Historically, Democrats have condemned Republicans for using wedge issues like gun control, abortion, and gay marriage to try and rig elections in their favor, but Republicans have their own issue in which to cry 'no fair:' Identity Politics.
During the '60's and '70's, many liberal groups pandered to minority organizations, hoping to empower them to articulate their oppression in terms of their own experience -- a definition of identity politics -- and form a more cohesive bloc against the largely white male majority that forms the more conservative Republican Party. However, after the 'affirmative action' arguments of the 80's and 90's burned out a lot of the political capital to be gained from implementing identity politics, the GOP has oftentimes succesfully pigeonholed Democrats as promoting policies that focus more on group marginalization, and less on full integration and acceptance.
President Obama largely won the 2008 election by carefully rejecting many aspects of identity politics and by doing so was able to garner a diverse coalition that helped give him the majority of the votes and the election.
Lately, however, Republicans are accusing him of not quite practicing what he has preached by nominating Sonia Sotomayor as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.
Some are saying that he has used her for nomination for shear political purposes, naming a Hispanic judge to the highest court in the land to shore up his own Hispanic Base (which gave him 67% of their vote), and basically dare conservatives to take the bait and attack Sotomayor more as a Latina woman, and less as a qualified or not qualified judge.
In part, the white house pushing Sotomayor's personal narrative as a poor-minority-from-the-projects-that-pulled-herself-up-by-her-own-bootstraps story has semi perpetuated this, and more and more people are becoming drawn to her biography more than they are her judicial achievements.
The only downside for Democrats to Sotomayor's nomination (who remains popular with a majority of Americans despite the revelation of inflammatory remarks she made in 2001,) has been that identity politics has once again forced Democrats to tread lightly, lest they fall into the same arguments over minority entitlement that have plagued them since the civil rights movements of the 60's. Despite the historic nomination, also, overplaying their hand could be used by Republicans to show that Democrats are once again pandering for votes from minority communities, instead of focusing on real issues and policy arguments.
Obama has promised that immigration reform is also on the table for this year, and how both sides deal with the Sotomayor nomination, will sadly draw the lines for how that debate proceeds.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Bush defends interrogation policies
While giving a speech yesterday to the Economic Club of Southwest Michigan, former President Bush defended his decision to allow harsh interrogations of suspected terror suspects after the 9/11 attacks.
In his wide ranging remarks, which included a Q&A session, the statement most likely to pop out is: “I made a decision within the law to get information so I can say, I’ve done what it takes to do my duty to protect the American people. I can tell you, the information gained saved lives.”
Although these remarks are along the same lines as statements that his former Vice President, Dick Cheney, has made in recent weeks -- including a televised rebuttal last week to President Obama's own National Security speech -- Bush refused to criticize the current administration saying he had his opinions but “there are plenty of people who will wade in, trust me, [I've seen it] first hand.”
Although last week's national security debate -- with all it's tough talk on prisoner transfers, the gray area's forming around the torture discussion, and whether or not the country is safe under the new administration -- have largely moved to the background in the face of a looming Supreme Court confirmation. One thing is for sure: the debate may be tabled for now, but it is not over.
More speculation will arise, especially in the wake of the current tensions in North Korea, when President Bush's memoirs are published and more data becomes available, and whether the current administrations policies fail or succeed.
In his wide ranging remarks, which included a Q&A session, the statement most likely to pop out is: “I made a decision within the law to get information so I can say, I’ve done what it takes to do my duty to protect the American people. I can tell you, the information gained saved lives.”
Although these remarks are along the same lines as statements that his former Vice President, Dick Cheney, has made in recent weeks -- including a televised rebuttal last week to President Obama's own National Security speech -- Bush refused to criticize the current administration saying he had his opinions but “there are plenty of people who will wade in, trust me, [I've seen it] first hand.”
Although last week's national security debate -- with all it's tough talk on prisoner transfers, the gray area's forming around the torture discussion, and whether or not the country is safe under the new administration -- have largely moved to the background in the face of a looming Supreme Court confirmation. One thing is for sure: the debate may be tabled for now, but it is not over.
More speculation will arise, especially in the wake of the current tensions in North Korea, when President Bush's memoirs are published and more data becomes available, and whether the current administrations policies fail or succeed.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
The Quote That Won't Go Away
One day after President Obama announced Sonia Sotomayor as his pick for the Supreme Court, critics have latched on to one particular quote from a speech she gave in 2002:
This single sentence has prompted accusations that Sotomayor is a racist and a bigot, and has surely opened the door for a nationwide discussion on identity politics.
