President Obama Getting Tough With Congress

For the first two months of his administration President Obama tried to show due deference to Congress, but now President Obama is thankfully starting to play hardball with the Republicans and right-leaning Democrats who are threatening to sink his ambitious proposals for this country. He's both calling out his critics and raising the option of using a legislative shortcut that would eliminate the threat of a Senate filibuster. Here are what a few new's sources are saying.

According to the New York Times:

"During an appearance on Tuesday at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, Mr. Obama took a swipe at Republican critics of his $3.6 trillion budget and its agenda for health care, energy, taxes and economic recovery.

"'If there are members of Congress who object to specific policies and proposals in this budget, then I ask them to be ready and willing to propose constructive, alternative solutions,' Mr. Obama said. '"Just say no" is the right advice to give your teenagers about drugs. It is not an acceptable response to whatever economic policy is proposed by the other party.'

"The strong words were the latest in a push that has come to resemble elements of the two-year-long presidential campaign. Mr. Obama may hold his second prime-time news conference as president, perhaps as early as next week, to talk up the budget."

In addition Walter Alarkon writes in The Hill that Obama's change in rhetorical strategy is his response to "substantial pushback from lawmakers in both parties who sharply attacked key elements in his $3.55 trillion proposal."

And the Associated Press writes:

"In a new Web video, President Barack Obama is asking Americans to help him pass his $3.6 trillion budget."

But Obama's big shot across Congress's bow is this from McClatchy Newspapers:

"A top White House official threatened Tuesday to use a congressional rule to force some controversial proposals through the Senate by eliminating the Republicans' power to block legislation.

"Peter Orszag, the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, said the Obama administration would prefer not to use the budget 'reconciliation' process that allows measures to pass the Senate on simple majority votes.

"Orszag said he wouldn't rule it out, however. The legislative tactic is being considered to push through Obama's global warming and health care programs, and perhaps his proposals to raise taxes on the wealthy....

"Under normal Senate rules, it requires 60 votes in the 100-member Senate to shut off debate and force a final vote. Democrats currently have 58 Senate votes. Under reconciliation, 51 votes can force anything through.

"There is plenty of historical precedent of using it by both parties, including Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, who used it force through big tax cuts.

"'Pretty much every major piece of budget legislation going back to April 1981, April '82, April 1990, April 1993, the 1990 act, the 2001 tax legislation, they were all done through reconciliation. Yet somehow this is being presented as an unusual thing,' Orszag said.

"'The historical norm as opposed to the exception is for a major piece of budget legislation to move through reconciliation.'"

The Washington Post reports the predictable Republican response:

"Republicans are howling about the proposal to expand health coverage and tax greenhouse gas emissions without their input, warning that it could irrevocably damage relations with the new president....

"Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, has argued against reconciliation as well....

"'There are many more problems with using reconciliation than is commonly appreciated,' Conrad said yesterday, after he and House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. John M. Spratt Jr. (D-S.C.) met with Obama at the White House. The topic of reconciliation came up 'in passing,' Conrad said, but no decisions were made.

"One big problem, Conrad said, is that reconciliation was conceived as a way to force hard budget choices, such as tax increases or spending cuts, not as a means to advance substantive legislation."

Roll Call reports on the opposition from some within Obama's own party:

"A bloc of Senate Democratic moderates is quietly maneuvering to keep open the
option of vetoing two of President Barack Obama's most ambitious agenda items
this year — climate change and health care reform.

"Eight Democrats who want to water down new climate change legislation have already joined with Republicans and signed a letter opposing any attempt to use fast-track budget rules to prevent filibusters. Many of the same Democrats also oppose using those budget rules to prevent filibusters of health care legislation...

"Democratic moderates have been couching their opposition to reconciliation with terms like 'bipartisanship' and 'regular order,' but when pressed, some Senators acknowledged they want to ensure their voices are heard during upcoming debates on global warming and health care.

