is one of three options that Pelosi said she is considering for a late-week House vote, but she added that she prefers it because it would politically protect lawmakers who are reluctant to publicly support the measure.”

Wait another minute. Haven’t the Speaker and the Democratic leadership been extolling the virtues of this “reform” and how good it will be for us ( just trust them)?  Then why the need for “political protection?” I’m confused.

The other bit of news is Sen. Chris Dodd’s release of his so-called “sweeping financial regulatory reform” bill. This quote from Dodd at the end of a Huffington Post article says it all:

“Interestingly, Dodd seemed to want to minimize expectations for the proposed legislation’s impact by saying several times that it is not enough to prevent another crisis: “This legislation will not stop the next crisis from coming. No legislation can…”

Yes it can, Sen. Dodd. If you want it to. Ay, there’s the rub.

Size Does Matter

03 Wednesday Mar 2010

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Memo to Wal-Mart management: Please add another fitting room.

“The places where most people buy condoms — Wal-Mart and drug stores — are motivated by a business model that needs to maximize shelf space, so they offer few varieties. To complicate things further, there is no standard sizing for condoms.

… a lot of people don’t know that condoms really do come in sizes, said Sarah Alleyne, HIV prevention specialist with the Lexington-Fayette County Health Department…And, she said, “there is probably some ego involved with it when people are buying condoms.”

“Some ego?” Ya think? Robin Williams put it best, all they need is 3 sizes—large, medium, and Caucasian.

Democrats Cave on Torture Amendment: So What Else Is New?

26 Friday Feb 2010

Posted by in Constitution, Democrats, Dick Cheney, Justice Department, Obama, Politics, Republicans, terrorism, torture, Uncategorized, war on terror

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

While all the attention in Washington yesterday was focused on the posturing and pontificating over health care reform, there was something else going on. Democratic Congressman Sylvestre Reyes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, proposed an amendment to the 2010 Intelligence Authorization Act. The amendment is called the Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Interrogation Prohibition Act of 2010 which, in essence, does nothing more than codify what already exists in Articles 1 and 16 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture. You know that treaty which under Article VI of the Constitution is supposed to be the “supreme Law of the Land,” but was signed and ratified pre-9/11 so is no longer applicable, apparently.

The amendment prohibits such acts as waterboarding, beatings, sleep deprivation, and mock executions among others. In other words, pretty much the chart toppers on the Cheney/Ashcroft/Rumsfeld/Yoo/Bybee hit parade. It applies to any “U.S. national, or any officer, employee, contractor, or subcontractor of the Federal government,” with punishment for violation being “fine or imprisonment for not more than 15 years, or both,” unless death results. Then the imprisonment is “any term of years or for life.”

And right on cue, here came the torture defenders, led by Liz Cheney, playing the predictable “keeping us safe” card:

“Late last night, Democrats in the House of Representatives inserted a provision dubbed “The Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Interrogation Act of 2010” into the intelligence authorization bill. This new language targets the US intelligence community with criminal penalties for using methods they have deemed necessary for keeping America safe. These methods have further been found by the Department of Justice to be both legal and in keeping with our international obligations.”

Sorry Liz, but just because they were found legal by the pretzel logic of Daddy’s Justice Department (and sadly, found to be merely “poor judgment” by the current Justice Department) doesn’t mean they are legal. It just means that laws and treaties have become an a la carte menu in post 9/11 America. We now pick and choose which ones to enforce and which ones to ignore. Again, sadly.

According to Marc Ambinder at the Atlantic, the amendment is also not popular at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue (sigh):

“The White House isn’t happy; they’ve already threatened to veto the bill because it, in their mind, it infringes upon the rights of the executive branch by forcing the administration to disclose more about intelligence operations to more members of Congress.”

That sounds a lot like a previous administration to me. (Double sigh).

And speaking of right on cue, all House Republicans had to do was give the insinuation that they would accuse Democrats of being ‘soft on terror’ and ‘coddling terrorists’ and the gutless, spineless, Democratic leadership pulled the bill.

Yoo: The President Could Order the Massacre of a Village

22 Monday Feb 2010

Posted by in Dick Cheney, Justice Department, Politics, torture, Uncategorized, war on terror

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Michael Isikoff at Newsweek.com has more on the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report in which David Margolis, senior lawyer in the Obstruction of Justice Department, found John Yoo and Jay Bybee guilty of nothing more than “poor judgement” in authoring the torture memos.

The report also contains an excerpt of an investigator’s interview with Yoo on the subject of the expanded powers of the president:

“At the core of the legal arguments were the views of Yoo, strongly backed by David Addington, Vice President Dick Cheney’s legal counsel, that the president’s wartime powers were essentially unlimited and included the authority to override laws passed by Congress, such as a statute banning the use of torture. Pressed on his views in an interview with OPR investigators, Yoo was asked:

“Sure,” said Yoo.”