As I chowed through my regular news diet today, I've seen this quote cited in every single article I've read about Sotomayor. Since her confirmation won't happen until August, I think the fury over this quote should die down eventually, but at some point Sotomayor is going to have to explain what she meant when she said this. However, even when she does finally get the chance to elaborate on her statement, I don't think she will be able mollify the "imagine if this was a white man making these statements" crowd.
"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
This single sentence has prompted accusations that Sotomayor is a racist and a bigot, and has surely opened the door for a nationwide discussion on identity politics.
As I chowed through my regular news diet today, I've seen this quote cited in every single article I've read about Sotomayor. Since her confirmation won't happen until August, I think the fury over this quote should die down eventually, but at some point Sotomayor is going to have to explain what she meant when she said this. However, even when she does finally get the chance to elaborate on her statement, I don't think she will be able mollify the "imagine if this was a white man making these statements" crowd.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Sotomayor ruled against Abortion groups
So says CBN
The big questions now are: will groups like NARAL and NOW push the issue and possibly derail a liberal appointment from the left? Will this muzzle some Conservative groups and deny them some red-meat arguments? Will it even be an issue as the white house presses for quick confirmation?
Anyway, read the link, it's a fascinating analysis from the mainstream religious right and will definitely be brought up by Democrats during her hearings.
The big questions now are: will groups like NARAL and NOW push the issue and possibly derail a liberal appointment from the left? Will this muzzle some Conservative groups and deny them some red-meat arguments? Will it even be an issue as the white house presses for quick confirmation?
Anyway, read the link, it's a fascinating analysis from the mainstream religious right and will definitely be brought up by Democrats during her hearings.
White House couldn't have asked for better timing
The announcement today of Sonia Sotomayor for Associate Justice of The Supreme Court could, in reality, have not come at a better time for the Obama administration.
After North Korea received international criticism for it's nuclear detonation and subsequent missile test this weekend it looked like the news cycle was going to be consumed with questions on Obama's National Security cred as well as ample 'what-if' scenarios.
Instead news agencies are pumping their juices at maximum to get the latest details, tidbits and reactions from both sides of the aisle in an attempt to try and frame how the confirmation debate is going to play out for the public and on the Senate floor.
the White House also gets a bit of a bonus in the fact that congress is currently not in session and many of the key conservative reactions have come from right-leaning interest groups and think tanks instead of from an organized press conference on the steps of the capitol. For now though it appears that the Sotomayor dog has yet to bark, at least amongst the highest echelons of Republican politics. Many GOP Senators and Representatives are tentatively carrying out a "wait and see" approach, not wanting to seem overtly hostile to the nation's first hispanic nominee, but at the same time not seeming to want to abandon their base, which is ready to draw the knives and prepare for a drawn out idealogical battle.
Another interesting story that seems to have been buried today is that Obama, who will be heading out to Europe to commemorate World War 2 anniversaries and give a major speech in Cairo, Egypt will also be visiting Saudi Arabia. A move the White House has successfully downplayed due to the flap over Obama allegedly 'bowing' to it's leader King Abdullah during their last meeting.
After North Korea received international criticism for it's nuclear detonation and subsequent missile test this weekend it looked like the news cycle was going to be consumed with questions on Obama's National Security cred as well as ample 'what-if' scenarios.
Instead news agencies are pumping their juices at maximum to get the latest details, tidbits and reactions from both sides of the aisle in an attempt to try and frame how the confirmation debate is going to play out for the public and on the Senate floor.
the White House also gets a bit of a bonus in the fact that congress is currently not in session and many of the key conservative reactions have come from right-leaning interest groups and think tanks instead of from an organized press conference on the steps of the capitol. For now though it appears that the Sotomayor dog has yet to bark, at least amongst the highest echelons of Republican politics. Many GOP Senators and Representatives are tentatively carrying out a "wait and see" approach, not wanting to seem overtly hostile to the nation's first hispanic nominee, but at the same time not seeming to want to abandon their base, which is ready to draw the knives and prepare for a drawn out idealogical battle.