"Senators from energy-producing states like West Virginia and Louisiana are worried new carbon taxes could be slammed down their throats. And fiscal conservatives are concerned they could be left out of the room while liberal Democrats push for a series of tax hikes proposed by Obama....

"But other Democrats said they were concerned that Republicans will filibuster anything Obama pushes on energy and climate change, and the recent run of near-total Republican opposition to Democratic priorities doesn't give them cause for hope. They argue that reconciliation — and the simple majority it requires — would ensure Democrats can forward their top agenda items.

Despite the tougher tack with Congress and Republican's in particular, it's worth nothing that President Obama is still not taking anything like Bush's "imperial presidency" approach to dealing with the legislative branch. For instance, he's actually asking Congress to write major legislation itself.

Robert Pear reports in the New York Times on how's that going:

"Three powerful House committee chairmen have agreed to work together on legislation to overhaul the health care system, starting with the view that most
employers should help finance coverage and that the government should offer a public health insurance plan as an alternative to private insurance.

"The unified approach contrasts with the competition and rivalry among committee
chairmen that helped sink President Bill Clinton's plan for universal health insurance 15 years ago....

"In a letter to President Obama, the chairmen said, 'Our intention is to bring similar
legislation before our committees.'"

Congress Approves $410 Billion Spending Bill

Another victory for President Obama and the Democrats as the Senate approved the $410 billion funding measure to keep the government running for the rest of the year. The White House announced that President Obama will sign the measure on Wednesday, where he will also announce steps aimed at curbing lawmakers' penchant for pet projects.

Now personally I believe that earmarks are getting a bad name, and are not as evil as Republicans are making them out to be. Earmarks should be a tool that Representatives and Senators use, to specifically meet their states needs. Its just that earmarks should be above board, clear who has submitted the earmark, and not tied to any lobbyist. Earmarks should be done in conjunction with state and local government to ensure they meet the needs of the state.

The media has been too willing to confuse pork barrel projects and earmarks. A pork barrel project is usually an earmark, but not every earmark is pork barrel.

I don't understand why the media is trying to say this bill is an embarresment for President Obama. He argued against wasteful spending, not earmarks (that was McCain who has priven to be an idiot). In addition, what this economy needs is spending, and that is what this bill delivers. And the bill was written mostly over the course of last year, with support from key Republicans such as Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, the Senate's No. 3 Republican, so the belly-aching by Republicans has been humorous. By the way even though McConnell was very active in writing the bill, he voted against it. Can you say covering his butt?

The spending measure chips away at several leftover Bush administration policies. It clears the way for the Obama administration to reverse a rule issued late in the Bush administration that says greenhouse gases may not be restricted to protect polar bears from global warming. Another Bush administration rule that reduced the input of federal scientists in endangered species decisions can also be quickly overturned without a lengthy rulemaking process.
The big increases — among them a 14 percent boost for a popular program that feeds infants and poor women and a 10 percent increase for housing vouchers for the poor — represent a clear win for Democrats who spent most of the past decade battling with Bush over money for domestic programs.

Generous above-inflation increases are spread throughout the bill for initiatives that the Bush Administration underfunded, including a $2.4 billion, 13 percent increase for the Agriculture Department and a 10 percent increase for Amtrak passenger rail system.

Cluster F#@k to the Poor House

Just for fun, the Daily Show's take on the debate over the stimulus plan.

Watch it here:

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Clusterf#@k to the Poor House - Economic Recovery Plan

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things With Demetri Martin

Funny Political News
Joke of the Day

LibertyAir Blog

Americans Trust Obama, Republicans Not So Much

So far the American public is giving President Barack Obama their approval for handling the government's efforts to pass an economic stimulus bill, while they don't believe the Republicans in Congress have been doing a very good job. In a new Gallup Poll the Repugs receive an approval rating 31%, in fact fifty-eight percent of the public openly disapprove of the GOP’s actions.

This is really surprising.