“What about ordering a village of resistants to be massacred? … Is that a power that the president could legally—”

“Yeah,” Yoo replied, according to a partial transcript included in the report. “Although, let me say this: So, certainly, that would fall within the commander-in-chief’s power over tactical decisions.”

“To order a village of civilians to be [exterminated]?” the OPR investigator asked again.

CarolynC at The Seminal comments on the fallout from Margolis’ decision:

“Because of the actions of men like John Yoo, our country’s moral standing in the world has been eroded. The country of Washington, Lincoln has become a country where legal justifications of torture are now viewed as a matter of “poor judgment,” as the OPR report concluded in its findings.”

One can only conclude that the extermination of an entire village would also fall under the “poor judgment” umbrella as well.

“… But far from being condemned and disgraced, our domestic war criminals live in comfort and ease, their opinions are eagerly sought by our slavish media, and they are treated with the utmost respect in the corridors of power.

…thanks to John Yoo, the President can now commit everything up to and including genocide. Nothing seems to have changed, but everything has changed. Most of us were brought up to consider ourselves citizens of a democratic country; now we are dangerously close to being mere subjects of a monarchical leader, whose powers know no bounds.”

Dick Cheney is so confident that he is in no danger of being held accountable that he triumphantly broadcast his guilt on national television; he admitted last Sunday that he personally ordered the CIA to waterboard detainees. No matter. He will still be treated with deference as an elder statesmen by the Beltway Elite. And John Yoo will continue to practice law, teach, give interviews and write books on the virtues of unlimited executive power, and the books will be greeted with glowing reviews.

Spencer Ackerman’s Open Letter to Liz Cheney

22 Monday Feb 2010

Posted by in Constitution, Dick Cheney, Justice Department, Obama, Politics, torture, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Spencer Ackerman at the Washington Independent has an “Open Letter to Liz Cheney on Torture”:

Dear Ms. Cheney,

I don’t know if you saw ‘Meet The Press’ this morning, but a general you may have heard of named David Petraeus — he’s the commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East and South Asia and is the most distinguished Army general since Colin Powell — graced your television. He was asked about whether the U.S. ought to torture Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the deputy commander of the Taliban, recently captured in Pakistan. “I have always been on record, in fact since 2003, with the concept of living our values,” Petraeus replied. Every time the U.S. took what he called “expedient measures” around the Geneva Conventions, those deviations just “turned around and bitten us on our backside.” The effect of torture at Abu Ghraib is “non-biodegradable,” he continued, and boasted that as commander of the 101st Airborne in Iraq, he ordered his men to ignore any instruction to use techniques outside the Army Field Manual on Interrogations. Besides, the non-torture techniques that manual has long instructed? “That works,” he said. “That is our experience.”

But hey. You’re a former deputy assistant secretary of state! You obviously know better than the man who implemented the surge in Iraq. Why don’t you enlighten Gen. Petraeus about all the glories of torture? And since you consider “enhanced interrogation” so necessary to secure the country, perhaps there’s a full page ad you’ll take out in a major newspaper?

Cordially,
Spencer

Would that Ackerman’s letter might get Ms. Cheney’s mind right. But I think the only means to that end would be Papa Dick in his rightful place before a war crimes tribunal. But sadly, the Obama Obstruction of Justice Department and the Look Forward, Not Back Doctrine of the Constitutional Scholar-in-Chief isn’t going to allow that to happen.

Sadly, we will continue to be subjected to the former VP, and by extension his daughter, proudly extolling the virtues of torture, undeterred by any thoughts of being held accountable.

Sadly indeed.

Bi-Partisan Commissions: A Hiding Place for Gutless Politicians

18 Thursday Feb 2010

Posted by in Congress, economy, Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

Generally speaking, bi-partisan commissions are a bad idea, with just a few exceptions. Those being when something is being investigated–such as the 9/11 Commission or the current Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission. The debt reduction commission, set to be unveiled today by President Obama, falls into the bad idea category, and for the usual reason.

Bi-partisan commissions are nothing more than a refuge for gutless politicians who are more concerned with the next election than the next generation, and who don’t want to go on the record with votes on controversial issues which might hurt their re-election chances. And there are no issues more controversial than what must be done if we hope to make any serious attempt at reducing the national debt. And I don’t mean re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic with so-called “spending freezes” on areas of the budget which amount to less than 20% of all spending.