Another interesting story that seems to have been buried today is that Obama, who will be heading out to Europe to commemorate World War 2 anniversaries and give a major speech in Cairo, Egypt will also be visiting Saudi Arabia. A move the White House has successfully downplayed due to the flap over Obama allegedly 'bowing' to it's leader King Abdullah during their last meeting.
Obama nominates Sotomayor
President Obama announced Judge Sonia Sotomayor as his pick for Supreme Court justice to replace retiring Justice David Souter. If confirmed, Sotomayor will be the first hispanic supreme court justice and the third woman to serve on the bench. At this time the GOP is not anticipating to attempt a filibuster Sotomayor's confirmation because they don't have enough votes to push it through and the conservative/liberal balance of the court will remain unchanged. GOP Chair Michael Steele issued a statement today saying that the GOP intended to keep an open mind until her career as a judge has been further vetted, and for now the conservative reaction to Sotomayor's nomination has been mostly just lukewarm.
Over the next few weeks as the public gets to know more about Sotomayor, I think we should expect to see some public criticism surrounding controversial statements she made with regard to how her ethnicity and gender influence her point of view as a judge. However, I don't think anyone is expecting her confirmation to go haywire like Harriet Meyers' did a few years ago.
Over the next few weeks as the public gets to know more about Sotomayor, I think we should expect to see some public criticism surrounding controversial statements she made with regard to how her ethnicity and gender influence her point of view as a judge. However, I don't think anyone is expecting her confirmation to go haywire like Harriet Meyers' did a few years ago.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Democrats concede on Gunatanamo, stand behnd Pelosi
Senate Democrats delivered a setback to the White House on Guantanamo Bay, which has been a signature issue for the administration, and was one of Obama's first achievements after taking office. After dems received harsh criticism for the past 3 months by Republicans who claim that once the detention facility is closed, hundreds of dangerous terrorists will be released into every American's backyard.
Yesterday the Senate Appropriations Committee, as well as senior Senate leadership, voted to strip some $80 million in funding for the closing of the controversial detention from a $93 Billion war supplemental that glided through both houses.
Congerssional Democrats defended themselves by saying that the President left them no choice, by closing the Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility without specifying a plan as to where these detainees would go, he left them vulnerable on National Security, and passing the funding would've dropped a golden egg in the lap of Republicans, desperate to find additional issues to cling too for the 2010 midterm elections next year.
Also, despite mounting pressure from the right on Nancy Pelosi to come clean from her giant mismanagement of statements on the CIA over the past couple of weeks, her top allies in her own caucus, as well as other powerful allies in the White House have not backed down from their support.
Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner has used the flap to his own advantage and continues to beat the drum on a daily basis, calling on Pelosi to "put up or shut up" on the controversial statements she made. Shoring up support amongst his own members as well as trying to kneecap the powerful speaker when she is at her most vulnerable.
Yesterday the Senate Appropriations Committee, as well as senior Senate leadership, voted to strip some $80 million in funding for the closing of the controversial detention from a $93 Billion war supplemental that glided through both houses.
Congerssional Democrats defended themselves by saying that the President left them no choice, by closing the Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility without specifying a plan as to where these detainees would go, he left them vulnerable on National Security, and passing the funding would've dropped a golden egg in the lap of Republicans, desperate to find additional issues to cling too for the 2010 midterm elections next year.
Also, despite mounting pressure from the right on Nancy Pelosi to come clean from her giant mismanagement of statements on the CIA over the past couple of weeks, her top allies in her own caucus, as well as other powerful allies in the White House have not backed down from their support.
Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner has used the flap to his own advantage and continues to beat the drum on a daily basis, calling on Pelosi to "put up or shut up" on the controversial statements she made. Shoring up support amongst his own members as well as trying to kneecap the powerful speaker when she is at her most vulnerable.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Obama Toughens Up Regulations on Fuel Efficiency
Today President Obama announced new nationwide rules for auto emissions and fuel-efficiency standards. These rules fall in line with California's long-disputed attempt to toughen auto standards on a statewide level. The new rules will take effect in 2012 and will require cars and light truck fleets to be 40 percent cleaner and more fuel-efficient by 2016.
While it was no surprise that environmentalist groups welcomed the change, the US auto industry is finally embracing the California-style standards for the first time since the state introduced the plan in 2002. With GM and Chrysler on their knees right now, they aren't in much of a position to pick a fight with the federal government. And since US car companies are getting out-sold by foreign competitors, the new standards might be the swift kick they need to change to manufacturing the smaller, more efficient cars that consumers have turned to in recent years.
