President Obama is quite efficient when he doesn't have to deal with Republican obstructionism. He didn't have to go to Congress to get permission to take out Osama bin Laden, Anwar al-Awlaki and other al Qaeda associates. When it comes to foreign affairs, the President is piling up mounting successes, and Moammar Gadhafi's death is further vindication of Obama's style of warfare.
Now Obama has announced the end of the war in Iraq, with all troops returning home by the end of the year. This is a popular move in an election year, and of course the Republicans are accusing Obama of playing politics. Although the political dividends are probably insignificant, being overshadowed by the economy, Obama can at least take credit for bringing this $1 trillion war that was one of the worst foreign policy blunders to an end. It should be remembered that Obama's opponents in 2008, including Hillary Clinton, had all voted to authorize the Iraq war in 2002. Obama was opposed to this war from the beginning.
Presidents can pretty much carry out foreign policy without congressional approval. The President has wide latitude in declaring war and other matters of national security. Although the Constitution says otherwise, the President does what he wants anyway. Imagine a protracted fight with Republicans in Congress about the best method of tracking down bin Laden. Obama's method worked just fine, even though members of his staff had warned him that such a strike was too risky. If he had failed, Obama's political career would have been toast. He took the courageous course. It worked, and the rest is history.
I can only imagine how much Obama could accomplish if he handled domestic issues the same as he handles matters of war. The Founding Fathers had a reason for making sure that there was a balance of power, but they couldn't have foreseen the insanity of what passes for politics today. As for the economic impact of the war, the Obama style of sending in drones instead of troops seems to be working, and at a relatively cheap price. And did we really need to spend $1 trillion in Iraq? Conservatives don't want to admit that this type of spending is what got us into this economic mess in the first place.
We paid a steep price in Iraq. There is no justification for the cost, not just financial, but in lives lost and troops injured. In the case of Gadhafi, a NATO warplane or U.S. drone is believed to have fired on his convoy outside his hometown of Sirte, allowing rebel fighters to capture him. “In this case, America spent $2 billion total and didn't lose a single life,” said Vice President Joe Biden. “This is more the prescription for how to deal with the world as we go forward than it has been in the past.”
Obama's foreign policy successes cannot be overlooked, no matter how hard his Republican detractors try to twist and distort the facts. But Obama's chances in 2012 hinge largely on the economy. Although the Republicans want him to be perceived as inept and lacking experience, it's hard not to blame our current economic problems on the complete lack of cooperation from the likes of John Boehner, Eric Cantor and the idiocy of the Tea Party movement.
Even though the focus of the next election will be on the economy, the Republican candidates will look pretty silly as they continue to label Obama weak on national security. Obama's solid leadership in foreign affairs may not be the biggest re-election topic, but it could be enough to put him over the top, given the weakness and utter lack of intelligence of the opposition. Compared to Obama, the GOP candidates look like contestants on “The Price Is Right”, only without the funny hats.
Showing posts with label John Boehner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Boehner. Show all posts
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
Debt Deal Done- 'It's Better Than Nothing'
A default was averted today when President Obama, with no fanfare, signed the debt ceiling bill into law shortly after it passed the Senate on Tuesday. Compromise was achieved, but at what price?
In a recent Washington Post/Pew Research poll, Americans put their disgust into words. The most common description was “ridiculous”, followed by “disgusting” and “stupid”. No, they weren't talking about Glenn Beck. They were talking about the budget negotiations that led up to the bizarre budget compromise.
If the debt debate proved one thing to America, it's that Washington is broken, and in need of some serious fixing. And there has been damage to the reputation of pretty much everyone in Washington.
The controversy was somewhat contrived to begin with. First of all, we call it a “debt ceiling”, but it's continually being raised. The problem this time, however, is that many Republicans, led by the right-wing Tea Party nut jobs, decided that they didn't want to compromise, default or no default.
