News Today

…Thank you, Mr. President.

Some of us were beginning to think you had forgotten about the issue completely….

Somewhat appropriately, Obama’s harshest warning about the U.S. budget deficit came during his recent nine-day trip to Asia. In an interview with Fox News, Obama said his administration was facing a “delicate balance of trying to boost the economy and spur job creation while putting the economy on a path toward long-term deficit reduction.”

“It is important though to recognize if we keep on adding to the debt, even in the midst of this recovery, that at some point, people could lose confidence in the U.S. economy in a way that could actually lead to a double-dip recession,” said Obama.

Obama also said he plans to hold a jobs forum with business leaders and financial experts in December to discuss ways to turn around the 10.2% unemployment. After taking office, Obama said, the focus of the administration was avoiding the Great Depression.

“Our first job was to get the economy to recover. And we’re now seeing that,” said Obama. “We’ve seen economic growth (in the third quarter). We anticipate economic growth next quarter as well. I always said the job growth would lag behind economic growth. The question now is how can we accelerate it.”

In an interview with NBC Obama said there was a whole “range of ideas” to give companies an incentive to start hiring again. Two ideas he did note were searching for more export opportunities and possible tax provisions that would encourage businesses to hire “sooner rather than sitting on the sidelines.”

I, like a lot of Americans, have been pretty discouraged by the amount of spending in the Obama administration so far. I don’t even blame Obama completely since it really does take over a thousand pages of legislation to get the Democrats in Congress to reach a consensus on big issues.

Plus, this guy went to Harvard. He’s a smart man. He knows that we can’t keep spending at these levels… right? Right???

Because we really can’t. For the United States to continue to keep borrowing more money at this point is downright irresponsible.

Put it like this, courtesy of China, Japan and a host of other countries, the United States was given an international credit card. A credit card with no spending limit. Then, with all of the excitement of a fifteen year old girl at the Mall of America, we went crazy with it. We racked up a lot of charges and… now we owe almost $12 trillon.

$12,000,000,000,000.

The forecast doesn’t get all that greater over the next few years either. According to the CBO, over half of the $9 trillion in debt that the U.S. is expected to build up over the next decade will be in interest rates alone (see chart).

States across the country are going bankrupt, California is looking at a $21 billion budget gap over the next year and a half. For a more comprehensive look at California’s situation visit NWunderlich, who has been documenting the state’s budget woes for a while now.

At some point our lawmakers need to come together and address this issue. It will take making some tough choices, unpopular choices like spending cuts and tax raises. Measures do need to be taken though.

If not, then President Obama is correct, we will experience a great deal of economic turmoil. The decades of borrowing are adding up, and if we don’t work to correct this soon it may be too late. It’s essential that we move forward with a streamlined and efficient government, one that is in control of its spending.

Sources:
http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/industries/government/update–obama-debt-fuel-double-dip-recession/?loomia_ow=t0:s0:a16:g4:r4:c0.000000:b28934020:z10
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091118/ap_on_bi_ge/us_california_budget;_ylt=AjVjPu2jpQ9f4C16RAxoY239xg8F;_ylu=X3oDMTJuZ3QzZjFjBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkxMTE4L3VzX2NhbGlmb3JuaWFfYnVkZ2V0BGNwb3MDMwRwb3MDMwRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3JpZXMEc2xrA2ZvcmVjYXN0Y2FsaQ–
http://money.cnn.com/2009/11/19/news/economy/debt_interest/

President Barack Obama is reportedly rejecting his national security team’s Afghanistan war options.

Harry Reid opening door for debate to begin on health care reform.

Lou Dobbs announced he is leaving CNN! Abruptly! -yawns-

John Allen Muhammed, the D.C. sniper, was excecuted.

…And Joe Biden’s motorcade was involved in a fatal accident. No, Mr. Biden was not driving in the car at the time.

One of my favorite quotes from George Washington was two little snippets of advice that he had for the young United States of America.

His first word of advice was that we should not form political parties (oops!) and the second had to do with the U.S. making alliances with foreign countries.

“The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations to have as little political connection as possible… Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalships, interest, humor, or caprice?… It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world.”

– George Washington.

Well, for better or for worse, we didn’t listen to George on this one either. Would we have been wise to?

. . .