While it was no surprise that environmentalist groups welcomed the change, the US auto industry is finally embracing the California-style standards for the first time since the state introduced the plan in 2002. With GM and Chrysler on their knees right now, they aren't in much of a position to pick a fight with the federal government. And since US car companies are getting out-sold by foreign competitors, the new standards might be the swift kick they need to change to manufacturing the smaller, more efficient cars that consumers have turned to in recent years.
Monday, May 18, 2009
Obama reaches out to moderate Republicans
A smart story in Politico shows that Obama has been quitely working on a small scale to try and woo moderate GOP house members to his side on health care reform. His efforts to reach out to Republicans in the past have largely failed on almost every major initiative where it was tried, so instead of large public displays of interest in bipartisanship with the President visiting the capitol, that are then seen as wholesale failures when Republican votes are scarce. Obama has tacked a new course: find a few moderate voices within the Republican party that may be open to your point of view and invite them over to the White House to try and frame a debate they can contribute too.
Although the administration admits getting any Republican support for his health care reform plan is going to be a stretch, especially when the GOP rank and file face daunting political pressures as further conservative factions within the party threaten to make looming primary fights inevitable. Contributing even slightly to the grand health care debate could serve to simply pad the resume for any house member, Republican or Democrat, that wants to give it's respective district some substance.
The Administration also made news this weekend when it brought another moderate Republican into it's tent and made Utah Governor Jon Huntsman Ambassador to China, a clever and calculated move that left tongues wagging in the Washington punditocracy and created endless speculation about Huntsman's own possible presidential ambitions in '12 or '16.
Although I am of the opinion that no candidate who accepted such a generous political appointment in the opposition parties administration, would be able to survive a crowded primary of his own party. Especially as he tried to denounce the policies of the administration he served in to please "the base" voters that generally turn up in primary elections. (It would be like John Kerry or Hillary Clinton accepting the same position in the Bush administration and then running a campaign based solely on opposition to that same administration's policies)
Whether it is intentional or not, Obama continues to create the illusion of a "collapse" at the Republican center, overseeing what appears to be the growing of his own party at the sake of absorbing the moderate wing of his opposition, a win-win scenario that burnishes his own bipartisan credentials, while at the same time sending the GOP more into "the wilderness," causing them to rely on more and more conservative voices that are out of step with the American mainstream.
Although the administration admits getting any Republican support for his health care reform plan is going to be a stretch, especially when the GOP rank and file face daunting political pressures as further conservative factions within the party threaten to make looming primary fights inevitable. Contributing even slightly to the grand health care debate could serve to simply pad the resume for any house member, Republican or Democrat, that wants to give it's respective district some substance.
The Administration also made news this weekend when it brought another moderate Republican into it's tent and made Utah Governor Jon Huntsman Ambassador to China, a clever and calculated move that left tongues wagging in the Washington punditocracy and created endless speculation about Huntsman's own possible presidential ambitions in '12 or '16.
Although I am of the opinion that no candidate who accepted such a generous political appointment in the opposition parties administration, would be able to survive a crowded primary of his own party. Especially as he tried to denounce the policies of the administration he served in to please "the base" voters that generally turn up in primary elections. (It would be like John Kerry or Hillary Clinton accepting the same position in the Bush administration and then running a campaign based solely on opposition to that same administration's policies)
Whether it is intentional or not, Obama continues to create the illusion of a "collapse" at the Republican center, overseeing what appears to be the growing of his own party at the sake of absorbing the moderate wing of his opposition, a win-win scenario that burnishes his own bipartisan credentials, while at the same time sending the GOP more into "the wilderness," causing them to rely on more and more conservative voices that are out of step with the American mainstream.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Obama at Notre Dame
The president gave the commencement address at Notre Dame earlier this afternoon after weeks of controversy and protest from pro-life groups. In classic Obama fashion, he didn't shy away from the opportunity to address the controversy head on, and called for people on both sides of the aisle to come together on solutions they can agree on, such as finding ways to reduce the number of unplanned pregnancies, supporting parents interested in adoption and social programs that help mothers in need support their children. Obama also called for impassioned people on both side of the aisle to address each other using "fair-minded" language.