In his televised address to the nation on July 25th, President Obama pointed out that raising the debt ceiling in America is a routine matter. “Since the 1950s, Congress has always passed it, and every President has signed it,” Obama said in his speech. “President Reagan did it 18 times. George W. Bush did it seven times. And we have to do it by next Tuesday, August 2nd, or else we won't be able to pay all of our bills.”
Obama went to Harvard, so I'm sure that he can add. And he met the August 2nd deadline with a few hours to spare, so I guess we can now pay all of our bills. But that's the problem. The debt ceiling was raised, but when it comes to the national debt, we're talking trillions. It's rising at a staggering $3.8 billion a day, so you would think we would have come up with a good way to do pay our bills by, for instance, increasing revenue in addition to cutting spending. This is where it gets confusing.
The bill allows Obama to increase the borrowing limit by $400 billion immediately and mandates an additional $917 billion in cuts over the next decade. In addition, Obama can raise the limit another $500 billion later, and only be blocked if Congress votes to disapprove, by offering what the legislation oddly describes as "a joint resolution of disapproval". Since Congress would certainly disapprove and Obama would be certain to veto, thereby guaranteeing a debt limit increase, why is this bizarre charade necessary anyway, other than to score political points?
Then there's the “super committee”, a new 12-member group, split equally among Democrats and Republicans, which would have the authority to recommend another $1.5 trillion increase in the debt ceiling, and is expected to convene in the fall. Whether such a committee is actually constitutional is another matter, but if the committee fails to approve the cuts, the President can still raise the debt ceiling, but only by an additional $1.2 trillion. However, that would result in cuts split evenly between defense and non-defense programs, unless some other “as yet not agreed upon” budget measure can be agreed upon.
In addition to increasing the debt ceiling, the "super committee" would also theoretically have the power to raise taxes. Since this "bipartisan" committee would consist of six hand-picked anti-tax Republicans, this would seem highly unlikely. Of course, there's the matter of the expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts which expire at the end of 2012. But more about that later.
If this whole convoluted budget deal sounds confusing, it is. But one thing stands out: Republicans have insisted all along on budget cuts only, without any new revenue. And that, in a nutshell, is what they got. How do you reduce this enormous budget deficit without any new revenue? Well, I'm not a Republican, so I can't answer that.
The problem with all of this is that the national debt is over $14 trillion, so a few billion here or there may add up to a trillion or two, but it won't make much difference in balancing the budget in the long run.
What is so wrong with higher taxes on the wealthy, which got the economy back on track under President Clinton's administration in the 1990s? How about taking away those silly farm subsidies for rich people with too much land? Or taxes on corporations with million-dollar loopholes? And the list goes on and on, but sadly, the Republican party is more intent on taking away college grants for poor students than on getting the rich to pay their share. So far, college grants are off the table, but they may be among the first programs to go, since the deck is stacked in favor of the wealthy.
The one good thing to come out this debt fiasco is that there is no default. Confidence in our economy has been damaged, especially internationally, by this entire spectacle. But now we have to really concentrate on creating an environment under which businesses feel confident enough to invest and ultimately to hire. Under the new compromise, however, this may be impossible. Budget cuts and no new revenue lead to less jobs, but the GOP wants us to believe otherwise.
Both Republicans and Democrats have said that they are not happy with the bill, but both sides say it was necessary to avert the disaster of a default. The prevailing wisdom is that it's “better than nothing”. And that about sums up the problems with the political system in America today.
President Obama's original intention was for a “clean”, unencumbered bill to raise the debt ceiling. Republicans, goaded on by the lunatic Tea Party fringe group, said no. The Speaker of the House, John Boehner, had to fall in line with the rest of his party of head cases and special-interest candidates and, as well-intentioned as Boehner may have seemed, he never made much economic sense.
Although it may seem to some people as if Obama is the loser in all this, he was still able to keep the core institutions intact - Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. In addition, the deal allows Obama to focus on the 2012 election without the distraction created by another imminent default. In the end, the majority of Americans are fed up with the dysfunction of the political process as a whole, and they blame Republicans and Democrats alike. Obama's approval ratings are low, but right now, so are the approval ratings of pretty much everyone in Washington.