You might have read how Think Progress released a report showing that Republican members of Congress outnumbered their Democratic counterparts by a ratio of 2 to 1 on the cable news shows. Apparently these Republicans and their talking points haven't been very persuasive. This is surprising because not only have conservative Republicans been dominating the discourse, but their talking points have been largely internalized by journalists covering the debate.

Let's hope this is not a outlier, and that the American public is paying attention.

Now a new CNN poll found similar results to the Gallup poll.

Seventy-six percent of those quesioned [sic] in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Monday give President Obama a thumbs-up when it comes to the way he's performing his duties, with 23 percent disapproving of the way Obama's handling his job as president.

While Repuglicans have been exceedingly pleased with their actions over the last few weeks, the American public is not.

Three out of four say that President Obama is doing enough to cooperate with Republicans in Congress, but only 39 percent feel that congressional Republicans are cooperating enough with the President.

Six out of ten approve of the way Democratic leaders in Congress are handling their jobs. But only 44 percent of those questioned approve of the way Republican leaders in Congress are performing.

Republicans may like to act as if they are not concerned with public attitudes, but they are. Republican leadership is the biggest set of cowards you have ever seen, and they will start feeling the heat. Watch them begin to fold this week.

Change We Can Believe In

In a great sign of the change that is coming, President-elect Barack Obama has shown over the past few days that he has the ability to hear critiscm, and can change. For example Obama had heard widespread Democratic skepticism over his suggested tax cuts as part of the stimulus package. Now President-elect Barack Obama will drop his bid to offer a $3,000-per-job business tax credit in his stimulus proposal.

Senator Tom Harkin had called the tax cuts an ineffective "trickle-down" measure, and Senator John Kerry said he’d prefer to invest in infrastructure and energy, the "kinds of things that much more directly, much more rapidly and much more certainly create a real job."

Shame on America

Proving again that the US Congress is populated by cowards and idiots, the United States House of Representatives voted 390-5 in favor of H. RES. 34, voicing their support for the Israeli military effort in the Gaza Strip. Seriously do our Representatives ever bother to actually look at what's going on? Can we for once as a nation decide to do what's just, and not what is politically expediant? There will never be peace in the Middle East as long as we unconditionally support the Israeli government, no matter how insane their actions are, or barbaric their deeds.

The bill demanded that Hamas end its rocket fire against Israel despite the fact they went 6 months without attacking Israel, and it was Israel who broke the cease-fire and did not live up to any of it's obligations. It of course called on Hamas to renounce violence while expressing “vigorous support and unwavering commitment” to Israel's violence. They of course declared that its two weeks of attacks on the Gaza Strip were rightful acts of self-defense. What total asses. The vote echoed a similar vote in the Senate.

I am thoroughly disgusted.

Keith Olbermann Discusses Obama's Speech

Keith Olbermann reported on President-elects economic speech yesterday, and comments made by Nancy Pelosis.

Nancy made the declaration that if the stimulus package is not passed by President's Day, there would be no President's recess. Olbermann pointed out the rank hypocrisy of John Bohner who had no trouble running up deficits during the Bush years, and is now trying to paint himself as a deficit hawk.

Olbermann interviewed Howard Fineman about the growing debate within Democratic ranks over the stimulus. Watch it here:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

There is definitely a debate about the needs for tax cuts, which I think is good. I don't agree with including so much in tax cuts.


Rachel Maddow then gave her take on Obama's speech. She pointed out that Obama's speech was a break, not with just the outgoing Bush administration, but with the administrations of Clinton, George H. W. Bush, and Ronald Reagan. She also reported on the confirmation hearings.

Watch her analysis and interview Robert Reich:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

DailyKos Launches Blog to Press Congress

Prominent writers for the country's top liberal blog, DailyKos, are not satisfied with just winning the election. They know that those we have elected to Washington are still just politicians, and that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosis have a history of being weak on liberal progressive issues. To that end they are launching a new site to scrutinize and pressure the Democratic Congress.

As most politicos are currently focusing on appointments in the incoming Obama administration, DailyKos bloggers begun a "soft launch" for Congress Matters, which promises a "community-based political watch party" for Democrats on Capitol Hill.