Admirers of President Obama's campaign speeches may have found a little more hope and a little more lofty language in Obama's commencement speech today and also at the address he gave at Arizona State University last week. After 100 plus days of straight talk from the president, I think many people were touched by the inspiring message he gave to this year's college grads.
Admirers of President Obama's campaign speeches may have found a little more hope and a little more lofty language in Obama's commencement speech today and also at the address he gave at Arizona State University last week. After 100 plus days of straight talk from the president, I think many people were touched by the inspiring message he gave to this year's college grads.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Wall to wall Pelosi
The embattled House Speaker has clogged up the news again for the third straight day this week as allegations continue to mount that she was either mislead or mislead herself over the issue of CIA intelligence briefings on Enhanced Interogation Techniques in 2002.
Whether she's telling the truth or not, it has given Republicans an opening to try and get their voice out to the American public that Democrats are back to their usual hypocritical, "soft on terror" ways, and that, coupled with the recent "outrage" over the Guantanomo Bay Detention Camp closing, they may finally have the chance to tout their favorite talking points about national security.
Pelosi was given a little bit of breathing room yesterday when a story broke that former Senator Bob Graham also claims to have been mislead by the CIA as well, claiming the briefings that they referenced, never even took place.
Regardless of what the final outcome may be, Pelosi has definitely raised the stakes on the torture debate, firing up a liberal base that still wants to prosecute top Bush-era officials, and reawakening a conservative base that wants to preserve the Bush legacy and remains convinced that his methods made America safe.
She's received only lukewarm defense from her fellow Democrats, who really want the issue to go away so they can focus on their more popular domestic legislative agenda, and already are facing a steep hill to climb.
Whether she's telling the truth or not, it has given Republicans an opening to try and get their voice out to the American public that Democrats are back to their usual hypocritical, "soft on terror" ways, and that, coupled with the recent "outrage" over the Guantanomo Bay Detention Camp closing, they may finally have the chance to tout their favorite talking points about national security.
Pelosi was given a little bit of breathing room yesterday when a story broke that former Senator Bob Graham also claims to have been mislead by the CIA as well, claiming the briefings that they referenced, never even took place.
Regardless of what the final outcome may be, Pelosi has definitely raised the stakes on the torture debate, firing up a liberal base that still wants to prosecute top Bush-era officials, and reawakening a conservative base that wants to preserve the Bush legacy and remains convinced that his methods made America safe.
She's received only lukewarm defense from her fellow Democrats, who really want the issue to go away so they can focus on their more popular domestic legislative agenda, and already are facing a steep hill to climb.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Dick Cheney goes public
After 8 years of being known for his extreme secrecy, former vice president Dick Cheney has been making the rounds in the media over the past few weeks criticizing President Obama, defending the War On Terror, calling Colon Powell a traitor, and getting in a public snit with the CIA for not de-classifying records he intends to use for his upcoming memoir.
While I don't think anyone is surprised by the antagonistic and sometimes controversial tone of Dick Cheney's attacks, I think there are people on both sides of the aisle scratching their heads over why he's decided to make himself so public. On Sunday's Face the Nation, Cheney himself mentioned that he felt compelled to speak out on behalf of the GOP because of a perceived void in leadership. But even if there is an apparent lack of leadership, is Cheney really doing the GOP any favors by dragging his mug out on the Sunday news shows?
The White House and the democratic party couldn't be more happy to link the GOP back to the Bush White House, as Robert Gibbs did in response to Cheney's comments this morning. The GOP knows that Cheney is one of the most negatively viewed heavyweights in the party, definitely not someone they want the public to continue associating as a face of the GOP, I wonder how long GOP leaders will allow Cheney to continue to be so outspoken.
While I don't think anyone is surprised by the antagonistic and sometimes controversial tone of Dick Cheney's attacks, I think there are people on both sides of the aisle scratching their heads over why he's decided to make himself so public. On Sunday's Face the Nation, Cheney himself mentioned that he felt compelled to speak out on behalf of the GOP because of a perceived void in leadership. But even if there is an apparent lack of leadership, is Cheney really doing the GOP any favors by dragging his mug out on the Sunday news shows?
The White House and the democratic party couldn't be more happy to link the GOP back to the Bush White House, as Robert Gibbs did in response to Cheney's comments this morning. The GOP knows that Cheney is one of the most negatively viewed heavyweights in the party, definitely not someone they want the public to continue associating as a face of the GOP, I wonder how long GOP leaders will allow Cheney to continue to be so outspoken.