The debt deal is burdened by the fact that deficit reduction in the middle of a severe recession is not only a stupid idea, but a dangerous one. Reducing the deficit in a period of high unemployment will harm the economy by putting more people out of work and decreasing consumer demand.
Getting back to the Bush tax cuts, which expire at the end of 2012, this could be Obama's most powerful weapon. And therein lies Obama’s opportunity. With Republicans so focused on keeping the Bush tax cuts alive, the President could use another extension to protect the Democrats' most cherished programs when the congressional "super committee" deliberates. If Obama dangles the possibility of extending some or all of the Bush tax cuts in front of the recalcitrant committee members, he could not only gain significant leverage to influence the outcome of the committee, but he could also position himself well for the election in 2012. In this case, he would be seen as an honest, intelligent, and moderate broker between the extremes of both parties.
It was clear to all rational people that budget cuts had to at least be matched by new revenue. Obama was left with a debt crisis and since time had run out, he had no choice but to compromise.
We can always ask what would have happened had Obama refused to budge. But he wasn't willing to take that chance, and that's probably for the best. What we got was “better than nothing.”
In a recent Washington Post/Pew Research poll, Americans put their disgust into words. The most common description was “ridiculous”, followed by “disgusting” and “stupid”. No, they weren't talking about Glenn Beck. They were talking about the budget negotiations that led up to the bizarre budget compromise.
If the debt debate proved one thing to America, it's that Washington is broken, and in need of some serious fixing. And there has been damage to the reputation of pretty much everyone in Washington.
The controversy was somewhat contrived to begin with. First of all, we call it a “debt ceiling”, but it's continually being raised. The problem this time, however, is that many Republicans, led by the right-wing Tea Party nut jobs, decided that they didn't want to compromise, default or no default.
In his televised address to the nation on July 25th, President Obama pointed out that raising the debt ceiling in America is a routine matter. “Since the 1950s, Congress has always passed it, and every President has signed it,” Obama said in his speech. “President Reagan did it 18 times. George W. Bush did it seven times. And we have to do it by next Tuesday, August 2nd, or else we won't be able to pay all of our bills.”
Obama went to Harvard, so I'm sure that he can add. And he met the August 2nd deadline with a few hours to spare, so I guess we can now pay all of our bills. But that's the problem. The debt ceiling was raised, but when it comes to the national debt, we're talking trillions. It's rising at a staggering $3.8 billion a day, so you would think we would have come up with a good way to do pay our bills by, for instance, increasing revenue in addition to cutting spending. This is where it gets confusing.
The bill allows Obama to increase the borrowing limit by $400 billion immediately and mandates an additional $917 billion in cuts over the next decade. In addition, Obama can raise the limit another $500 billion later, and only be blocked if Congress votes to disapprove, by offering what the legislation oddly describes as "a joint resolution of disapproval". Since Congress would certainly disapprove and Obama would be certain to veto, thereby guaranteeing a debt limit increase, why is this bizarre charade necessary anyway, other than to score political points?
Then there's the “super committee”, a new 12-member group, split equally among Democrats and Republicans, which would have the authority to recommend another $1.5 trillion increase in the debt ceiling, and is expected to convene in the fall. Whether such a committee is actually constitutional is another matter, but if the committee fails to approve the cuts, the President can still raise the debt ceiling, but only by an additional $1.2 trillion. However, that would result in cuts split evenly between defense and non-defense programs, unless some other “as yet not agreed upon” budget measure can be agreed upon.
In addition to increasing the debt ceiling, the "super committee" would also theoretically have the power to raise taxes. Since this "bipartisan" committee would consist of six hand-picked anti-tax Republicans, this would seem highly unlikely. Of course, there's the matter of the expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts which expire at the end of 2012. But more about that later.
If this whole convoluted budget deal sounds confusing, it is. But one thing stands out: Republicans have insisted all along on budget cuts only, without any new revenue. And that, in a nutshell, is what they got. How do you reduce this enormous budget deficit without any new revenue? Well, I'm not a Republican, so I can't answer that.