Today the United States holds alliances all across the world. We’re allied in one form or another with almost all of Europe, several countries in Asia, and with many countries in North, South and Central America. With these alliances come both assets and liabilities, but what real assets are we talking about here?

Let’s take a look at one alliance in particular, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

NATO was formed on April 4, 1949. Originally it was a pact between the United States and 11 other countries, but over the years NATO’s ranks have swelled to 28 countries. The point of NATO was to provide a military support between its members.

From the treaty:

“The Parties of NATO agreed that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all. Consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence will assist the Party or Parties being attacked, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”

NATO member’s military spending accounts for about 70% of the military spending in the entire world. You can bet that’s not divided up evenly between all 28 members of NATO either. In fact, the United States military spending works out to about half of the military spending in the world.

To make a bad situation worse, we have treaties like the 2002 Berlin Plus Agreement. Signed between the European Union (EU) and NATO, the Berlin Plus Agreement gives the EU rights to the use of NATO assets should NATO decline to intervene in an international crisis. What was that whole bit about entangling our peace and prosperity with the toils of European ambitions again, George?

Six months into President Barack Obama’s administration Obama received a letter from several Central and Eastern European NATO members stating that the “ability to sustain public support at home for our contributions to Alliance missions abroad … depends on us being able to show that our own security concerns are being addressed in NATO and close cooperation with the United States.”

Here’s the thing, almost all of the countries that were demanding more resources from the United States spend less than 2% of their GDP on defense spending. The government puts defense spending at 20% of the United States GDP, but if you account for past military expenses such as veteran’s benefits and interest from debt that number jumps dramatically to about 54%.

“The primary purpose of our alliance from a military standpoint is to provide for the security of Japan.” Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on a recent visit with Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama. “It allows Japan to have a defense budget … of roughly 1 percent of GDP.”

These countries are able to spend virtually nothing on defense because the United States is doing it for them. What is it that the U.S. is getting in return though, other than an excuse to spend that much money on the military?

Justin Logan of the CATO Institute worded it best:

“America’s alliances are no longer considered responses to security challenges. Instead, they have become ends in themselves. In an era of record-breaking budget deficits and serious economic problems at home, the billions of dollars Uncle Sam pays each year to baby-sit Europe and East Asia ought to be coming in for scrutiny, not perpetual affirmation.”

Sources:
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10954
http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog/George.Washington.Quote.2D30
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/SID-C4B3E460-5AD5C2A3/natolive/index.htm
http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending
http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm

Oh I would not want to be in Harry Reid’s shoes right now…

Nevermind his prospects in the 2010 election, the Nevada Democrat is now charged with two unenviable tasks. First Reid must successfully combine the Senate’s two committee bills into one final version, a task that is proving to be not so easy. Then the Senate Majority Leader must find a way to combine the Senate’s final draft with the drastically different House bill.

Among the differences he will have to work around include a last-minute abortion amendment that likely gave the House bill enough support with moderate Democrats to pass. The House bill passed 220-215 on Saturday after 219 Democrats and one Republican (bi-partisanship?) voted in favor.

Getting a bill passed in the Senate will be harder as well. In the Senate 60 votes are needed for passage, as opposed to the simple majority required in the House. While Democrats do hold the coveted “super-majority” (filibuster-proof 60-vote majority) in the Senate, it’s not clear if the left will be able to keep rank with all of its members (something that will probably be needed as all 40 Republican Senators will likely vote in opposition).

“If the public option plan is in there, as a matter of conscience, I will not allow this bill to come to a final vote,” Sen. Joe Lieberman told Fox News on Sunday.

Joe Lieberman refusing to work with Democrats is nothing new, but Lieberman isn’t the only one standing in opposition of the bill.

“If it isn’t clear that government money is not to be used to fund abortions — whether it’s subsidies or direct payments or tax credits or something like that — I will not support it,” said Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska. “If it doesn’t make it clear that it does not pay for abortion, you can be sure I will vote against it.”

Quotes like these demonstrate the tricky task that Harry Reid is faced with as health care legislation makes its way through Congress.

Right now Reid’s strategy is to include a public insurance plan that states would have the option (but would not have to) of signing up for. To pay for the measure the Senate is planning on taxing high-value insurance plans and making companies face tax-penalties for not providing insurance to their employees. Congressional Budget Office cost projections for the Senate bill will likely be released in the next couple days.