Health care reform finds unlikely allies
When Bill Clinton's administration attempted health care reform in the 90's, his plans were successfully blocked by an oppositional wall of hostile Republicans, conservative Democrats, and powerful interest groups within the private health care sector. The public became skeptical as lobbying groups successfully branded the reform efforts as 'socialized' and 'dangerous.'
Almost 16 years later, the current white house, learning from those lessons, has banded together a powerful coalition of groups within the health care industry, the same groups that successfully killed reform before, to try and defang possible opposition before it can grow. Representatives from every spectrum of the health care industry including pharmaceutical and insurance company executives, prominent medical professionals, doctor's associations, and union groups will meet with Obama today and present a plan to reduce overall health care cost by almost $2 trillion over 10 years. This number will embolden reform activists inside and outside of congress, as well as give the administration momentum to push it's reform agenda without being attacked by beneficiaries of the 'medical-industrial complex.'
For once the white house wouldn't mind you read today's Paul Krugman op-ed in which he takes an uncharacteristically optimistic tone on how reform can actually happen, and how today's meeting should be seen as genuine progress.
Some liberals are skeptical though still and think maybe Obama is cozying up a little too much with the health care industry and thinks that in an attempt to compromise with the insurance giants he may leave out key provisions for universal coverage subsidized by the federal government. Provisions that these industries have long opposed.
Also, today's Washington Post profiles a former Hospital CEO that doesn't care of his colleagues are ready for reform, he's ready to fight Obama's plans tooth and nail. An indication that today's big meeting, touted by the white house as 'unprecedented' may merely be simply a first step in a series of first steps, heated debates, and a whole lot of money getting spent by people who want their way.
Almost 16 years later, the current white house, learning from those lessons, has banded together a powerful coalition of groups within the health care industry, the same groups that successfully killed reform before, to try and defang possible opposition before it can grow. Representatives from every spectrum of the health care industry including pharmaceutical and insurance company executives, prominent medical professionals, doctor's associations, and union groups will meet with Obama today and present a plan to reduce overall health care cost by almost $2 trillion over 10 years. This number will embolden reform activists inside and outside of congress, as well as give the administration momentum to push it's reform agenda without being attacked by beneficiaries of the 'medical-industrial complex.'
For once the white house wouldn't mind you read today's Paul Krugman op-ed in which he takes an uncharacteristically optimistic tone on how reform can actually happen, and how today's meeting should be seen as genuine progress.
Some liberals are skeptical though still and think maybe Obama is cozying up a little too much with the health care industry and thinks that in an attempt to compromise with the insurance giants he may leave out key provisions for universal coverage subsidized by the federal government. Provisions that these industries have long opposed.
Also, today's Washington Post profiles a former Hospital CEO that doesn't care of his colleagues are ready for reform, he's ready to fight Obama's plans tooth and nail. An indication that today's big meeting, touted by the white house as 'unprecedented' may merely be simply a first step in a series of first steps, heated debates, and a whole lot of money getting spent by people who want their way.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Obama v. Democrats
Well the first 100 days of the new administration and the new Democratic super congress are over, but it looks like the next 100 days will be even harder than the first. As Democrats continue to scuffle over details in passing the administrations sweeping agenda. Obama knows he has precious little time left to get big things accomplished, and has learned the lessons of both Reagan and Clinton whose political capital diminished greatly after their first two years in office.
The White House Climate Control bill that has been bouncing around various house committees didn't even need any full voiced Republican opposition, the bill has been stalling as Democrats are coming from every direction to protect the coal, steel, and manufacturing interests that got many of them elected in the first place. A move that has given climate change idealists inside and outside the white house a continuing headache.
There have been reported clashes between Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Wexler, who is pushing the bill and DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen. Van Hollen, who's job it is to protect freshman democratic house members, feels that many of them will become vulnerable to anti-business ads from Republicans, should the bill pass. Even House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer has said that no "consensus" has been reached on the bill, and that they're "hoping" to reach their end of May deadline.
Yesterday also, Obama introduced a plan to close offshore tax loopholes, a proposal that should've been a slam dunk for Democrats trying to raise new revenue for their spending programs, as well as encourage investment within the United States, but Sen. Max Baucus, the powerful finance committee chairman, has been cool to the tax crackdown, worried about multinational banks in New York that employ thousands.