The problem with all of this is that the national debt is over $14 trillion, so a few billion here or there may add up to a trillion or two, but it won't make much difference in balancing the budget in the long run.
What is so wrong with higher taxes on the wealthy, which got the economy back on track under President Clinton's administration in the 1990s? How about taking away those silly farm subsidies for rich people with too much land? Or taxes on corporations with million-dollar loopholes? And the list goes on and on, but sadly, the Republican party is more intent on taking away college grants for poor students than on getting the rich to pay their share. So far, college grants are off the table, but they may be among the first programs to go, since the deck is stacked in favor of the wealthy.
The one good thing to come out this debt fiasco is that there is no default. Confidence in our economy has been damaged, especially internationally, by this entire spectacle. But now we have to really concentrate on creating an environment under which businesses feel confident enough to invest and ultimately to hire. Under the new compromise, however, this may be impossible. Budget cuts and no new revenue lead to less jobs, but the GOP wants us to believe otherwise.
Both Republicans and Democrats have said that they are not happy with the bill, but both sides say it was necessary to avert the disaster of a default. The prevailing wisdom is that it's “better than nothing”. And that about sums up the problems with the political system in America today.
President Obama's original intention was for a “clean”, unencumbered bill to raise the debt ceiling. Republicans, goaded on by the lunatic Tea Party fringe group, said no. The Speaker of the House, John Boehner, had to fall in line with the rest of his party of head cases and special-interest candidates and, as well-intentioned as Boehner may have seemed, he never made much economic sense.
Although it may seem to some people as if Obama is the loser in all this, he was still able to keep the core institutions intact - Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. In addition, the deal allows Obama to focus on the 2012 election without the distraction created by another imminent default. In the end, the majority of Americans are fed up with the dysfunction of the political process as a whole, and they blame Republicans and Democrats alike. Obama's approval ratings are low, but right now, so are the approval ratings of pretty much everyone in Washington.
The debt deal is burdened by the fact that deficit reduction in the middle of a severe recession is not only a stupid idea, but a dangerous one. Reducing the deficit in a period of high unemployment will harm the economy by putting more people out of work and decreasing consumer demand.
Getting back to the Bush tax cuts, which expire at the end of 2012, this could be Obama's most powerful weapon. And therein lies Obama’s opportunity. With Republicans so focused on keeping the Bush tax cuts alive, the President could use another extension to protect the Democrats' most cherished programs when the congressional "super committee" deliberates. If Obama dangles the possibility of extending some or all of the Bush tax cuts in front of the recalcitrant committee members, he could not only gain significant leverage to influence the outcome of the committee, but he could also position himself well for the election in 2012. In this case, he would be seen as an honest, intelligent, and moderate broker between the extremes of both parties.
It was clear to all rational people that budget cuts had to at least be matched by new revenue. Obama was left with a debt crisis and since time had run out, he had no choice but to compromise.
We can always ask what would have happened had Obama refused to budge. But he wasn't willing to take that chance, and that's probably for the best. What we got was “better than nothing.”
Sunday, July 10, 2011
Default is not an option. Is the GOP stupid enough to think it is?
Just minutes before a major White House meeting begins over the debt ceiling negotiations, it's my bet that Republicans will be unwilling to accept revenue-raising measures in exchange for major spending cuts and entitlement reforms. At least not for now.
The debt ceiling deadline is August 2nd, and a U.S. debt default could “shock” and destabilize the entire global economy. That's what International Monetary Fund Christine Lagarde warned today on ABC's “This Week” news program. She emphasized that she can not imagine this actually happening.
A default would be bad for everybody, especially the U.S. economy. If no agreement is reached by the deadline, the U.S. dollar may plummet and interest rates could skyrocket. The Federal Government says just a 1% rise in interest rates could cost taxpayers $973 billion over the next 10 years. Obviously, no one wants that to happen, not even Republicans - at least not any sane Republicans.