Sources:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125779914376639381.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senate-health-bill-major-hurdles/story?id=9030942
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125765850379236569.html

While working families, pregnant women and children are struggling to get access to scarce doses of the H1N1 vaccine, workers at the New York Stock Exchange, bankers at Goldman Sachs and Citigroup, and employees at the Federal Reserve have all been given doses of the vaccine.

The bankers at Goldman Sachs have a stockpile of 200 doses of the vaccine. To put this in perspective, that’s the same amount of doses that Lenox Hill Hospital in New York was given. Citigroup has been supplied with over 1,200 units.

This is disgusting, even more so than the bonus-gate scandals.

“If we know that the distribution is the weak part of this entire thing, why not put doctor’s offices and hospitals at the top of the line,” said Dr. Nancy Schnyderman, NBC’s chief medical editor, “and say to corporate America, no matter who you are, you’re you’re going to have to go through clinics and hospitals like everyone else.”

Instead, while hospitals, schools and community health clinics are in desperate need of the H1N1 vaccine, Wall Street’s investment bankers are allowed to just cut in line and secure scarce doses.

If this story makes you feel as disgusted as it made me, I’d urge you to click this link. Clicking will add your signature to a Credo Action petition urging Goldman Sachs to donate their vaccines.

After receiving over $1 billion in taxpayer bailouts during the financial meltdown, being the single-largest recipient of taxpayer money in the AIG bailout, and preparing to give its bankers as much as $23 billion in bonuses while the rest of country struggles through this jobless “recovery” — I’d say it’s the least they could do.

Sources:
http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/h1n1_vaccine/
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/nov2009/db2009112_606442.htm
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/05/swine-flu-vaccine-banks-g_n_346907.html&cp

There were a number of races and issues that were voted on yesterday. Let’s take a look at some of the more intriguing races and results.

NY-23 Special Election - Despite the best efforts of conservative star-power like Tim Pawlenty, Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck, voters in this district (A Republican lock since the Civil War) chose Democrat Bill Owens over the Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman. Still, it would be wrong to label this a defeat for the hard-right Tea Party movement. They had enough influence to knock G.O.P. candidate Dede Scozzafava out of the race and brought some much needed national attention to their movement.

New York Mayor - After running the most expensive self-financed campaign ever, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg won an unexpectedly tight race Tuesday night with long-shot challenger City Comptroller William Thompson Jr.

Virginia - Republican Bob McDonnell, in a replay of Virginia’s Attorney General race four years earlier, cruised to an easy victory over Democrat Creigh Deeds in the Virginia governor’s race. “One of the reasons we were so successful is we had independents and Democrats come over to our side,” said McDonnell, in a quote that sounds eerily similar to our president. “For those of you who did not support me, I say give me a chance to earn your trust.”

New Jersey - Chris Christie became the first Republican to win statewide in New Jersey in more than a decade by ousting the Democrat incumbent Jon Corzine. Christie was aided by a poor showing from independent candidate Chris Daggett. Despite polling as high as 20 percent in October, Daggett, a former Republican and EPA official, was unable to break double digits at the polls.

Maine - Voters in this state chose to repeal a state law granting same-sex couples the right to marry, marking a defeat for gay rights activists who were hoping the state would become the first to approve gay marriage at the polls. Currently Iowa, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire and Connecticut are the only states to allow same-sex marriage.

Ohio - Cincinnati, Columbus, Cleveland and Toledo will be building Las Vegas-style casinos after voters in the buckeye state passed Issue 3. This was the fifth statewide vote on the issue since 1990, but with state unemployment hovering around 10% voters said yes to the promise of 34,000 new jobs, $1 billion in capital investment, and $651 million a year in tax revenues for local governments and school districts.

Sources:
http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/election/ohioans-approve-casinos-for-4-cities-382796.html
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29119.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/04/AR2009110402115.html?hpid=topnews
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29103.html
http://www.theweek.com/article/index/102397/Tea_Party_backlash_in_NY

Regardless of what happens at the polls today in NY-23, one thing is clear. The G.O.P. has a big red problem, one that is likely to get even bigger.

Still think this is astro-turf Nancy Pelosi?