House Appropriations chairman David Obey generously gave Obama all that he asked for and more for the continuing war in Afghanistan, but had strong words for Obama's plan, should there continue to be no signs of relief for a conflict now going into it's 8th year. He was quoted as saying he was "very dubious" about the chances of success in the region. Words that further frustrate The Administration's plans for the war weary country, should the confilct there intensify, especially after the August elections and the continuing escalations in Pakistan. Also missing from Obey's appropriation, money to move forward on closing The Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba, the administrations first victory, but now a continuing thorn as complaints are raised that Obama has no clear plan to move forward with closing the infamous prison, or relocating the 100 or so detainees still imprisoned there.
Sen. Chris Dodd today, bucking the administration, has said he was open to waterboarding trials of former Bush officials, maybe trying to take attention away from his floundering poll numbers in his home state of Connecticut.
There is something to be said with having too much of a majority: the more congressman you supposedly have on your side, the more egos, agendas, and outsized personalities there are that need to be consistently assuaged and assured.
The White House Climate Control bill that has been bouncing around various house committees didn't even need any full voiced Republican opposition, the bill has been stalling as Democrats are coming from every direction to protect the coal, steel, and manufacturing interests that got many of them elected in the first place. A move that has given climate change idealists inside and outside the white house a continuing headache.
There have been reported clashes between Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Wexler, who is pushing the bill and DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen. Van Hollen, who's job it is to protect freshman democratic house members, feels that many of them will become vulnerable to anti-business ads from Republicans, should the bill pass. Even House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer has said that no "consensus" has been reached on the bill, and that they're "hoping" to reach their end of May deadline.
Yesterday also, Obama introduced a plan to close offshore tax loopholes, a proposal that should've been a slam dunk for Democrats trying to raise new revenue for their spending programs, as well as encourage investment within the United States, but Sen. Max Baucus, the powerful finance committee chairman, has been cool to the tax crackdown, worried about multinational banks in New York that employ thousands.
House Appropriations chairman David Obey generously gave Obama all that he asked for and more for the continuing war in Afghanistan, but had strong words for Obama's plan, should there continue to be no signs of relief for a conflict now going into it's 8th year. He was quoted as saying he was "very dubious" about the chances of success in the region. Words that further frustrate The Administration's plans for the war weary country, should the confilct there intensify, especially after the August elections and the continuing escalations in Pakistan. Also missing from Obey's appropriation, money to move forward on closing The Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba, the administrations first victory, but now a continuing thorn as complaints are raised that Obama has no clear plan to move forward with closing the infamous prison, or relocating the 100 or so detainees still imprisoned there.
Sen. Chris Dodd today, bucking the administration, has said he was open to waterboarding trials of former Bush officials, maybe trying to take attention away from his floundering poll numbers in his home state of Connecticut.
There is something to be said with having too much of a majority: the more congressman you supposedly have on your side, the more egos, agendas, and outsized personalities there are that need to be consistently assuaged and assured.
Monday, May 4, 2009
You can't always get what you want. . .
. . .But sometimes, you get what you need.
A new Quinnipiac poll released today shows newly minted Democratic Senator Arlen Specter's gamble may be paying off, at least for now. Going head to head statewide against his two most formidable Republican opponents, Former Rep. Pat Toomey, and former Governor Tom Ridge, he now leads by 10 points and 3 points resepctively.
Many have speculated that Specter's flight from the Republican Party as a way to avoid a blistering primary campaign in a state that has seen huge voter defections towards democrats as well as a rightward drift in the ideology of republicans statewide.
Although it's still early, and democrats can collectively take a sigh of relief, there is an unseen variable here, and that is a challenge from the left. So far, there has been little opposition, with Philadelphia Rep. Joe Sestak putting his toes in the water but not committing either way.
With the full backing of President Obama, plus popular Governor Ed Rendell, it may be hard for anyone on the left to mount such serious opposition in the primary to the well funded Democratic establishment in the state.
A new Quinnipiac poll released today shows newly minted Democratic Senator Arlen Specter's gamble may be paying off, at least for now. Going head to head statewide against his two most formidable Republican opponents, Former Rep. Pat Toomey, and former Governor Tom Ridge, he now leads by 10 points and 3 points resepctively.