The Republican party, however, looks anything but sane. The 2012 GOP race is headed by Michele Bachmann and Mitt Romney. Bachmann, who is now the official Iowa frontrunner, is known for her many factual inaccuracies. Her latest gaffe: confusing actor John Wayne with serial killer John Wayne party.
Donald Trump distracted the electorate for months while amazingly waging a fake campaign based on the premise that Obama wasn't a U.S. citizen. The Tea Party has hijacked some of the headlines from somewhat normal people like Mitt Romney, but Romney's troubles are just beginning.
Although Romney is ecstatic that his main competition seems to be Bachmann, his real problem is that although it is a good strategy for him to lay low and continue to let Bachmann make herself look like an idiot, eventually he will have to stand on his own merits. So far he's been spending most of his time distancing himself from the one program that he accomplished that got something done: the Massachusetts health care reform. The fact that Obama's plan is similar to Romney's original plan would be good for Romney if he was a Democrat, but this and other inconsistencies in Romney's record make him a good bet to lose in a general election against Obama.
Making the Republican party look even worse is not just potential offbeat candidates like Sarah Palin and Rick Perry, who has gone on the record as saying he would have Texas secede from the U.S. The Republican party now has to deal with the embarrassment of David Duke, the white supremacist who says he's considering throwing his hat in the ring.
The economy as a whole is a dark cloud hanging over the White House and the reelection, and they know that. But the Democrats are pointing out that they were handed a disastrous economy by the last administration, and they are taking steps to correct it. The first step is solving the debt crisis, and House Speaker John Boehner and Congressional Republicans are standing in the way. Talks broke off Saturday night over the issue of tax hikes. Republicans want tax hikes off the table, and as negotiations begin again tonight, Obama has made clear he will not budge on this issue. So what we have left is continued gridlock, and with time running out.
So far, the world has not lost faith in the U.S. economy. Our stock markets are strong and our companies continue to thrive. But as this dangerous gridlock grinds Washington to a standstill, it is easy to see the American public becoming fed up with talk-radio rhetoric and political grandstanding. The Republicans seem intent on playing games with the creditworthiness of America, and this is not only a terrible policy, but also political suicide.
Even before the lastest shocking employment numbers, recent polls showed Obama's approval ratings plummeting when it comes to creating jobs. According to a June Bloomberg poll, Obama had a dismal 38% approval rating, with 57% disapproving. That can only encourage Republican presidential candidates, and they have indeed pounced on these job numbers with ads claiming “things have gone from bad to much worse,” and other variations of this theme.
Normally, with the economy in such disarray, Obama would seem easily beatable. But the Republican party has put together a rogues gallery of weird candidates, from Trump to Bachmann, all the way to the possible candidacy of well known racist David Duke.
The debt negotiations won't end today, but they will end. It is not only in the interests of the U.S., but the rest of the world. The August 2nd deadline is fast approaching and default is not an option. And when it's all over, Obama will continue his steady approach to governing the country, and the Republicans will be trying to disassociate themselves from right wing nutjobs like David Duke.
The debt ceiling deadline is August 2nd, and a U.S. debt default could “shock” and destabilize the entire global economy. That's what International Monetary Fund Christine Lagarde warned today on ABC's “This Week” news program. She emphasized that she can not imagine this actually happening.
A default would be bad for everybody, especially the U.S. economy. If no agreement is reached by the deadline, the U.S. dollar may plummet and interest rates could skyrocket. The Federal Government says just a 1% rise in interest rates could cost taxpayers $973 billion over the next 10 years. Obviously, no one wants that to happen, not even Republicans - at least not any sane Republicans.
The Republican party, however, looks anything but sane. The 2012 GOP race is headed by Michele Bachmann and Mitt Romney. Bachmann, who is now the official Iowa frontrunner, is known for her many factual inaccuracies. Her latest gaffe: confusing actor John Wayne with serial killer John Wayne party.
Donald Trump distracted the electorate for months while amazingly waging a fake campaign based on the premise that Obama wasn't a U.S. citizen. The Tea Party has hijacked some of the headlines from somewhat normal people like Mitt Romney, but Romney's troubles are just beginning.