Ask Dede Scozzafava if she thinks it’s not a legitimate grassroots campaign. At the beginning of the month Scozzafava held a 7-point lead over Democrat Bill Owens. Fast forward to today and Scozzafava, the G.O.P. candidate picked for NY-23, has already bowed out of the race and Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman holds a slim lead over Owens in polls, 36 percent to 35 percent.

Inspired by their NY-23 victory, conservatives and tea party activists have already set their sights on some other G.O.P. Senate recruits like Gov. Charlie Crist in Florida, former Rep. Rob Simmons in Connecticut, Rep. Mark Kirk in Illinois and even GOP incumbents like Utah Sen. Bob Bennett.

“I would say it’s the tip of the spear,” said Dick Armey, the former GOP House majority leader who now serves as chairman of Freedom Works, an organization that has been closely aligned with the tea party movement. “We are the biggest source of energy in American politics today.”

NY-23 has brought up some intriguing questions. What will the long-term impact of this conservative infighting be? Could this be the fall of the Republican Party? Are we about to enter a new era in American politics?

Some analysts think so, and it will be interesting to see how this plays out. In states from California to Connecticut the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) is choosing candidates who appear at first glance to be strong general election prospects in their districts. Nevertheless these candidates are meeting tough resistance from grass-roots level from activists who believe in supporting the conservative cause, even if it means going against the party nominee.

“New York 23, on some scale, is the first battle of a larger internal Republican debate over how to define the party,” said former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio, a conservative who is challenging Crist for the Senate nomination. “They want us to vote for their candidates, but they don’t want us to run for office.”

Sources:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/cq/politics3237585;_ylt=AlPTu_LeTcdo21OVPHmfpFBh24cA;_ylu=X3oDMTE2ajVuNTVrBHBvcwM0BHNlYwN5bi1yLWItbGVmdARzbGsDLXJlYWRpbmdlbGVj
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_what_s_at_stake
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20091103/pl_politico/29057

As Scotty says, Halloween is over, and it’s time to get back to work.

It was a pretty active weekend too, which I would say calls for a quick round of this and that…

The FBI released the 2004 interview summary of Dick Cheney’s answers in the Valerie Plame criminal investigation. Apparently the interview contained 72 instances where Cheney “could not recall” the answer and one instance where he refused to answer altogether.

The G.O.P. is getting ready to release a health care bill, which will focus on lowering costs rather than expanding coverage. “If you drive down costs, you can expand access,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner on Monday. No word yet on cost.

One of my favorite stories got that much more interesting on Saturday when Dede Scozzafava decided to drop out of New York’s 23rd district special congressional election. What will the long-term implications of this race be?

It will be interesting to see how all of tomorrow’s elections play out.

President Barack Obama gave Afghan President Hamid Karzai a cold congratulations on Saturday, warning Karzai that America needs to see an improvement on corruption in the Afghan government. “The proof is not going to be in words,” said Obama. “It’s going to be in deeds.”

And Dylan Ratigan of the Huffington Post poses a very intriguing question: Why keep Timothy Geithner?

After a nine month hiatus of, well, pretty much anything public, George W. Bush may have found himself a new role - Motivational Speaker.

…I know right?

Over 11,000 people (some reports say upwards of 15,000) attended a “Get Motivated!” seminar in Fort Worth, Texas on Monday that featured our 43rd president, former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, Rev. Robert H. Schuller, retired football great Terry Bradshaw and motivational speaker Zig Ziglar.

Looking more relaxed than he ever did during his presidency Bush strung together anecdotes and jokes while musing about his eight years in the Oval Office.

“Every single day, I was honored to be your president by bringing honor and dignity to the office,” said Bush.

-spits coffee out of mouth-

“It’s so simple in life to chase popularity, but popularity is fleeting,” said Bush, adding, “it’s not real.”

I’ll refrain from commenting out of respect for the presidency.

In all seriousness though, I think George may have found himself a suitable role (or at least a better one than POTUS). The reaction from the crowd consisted of standing ovations and, for the most part, good reviews. Last week 43 gave three speeches in Canada, and he also recently joined the Washington Speakers Bureau. His next scheduled motivational speech will take place next month in San Antonio.