Many have speculated that Specter's flight from the Republican Party as a way to avoid a blistering primary campaign in a state that has seen huge voter defections towards democrats as well as a rightward drift in the ideology of republicans statewide.
Although it's still early, and democrats can collectively take a sigh of relief, there is an unseen variable here, and that is a challenge from the left. So far, there has been little opposition, with Philadelphia Rep. Joe Sestak putting his toes in the water but not committing either way.
With the full backing of President Obama, plus popular Governor Ed Rendell, it may be hard for anyone on the left to mount such serious opposition in the primary to the well funded Democratic establishment in the state.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Justice David Souter announces retirement, sets off court battle
NPR broke the story last night that is putting Washington in a tizzy and starting off what will most likely become a full scale partisan war on capitol hill.
As if the financial crisis, banking meltdown, swine flu, Chrysler bankrputcy, defense spending overhaul, budget battle, a senatorial party switch, and two expensive wars weren't enough to keep the new administration and congress more than busy into the foreseeable future; the announced retirement of Supreme Court Justice David Souter, 69, at the end of the summer has dropped a bomb on a city that is already humming at or past capacity.
Although he was appointed to the court by George H.W. Bush in 1990 and was once declared a "home run" for conservatism, Souter has tended to vote with the liberal wing of the court. At 69, he is well below the usual age that justices tend to retire, and the timing of his announcement will cause more and more speculation, and will continue to keep all eyes on the Obama administration's plans well into the summer and could also inadvertantly sidetrack some of Obama's legislative agenda. The new choice could also reinvigorate a depressed GOP, as well as burnish or tarnish Obama's bipartisan credentials either depleting or replenishing precious political capital.
Republicans have already started sniping at potential replacements and the cry of "activist judges" by an angry conservative base could become a possible headache for Democrats eager to get to their domestic agenda while the wind remains at their back.
The Vice President, who, as chairman of the judiciary committe, has presided over 6 confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justices and is a veteran of these capital hill slugfests will carry the administration's banner into battle and will be the go to guy and coach for a young administration eager to avoid a nomination fight.
Despite a hefty packing of friendly democrats in the Senate, especially after the switch of Sen. Arlen Specter and the not-if-but-when swearing in of Al Franken possibly by summer, it could still be an uphill battle for Obama if he wants to avoid a cultural war with Republicans. Especially at a time he's trying to mount huge legislative accomplishments and continue to maintain goodwill amongst the majority of the America public going into his second 100 days, despite one of the most crowded political environments in modern history.
Fox News has a list of possible nominees HERE
As if the financial crisis, banking meltdown, swine flu, Chrysler bankrputcy, defense spending overhaul, budget battle, a senatorial party switch, and two expensive wars weren't enough to keep the new administration and congress more than busy into the foreseeable future; the announced retirement of Supreme Court Justice David Souter, 69, at the end of the summer has dropped a bomb on a city that is already humming at or past capacity.
Although he was appointed to the court by George H.W. Bush in 1990 and was once declared a "home run" for conservatism, Souter has tended to vote with the liberal wing of the court. At 69, he is well below the usual age that justices tend to retire, and the timing of his announcement will cause more and more speculation, and will continue to keep all eyes on the Obama administration's plans well into the summer and could also inadvertantly sidetrack some of Obama's legislative agenda. The new choice could also reinvigorate a depressed GOP, as well as burnish or tarnish Obama's bipartisan credentials either depleting or replenishing precious political capital.
Republicans have already started sniping at potential replacements and the cry of "activist judges" by an angry conservative base could become a possible headache for Democrats eager to get to their domestic agenda while the wind remains at their back.
The Vice President, who, as chairman of the judiciary committe, has presided over 6 confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justices and is a veteran of these capital hill slugfests will carry the administration's banner into battle and will be the go to guy and coach for a young administration eager to avoid a nomination fight.
Despite a hefty packing of friendly democrats in the Senate, especially after the switch of Sen. Arlen Specter and the not-if-but-when swearing in of Al Franken possibly by summer, it could still be an uphill battle for Obama if he wants to avoid a cultural war with Republicans. Especially at a time he's trying to mount huge legislative accomplishments and continue to maintain goodwill amongst the majority of the America public going into his second 100 days, despite one of the most crowded political environments in modern history.
Fox News has a list of possible nominees HERE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