Although Romney is ecstatic that his main competition seems to be Bachmann, his real problem is that although it is a good strategy for him to lay low and continue to let Bachmann make herself look like an idiot, eventually he will have to stand on his own merits. So far he's been spending most of his time distancing himself from the one program that he accomplished that got something done: the Massachusetts health care reform. The fact that Obama's plan is similar to Romney's original plan would be good for Romney if he was a Democrat, but this and other inconsistencies in Romney's record make him a good bet to lose in a general election against Obama.
Making the Republican party look even worse is not just potential offbeat candidates like Sarah Palin and Rick Perry, who has gone on the record as saying he would have Texas secede from the U.S. The Republican party now has to deal with the embarrassment of David Duke, the white supremacist who says he's considering throwing his hat in the ring.
The economy as a whole is a dark cloud hanging over the White House and the reelection, and they know that. But the Democrats are pointing out that they were handed a disastrous economy by the last administration, and they are taking steps to correct it. The first step is solving the debt crisis, and House Speaker John Boehner and Congressional Republicans are standing in the way. Talks broke off Saturday night over the issue of tax hikes. Republicans want tax hikes off the table, and as negotiations begin again tonight, Obama has made clear he will not budge on this issue. So what we have left is continued gridlock, and with time running out.
So far, the world has not lost faith in the U.S. economy. Our stock markets are strong and our companies continue to thrive. But as this dangerous gridlock grinds Washington to a standstill, it is easy to see the American public becoming fed up with talk-radio rhetoric and political grandstanding. The Republicans seem intent on playing games with the creditworthiness of America, and this is not only a terrible policy, but also political suicide.
Even before the lastest shocking employment numbers, recent polls showed Obama's approval ratings plummeting when it comes to creating jobs. According to a June Bloomberg poll, Obama had a dismal 38% approval rating, with 57% disapproving. That can only encourage Republican presidential candidates, and they have indeed pounced on these job numbers with ads claiming “things have gone from bad to much worse,” and other variations of this theme.
Normally, with the economy in such disarray, Obama would seem easily beatable. But the Republican party has put together a rogues gallery of weird candidates, from Trump to Bachmann, all the way to the possible candidacy of well known racist David Duke.
The debt negotiations won't end today, but they will end. It is not only in the interests of the U.S., but the rest of the world. The August 2nd deadline is fast approaching and default is not an option. And when it's all over, Obama will continue his steady approach to governing the country, and the Republicans will be trying to disassociate themselves from right wing nutjobs like David Duke.
Friday, January 7, 2011
Note to GOP - Comedy is hard, politics is harder
Speaker John Boehner and House Republicans celebrated a historic return to power this week by quickly turning the proceedings into a circus. The 112th Congress started out the week innocently enough by having the Constitution read aloud by members of both parties. Reading the Constitution is a great idea, but you would think that Republicans could do it in the privacy of their own homes or offices and save the theatrics for more important activities.
Next up for Republicans: repealing health care reform. Unfortunately, they got unwelcome news - a Congressional Budget Office estimate that this would increase the deficit by $230 billion by 2012. The CBO's nonpartisan report backed the Democrats' claims that overturning the health care law would cause a major hit to the deficit.
Republicans quickly dismissed the CBO projection as unrealistic. “CBO is entitled to their opinion,” Boehner said. “I do not believe that repealing the job-killing health care law will increase the deficit.”
What is lost in the discussion is the fact that overturning the law signed by President Obama in March would also leave 32 million more Americans without health insurance, according to experts. A good example of cost-cutting is the recent news that a second person has died in Arizona resulting form the state's refusal to pay for certain transplants. In what has become known as Arizona's "Death Panels", Arizona reduced Medicaid coverage for transplants on October 1st last year under cuts included to help close a shortfall in the state budget. Dr. Rainer Gruessner, chair of the University of Arizona Surgery Department, predicts that nearly 30 Arizonans will die this year because of the state's decision to cut these transplants.