Chris Clarke, a 25-year old salesman from Dallas who attended the event, summed it up pretty perfectly. He said when Bush misspeaks, it sounds “incompetent if you are president. But here it can be inspiring. It makes him seem like a regular guy, no better than me.”

Sources:
http://www.star-telegram.com/local/story/1710670.html
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2009/10/27/George-W-Bushs-gig-Motivational-speaker/UPI-16531256655386/
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-bush28-2009oct28,0,3497678.story?track=rss

While Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor made it through the Senate relatively easily (68-31 with 9 Republicans joining a unified Democratic Senate in approving the justice), the rest of President Barack Obama’s lower court nominees are moving at a much slower pace.

Slower than molasses, even.

Only three of his 22 lower court nominees have been confirmed so far and the latest, Roberto Lange (for a federal district court appointment in South Dakota), waited 3 1/2 months to be approved. Gerard Lynch from New York and Jeffrey Viken from South Dakota, the other two nominees to be confirmed, spent a similar amount of time waiting to be approved.

Two unapproved nominees, Andre Davis of Maryland and David Hamilton of Indiana, cleared the Senate judiciary committee almost 150 days ago. Both of them are still waiting for a floor vote. Another nominee, Beverly Martin, has the support of Georgia’s two conservative Republican senators and was unanimously reported out of the Senate judiciary committee almost 50 days ago. She, too, has not received a Senate floor vote.

All in all eight of Obama’s nominees are currently waiting for floor action.

In some ways this is nothing new. Senators in both parties have been guilty for a while now of using procedural tactics to block or delay confirmations. However, as Slate’s Doug Kendall points out, these heavy-handed tactics were typically reserved for controversial candidates whereas the Republicans appear to be contesting them all.

From Kendall’s article:

“To date, however, the tit-for-tat game has played out within a fairly narrow category of nominees who are deemed controversial. While there has never been an agreed-upon definition of what that means—it’s an eye-of-the-beholder type of thing—there has consistently been a large category of nominees that are not considered controversial. They have typically made it easily through the Senate confirmation process, no matter how rough the ride is for their controversial counterparts.”

Let’s compare Obama’s progress with his predecessor. During the last two years of his presidency, George W. Bush’s support was dwindling and he faced a Senate under Democratic control. Still, 26 of Bush’s 68 nominees cleared the floor within 3 months of Bush nominating them and 23 of the Bush nominees were confirmed on the Senate floor within a week of passing out of the judiciary committee.

Bush’s first two years went about the same. A Democratic majority in Congress confirmed 100 of Bush’s nominees in 17 months, even after delays due to a change in party control.

So why is it that the more popular Obama, with a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, is having so much trouble?

Again let’s turn to Kendall’s article.

“The emerging Republican strategy is to hold these uncontroversial nominees hostage as pawns in the larger war over President Obama’s agenda and the direction of the federal judiciary. The Senate operates according to a set of arcane rules that allows a minority party to bring the institution to a halt if it chooses to do so. Most bills and nominations pass through the Senate with no debate and only a voice vote on the Senate floor. But this requires every senator to play along. By stonewalling on every nominee so far, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is requiring his counterpart, Sen. Reid, to negotiate, or devote precious floor time, for every judicial confirmation.”

While I can’t say I agree much with Kendall’s description of our government’s checks and balances as “a set of arcane rules,” Kendall goes on to describe why the G.O.P.’s tactics are detrimental to our whole judicial system.

“This is unprecedented and dangerous. There are already 95 vacancies on the federal bench at a time when there is bipartisan agreement that we need more judgeships. The last thing we need is for existing seats in overworked courts to go unfilled.”

“Even more important, Republican obstruction of uncontroversial nominees undermines the one part of the judicial confirmation process that was still working, until now. Well-qualified nominees who enjoy bipartisan support should be able to count on a fair and relatively smooth Senate confirmation process. This is critical because while they’re waiting, the careers of these nominees go on hold. Given the demands of the bench, and the gap between judicial salaries and what these candidates could earn in private practice, the nation is already lucky that top candidates are willing to serve. If we throw in an unpredictable and lengthy confirmation process, the quality of the federal bench—and the dispensation of justice—will unquestionably suffer.”

Sources:
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_next_war_over_the_courts
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/06/sonia.sotomayor/index.html
http://www.slate.com/id/2233309/#return