Serious debt reduction has to take on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, which together make up about 40% of the budget. And for the two biggest expenditures–Social Security and Medicare– there are only 3 options–raise taxes, reduce benefits, or raise the eligibility age.

Serious debt reduction has to cut spending across the board, no exceptions and no exclusions, including the Pentagon. The 2009 budget for the Department of Defense was north of $700 billion, which is roughly equivalent to the rest of the world’s military spending combined.

Serious debt reduction has to include tax increases. We, as a country, have been living on a credit card for the last 30 years–it’s time to start paying the bill.

Tough decisions all, and decisions we pay members of Congress to make, not shove off on “bi-partisan commissions” with no authority to do anything other than make recommendations.

The Washington–K Street Revolving Door

17 Wednesday Feb 2010

Posted by in Congress, Democrats, lobbyists, Politics, Republicans, special interests, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No need to pass the hat for retiring members of Congress, they’re unlikely to join the ranks of the unemployed:

“Lawmakers retiring this year have little reason to fret the job market: Some of K Street’s biggest players have top openings with seven-figure salaries…At least four major trade associations are looking to hire for their high-profile jobs, each of which could command a salary in excess of $1 million a year.

The growing list of members who have decided not to seek reelection, combined with top-notch job opportunities, will only further the trend of ex-lawmakers lobbying for interests they once oversaw.”

Ah yes, the old D.C. revolving door:

“Public Citizen, a watchdog group, reported that 43 percent of members who left Congress between 1998 and 2004 became registered lobbyists, a figure that does not include political consultants who don’t register” [like former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle.]

A few other examples:

“Retiring Democrats like Sens. Christopher Dodd (Conn.) and Byron Dorgan (N.D.), and Reps. John Tanner and Bart Gordon, both of Tennessee, are names mentioned as possible hot prospects downtown.”

“Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) announced his retirement from Congress last fall and instead of finishing his term, he immediately took a job with law and lobbying firm DLA Piper (though he did not register as a lobbyist).

Then there’s the soon-to-be retired senator from Indiana, Evan Bayh, who, “a day after he announced his retirement..declined to rule out a career as a lobbyist.” A good fit for Senator Bayh might be the job recently vacated by another former member of Congress who moved on to the greener pastures of lobbying, the head of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association (PhRMA) which was held by Billy Tauzin, and pays fairly well:

“Tauzin, a collegial dealmaker who entered Congress as a Democrat and left as a Republican, is resigning from a job that paid him a total compensation package in excess of $2 million a year, according to the association’s 2007 tax records.”

Since Senator Bayh’s wife sits on the board at insurance giant WellPoint, I suspect there might be a place for him there as a lobbyist if he so chooses. There is one small matter Bayh needs to clear up, what to do with the $13 million campaign war chest he has on hand. There are a few options:

a) keep the cash in his own account for a possible future run for office
b) transfer it to a newly-created PAC
c) return it to the donors
d) give it to charity
e) give it to the Indiana Democratic Party
f) give it to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), or the Democratic National Committee (DNC)

I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess (a). Just a hunch.

Snowstorm Shuts Down Capitol Hill

10 Wednesday Feb 2010

Posted by in Congress, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

Neither rain, nor snow, nor…..wait a minute, that doesn’t apply to Congress.

“The House suspended votes for the rest of the week because of the impending snowstorm while the Senate may cancel votes on Wednesday.
 
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said that after consulting with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) it became clear that Tuesday’s approaching snowstorm was preventing too many members from returning to Washington.

… The Senate is scheduled to be in recess next week to observe President’s Day…The House also will keep to its scheduled recess next week, meaning the next House vote will be the following week.”
 

The hardest working Congress money can buy.

Paulson and Greenspan on Meet the Press

08 Monday Feb 2010

Posted by in economy, Financial Crisis, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Remember when Tim Russert was the host and Meet the Press was a serious news show? Those days are no more. Now the host is David Gregory and the best Meet the Press can do is look to two of the architects of the financial meltdown for their opinion on how the recovery is going.

As Crooks and Liars put it:

“Oh yes, who better to bring in than Hank Paulson and Alan Greenspan to ask how we get the economy and the job market turned around in the United States? I know I always want to hear from the people who helped take a wrecking ball to something for advice on how to put it back together.”

Three things I did learn from Jeff Daniels and Jim Carrey Paulson and Greenspan yesterday:

1. The worst of the recession is yet to come.
2. Housing prices are headed lower.
3. Unemployment is going up.

How do I know this? Paulson and Greenspan predicted the opposite. Holding true to form, both also predicted the Colts would win the Super Bowl.

Sneak preview: Next Sunday on Meet the Press, the captain of the Titanic discusses how to avoid icebergs, and Tiger Woods gives advice on marital fidelity.