The Republicans want to repeal health reform, but don't have any alternative ideas on how to deal with the failing health care system in this country. The whole thing is just political theater anyway, because the repeal will never reach President Obama's desk for a veto. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who is still there thanks to the lunacy of the Tea Party, has indicated that he won't even bring it to a vote. But the House has scheduled a repeal of health care reform on January 12th. But the Republicans must put on a show for their constituents.
In other news, the Republicans went from ridiculous to just plain absurd. On Thursday, two House Republicans somehow neglected to get sworn in as new members of Congress. Rep. Pete Sessions of Texas and Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania were not in the House chamber, but rather in front of a television in the Capitol Visitors Center during the swearing-in ceremony.
Sessions and Fitzpatrick were on the House floor on Thursday, voting and reading the Constitution, just like every other sworn-in member of Congress. But once Republican leaders learned that two of their members weren't legitimate members of Congress, they abruptly stopped the hearing on the health care law that was in session.
Shortly after the Rules Committee hearing was stopped, Fitzpatrick and Sessions both appeared back on the House floor and were administered the oath of office by Speaker Boehner, who mispronounced Fitzpatrick's name. But the House decided Friday to invalidate the initial votes cast in the new Congress by the two Republican Congressmen.
The week started out innocently enough. There was the freshman fundraiser hosted by Republican Congressman-elect Jeff Denham, featuring country music by LeAnn Rimes and a rare invitation to the press to attend and report on the event at the high-end W Hotel. The event clashed with the image Republicans have worked so hard to construct: citizen-legislators cleaning up the waste and extravagant ways of Washington.
By week's end, Republican aides are still crunching the numbers, but they can't get them to fit. It is now clear that they will fall far short of the $100 billion in saving the GOP promised in their election season pledge. So far they have pledged to slash $35 million from the House's operating budget. That's about 0.05% of the deficit.
The first-week Republican blunders did little to dampen Boehner's spirit. His themes of humility and austerity are intact. But the GOP is learning that its mistakes will be magnified as the new majority comes under scrutiny.
Now, as they make their clown act public, the Republican party is learning an important Hollywood lesson: comedy is hard, politics is harder.
Next up for Republicans: repealing health care reform. Unfortunately, they got unwelcome news - a Congressional Budget Office estimate that this would increase the deficit by $230 billion by 2012. The CBO's nonpartisan report backed the Democrats' claims that overturning the health care law would cause a major hit to the deficit.
Republicans quickly dismissed the CBO projection as unrealistic. “CBO is entitled to their opinion,” Boehner said. “I do not believe that repealing the job-killing health care law will increase the deficit.”
What is lost in the discussion is the fact that overturning the law signed by President Obama in March would also leave 32 million more Americans without health insurance, according to experts. A good example of cost-cutting is the recent news that a second person has died in Arizona resulting form the state's refusal to pay for certain transplants. In what has become known as Arizona's "Death Panels", Arizona reduced Medicaid coverage for transplants on October 1st last year under cuts included to help close a shortfall in the state budget. Dr. Rainer Gruessner, chair of the University of Arizona Surgery Department, predicts that nearly 30 Arizonans will die this year because of the state's decision to cut these transplants.
The Republicans want to repeal health reform, but don't have any alternative ideas on how to deal with the failing health care system in this country. The whole thing is just political theater anyway, because the repeal will never reach President Obama's desk for a veto. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who is still there thanks to the lunacy of the Tea Party, has indicated that he won't even bring it to a vote. But the House has scheduled a repeal of health care reform on January 12th. But the Republicans must put on a show for their constituents.
In other news, the Republicans went from ridiculous to just plain absurd. On Thursday, two House Republicans somehow neglected to get sworn in as new members of Congress. Rep. Pete Sessions of Texas and Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania were not in the House chamber, but rather in front of a television in the Capitol Visitors Center during the swearing-in ceremony.
Sessions and Fitzpatrick were on the House floor on Thursday, voting and reading the Constitution, just like every other sworn-in member of Congress. But once Republican leaders learned that two of their members weren't legitimate members of Congress, they abruptly stopped the hearing on the health care law that was in session.