"It'll be a place where we'll try to explain Congressional rules and procedure so that the netroots community gets a better handle on it and can become more effective advocates for their priorities," said David Waldman, an attorney and former Congressional aide who blogs on the front page of DailyKos under the name Kagro X.

Perriello Wins House Seat

The State Board of Elections certified Virginia's Nov. 4 election results, which includes a win for Democrat Tom Perriello over Rep. Virgil Goode Jr., a longtime incumbent in southern Virginia, and a truly ugly individual. People might remember Rep. Goode as the idiot who made an idiot of himself when he said he wanted strict immigration controls and to prevent Muslims from being elected to Congress and using the Koran during swearing-in ceremonies.

This was just before the last congress was sworn in, and it was obvious he was going after Rep. Keith Ellison the first Muslim elected to Congress. Goode said that it would be wrong to allow Rep. Ellison to take his oath on the Koran, for it would basically be the first step towards the fall of the republic.

It is a great sign that we can now bid goodbye to Mr. Goode, out country needs leaders not bigots.

Bailout Czar Grilled On the Hill

Assistant Secretary of Treasury Neel Kashkari, the “bailout czar”, the man who Henry Paulson placed in charge of the bailout, went to Washington, DC, yesterday to testify before Congress. He sat down in front of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the House Oversight Committee — chaired by Rep. Dennis Kucinich. It was not a pretty picture. Representative Elijah Cummings (D-MD) excoriated the “bailout czar” as he brought up the reports that AIG has doled out $503 million to top executives.

Noting the financial troubles in his Baltimore district, Representative Cummings asked rhetorically whether his constituents would think Kashkari is a “chump” after learning of the AIG bonuses:

CUMMINGS: I’m just wondering how you feel about an AIG giving $503 million worth of bonuses on the one hand, and accepting $154 billion from hard-working taxpayers. You know, because I’m trying to make sure you get it. What really bothers me is all these other people who are lined up. They say, well, is Kashkari a chump?

“I wouldn’t want to be asking my friend for some money to stay afloat. … Then my friend, who can barely afford to go to McDonald’s sees me in a restaurant costing $150 a meal. There’s absolutely something wrong with that picture!” exclaimed Cummings.

Watch it:

Representative Kucinich questioned Kashkari as to why the Treasury has not focused more on helping homeowners facing foreclosure. When Kashkari replied that the Treasury Secretary is “passionate” about helping homeowners, Kucinich asked “He is? Where? What country?”

Watch it here:

LibertyAir Blog

By large margin, Senate passes bailout bill

From Politico:

Treasury’s $700 billion rescue plan for the financial markets passed the Senate Wednesday night, giving the White House new confidence it has turned the corner and can win final approval from Congress by Friday.

The 74-25 roll call endorsing the package featured a rare joint-return appearance by the two major presidential candidates, Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain, both of whom supported the measure.

The Senate galleries, usually empty at night, were packed with visitors on the left and right, and senators voted from their desks as if to underscore the seriousness of the legislation. Shortly before the vote, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) tried to capture the moment for posterity, calling this breakthrough “one of the finest moments in the history of the Senate. This is the kind of vote we are sent by our people to cast.”

Majority Leader Harry Reid added that “each United States senator this evening is facing a critical test of leadership.”

A second vote was needed immediately after to complete final passage, but that is not in doubt. The first vote Wednesday night was the bigger test and the administration is betting that with this bipartisan showing, it can marginalize the remaining opposition in the House, due to vote Friday....

[T]he revised Senate package blends in more than $100 billion in popular tax breaks as well as aid to rural schools important to House Republicans. And to build support among small town community banks, the bill raises the cap on insured deposits from $100,000 to $250,000.

House to Wall Street: Drop dead

Rex Nutting has the best line of the day on MarketWatch.com, about today's failure to get a bailout passed: "House to Wall Street: Drop dead" In the article Mr. Nutting correctly places the blame and/or credit with House Republicans for today's failure to get a deal.