Shortly after the Rules Committee hearing was stopped, Fitzpatrick and Sessions both appeared back on the House floor and were administered the oath of office by Speaker Boehner, who mispronounced Fitzpatrick's name. But the House decided Friday to invalidate the initial votes cast in the new Congress by the two Republican Congressmen.
The week started out innocently enough. There was the freshman fundraiser hosted by Republican Congressman-elect Jeff Denham, featuring country music by LeAnn Rimes and a rare invitation to the press to attend and report on the event at the high-end W Hotel. The event clashed with the image Republicans have worked so hard to construct: citizen-legislators cleaning up the waste and extravagant ways of Washington.
By week's end, Republican aides are still crunching the numbers, but they can't get them to fit. It is now clear that they will fall far short of the $100 billion in saving the GOP promised in their election season pledge. So far they have pledged to slash $35 million from the House's operating budget. That's about 0.05% of the deficit.
The first-week Republican blunders did little to dampen Boehner's spirit. His themes of humility and austerity are intact. But the GOP is learning that its mistakes will be magnified as the new majority comes under scrutiny.
Now, as they make their clown act public, the Republican party is learning an important Hollywood lesson: comedy is hard, politics is harder.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
First Guantanamo Detainee Transferred to U.S.
In a move that is upsetting Republican leaders, a top al Qaeda detainee was flown from Guantanamo Bay to New York earlier today to face terror charges. Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani was transfered from U.S. military to civilian custody by order of the Justice Department to stand trial for his role in the 1998 American embassy bombings in East Africa. Ghailani is the first Guantanamo detainee to be transferred to an American court under the Obama Administration. President Obama has promised to close the Guantanamo prison by January 2010. Many people, especially Obama's Republican adversaries such as House Minority Leader John Boehner, are wondering if bringing terrorists to American soil is the right thing to do. "This is the first step in the Democrats' plan to import terrorists into America," Boehner said. "There are more than 200 of the world's most dangerous men held at the Guantanamo Bay prison," Boehner continued. "Does the Administration plan to transfer all of them into our nation in this way? Do they plan to give them the same legal rights as the American people? Just what is the Administration's plan for closing this prison?" Another high-profile Republican, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, weighed in on the subject: "Our priority must be to keep America safe, and it defies logic to put the rights of some of the most dangerous terrorists in the world before the safety of Americans by bringing them onto American soil," he said in a statement. "Terrorists spend years trying to sneak inside our borders, and bringing them here ourselves is utterly counter-intuitive." The government is quick to point out that there are 216 inmates in custody in America with ties to international terrorism, and there are 139 individuals custody connected to domestic terrorism. Domestic terrorists, including Unabomber Theodore Kaczynski and Okalahoma City bombing accomplice Terry Nichols, are safely hidden away in the Supermax detention facility in Colorado, and they're joined by international terrorists Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman and Ramzi Yousef, both convicted of the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing, as well as by shoe bomber Richard Reid, and Ahmed Ressam, the Millennium Bomber, who plotted to bomb Los Angeles International Airport on New Year's Eve, 1999. While most of these prisoners will never see the light of day, Ressam was given a relatively light sentence. By cooperating with authorities by giving them information about terror camps in Afghanistan, Ressam was sentenced in 2005 to 22 years. The judge in the case, U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour, said he hoped to send a message that the U.S. court system works in terrorism cases. "We did not need to use a secret military tribunal, detain the defendant indefinitely or deny the defendant the right to counsel," he said. "Our courts have not abandoned the commitment to the the ideals that set this nation apart." With credit for time served and reductions for good behavior, Ressam could be out of jail by 2016. He most likely will be deported, his attorney said at the time, but he didn't exactly specify where. This is the type of case that is problematic for Republicans, causing them to hyperventilate unnecessarily. Some of the prisoners will be getting out. So what? They won't be allowed to loiter in my neighborhood. We have a system in place to deal with their deportation, although rendition for the purpose of torture is no longer allowed. At least that's what the government wants us to think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