His final two lines though I think correctly sum up where we are today, after the failure to pass the bailout bill.

Rejection of the plan means there's no political solution to this financial crisis on the horizon. As it now stands, the markets are on their own.

The next six weeks will tell whether the coup d'etat in the House on Monday has created a political crisis to match the financial one.

Do Over?

The House has decided to try a do-over on the Bail Out vote later today. The House bill on the Bail Out failed, 228 to 205. I guess the House leadership want to see if the same lawmakers vote differently this time. Not sure what difference this will make. My guess is there is some serious arm twisting.

BREAKING: HOUSE FAILS TO PASS BAILOUT...

Associated Press:

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The House on Monday defeated a $700 billion emergency rescue package, ignoring urgent pleas from President Bush and bipartisan congressional leaders to quickly bail out the staggering financial industry.

Stocks plummeted on Wall Street even before the 228-205 vote to reject the
bill was announced on the House floor.

When the critical vote was tallied, too few members of the House were willing to support the unpopular measure with elections just five weeks away. Ample no votes came from both the Democratic and Republican sides of the aisle.

Bush and a host of leading congressional figures had implored the lawmakers to pass the legislation despite howls of protest from their constituents back home.

The vote had been preceded by unusually aggressive White House lobbying, and spokesman Tony Fratto said that Bush had used a "call list" of people he wanted to persuade to vote yes as late as just a short time before the vote.

Lawmakers shouted news of the plummeting Dow Jones average as lawmakers crowded on the House floor during the drawn-out and tense call of the roll, which dragged on for roughly 40 minutes as leaders on both sides scrambled to corral enough of their rank-and-file members to support the deeply unpopular measure.

They found only two.

Bush and his economic advisers, as well as congressional leaders in both parties had argued the plan was vital to insulating ordinary Americans from the effects of Wall Street's bad bets. The version that was up for vote Monday was the product of marathon closed-door negotiations on Capitol Hill over the weekend.

"We're all worried about losing our jobs," Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., declared in an impassioned speech in support of the bill before the vote. "Most of us say, 'I want this thing to pass, but I want you to vote for it — not me.' "

With their dire warnings of impending economic doom and their sweeping request for unprecedented sums of money and authority to bail out cash-starved financial firms, Bush and his economic chiefs have focused the attention of world markets on Congress, Ryan added. "We're in this moment, and if we fail to do the right thing, Heaven help us," he said.

Good ideas do not need lots of lies told about them in order to gain public acceptance.

Paul Krugman referenced this line from Daniel Davies today. It was a key line from one of the great blog posts of this era, and it laid down a key principle I have often thought about when it comes to today's Republican leadership, and many of the so called voices of conservatism.

Good ideas do not need lots of lies told about them in order to gain public acceptance; lies do.

Davies was talking about the selling of the Iraq war, but it applies pretty much to the entire Bush Administration. It was true about the Patriot Act, the Iraq War, Unauthorized surveillance of the American public, Katrina, the list goes on. It should be the rule that we keep in mind as we listen to the debate going on over the Treasurery Bailout.

Paul Krugman points out that this morning Hank Paulson told a whopper:

We gave you a simple, three-page legislative outline and I thought it would have been presumptuous for us on that outline to come up with an oversight mechanism. That’s the role of Congress, that’s something we’re going to work on together. So if any of you felt that I didn’t believe that we needed oversight: I believe we need oversight. We need oversight.

This was a lie by Henry Paulson. If he was telling the truth, then there would have been no reference to oversight, or that it would be worked out with Congress. This is not what Paulson proposed, what his proposal actually did, of course, was explicitly rule out any oversight, plus grant immunity from future review:

Sec. 8. Review.

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

Krugman then states that he is not playing gotcha here, buthis is telling: if Paulson can’t be honest about what he himself sent to Congress — if he not only made an incredible power grab, but is now engaged in black-is-white claims that he didn’t — there is no reason to trust him on anything related to his bailout plan.