The following letter was submitted to the Congressman via his House website (note: the links didn't go through; it's a text-only message form) -
Note: This letter is from a post in my blog, Random Musings. While I truly don't expect a reply, it's only fair to actually submit the letter to you when I'm posting it on the internet.
Congressman Shadegg -
I know you've been busy with other things, like dealing with criticism for your support of the President's SCHIP veto or fighting off the surging campaign of challenger Bob Lord, but I hope you can take the time to answer a question for me.
You've been getting a lot of love recently in the conservative blogosphere for your bill, HR1359, the Enumerated Powers Act.
As written, it would require that "each Act of Congress shall contain a concise and definite statement of the constitutional authority relied upon for the enactment of each portion of that Act."
Believe it or not, while I am an active Democrat and certainly more progressive than you, I don't have a major problem with that particular concept.
I do have to wonder, however, where is the same requirement for Presidential acts, such as executive orders and 'signing statements'?
Why don't you believe that the President is as subject to the Constitution and needs to have Constitutionally-granted authority for his or her actions as any member of Congress would?
Sincerely,
[cpmaz]
Later!
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Another day, more evidence of Republican priorities
The Bushies are now limiting their contempt for the public. They are only placing more importance on corporate profits over public safety on specific days now.
As in only on days ending in "y".
Earlier today, the House Committee on Science and Technology held a hearing on NASA's refusal to release the results of a survey of pilots on aviation safety.
NASA's justification for that initial refusal?
It might "affect the public confidence in, and the commercial welfare of the air carriers and general aviation companies." (AFP)
Under questioning from legislators at today's hearing (including AZ5's Harry Mitchell), the director of NASA, Michael Griffin, disavowed the stated justification for withholding the survey results and promised to release the results.
After any sensitive information has been redacted (i.e. - censored) from the report.
Sensitive information includes such 'meaningless' things like airlines, airports, and aircraft models.
Rep. Harry Mitchell had this to say (courtesy a press release) -
You know, I've disagreed with Congressman Mitchell on a few significant issues (FISA, Iraq war funding), but he's dead on on this one.
Perhaps it must be done one issue at a time, but it's time that the Democrats in Congress start holding the Bush Administration and their Executive Branch appointees accountable for their failure to do their job of protecting the interests of *all* Americans.
Not just big-money contributors.
Griffin's written testimony here.
Committee chairman Bart Gordon's (D-TN) opening statement here.
AP coverage of the hearing here.
Later!
As in only on days ending in "y".
Earlier today, the House Committee on Science and Technology held a hearing on NASA's refusal to release the results of a survey of pilots on aviation safety.
NASA's justification for that initial refusal?
It might "affect the public confidence in, and the commercial welfare of the air carriers and general aviation companies." (AFP)
Under questioning from legislators at today's hearing (including AZ5's Harry Mitchell), the director of NASA, Michael Griffin, disavowed the stated justification for withholding the survey results and promised to release the results.
After any sensitive information has been redacted (i.e. - censored) from the report.
Sensitive information includes such 'meaningless' things like airlines, airports, and aircraft models.
Rep. Harry Mitchell had this to say (courtesy a press release) -
“The idea that the federal government would put private profits ahead of the flying public’s safety is outrageous and inexcusable,” said Mitchell. “NASA’s survey reportedly contains information – from pilots – about runway incursions, wildlife strikes, and near collisions. These are real risks. If pilots have concerns about them, we need to know.”
You know, I've disagreed with Congressman Mitchell on a few significant issues (FISA, Iraq war funding), but he's dead on on this one.
Perhaps it must be done one issue at a time, but it's time that the Democrats in Congress start holding the Bush Administration and their Executive Branch appointees accountable for their failure to do their job of protecting the interests of *all* Americans.
Not just big-money contributors.
Griffin's written testimony here.
Committee chairman Bart Gordon's (D-TN) opening statement here.
AP coverage of the hearing here.
Later!
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Will somebody please wake me when the Republicans start taking the responsibilities of governing seriously?
Sort of maintaining the theme of my last post or two...
While looking for info about the results of the Senate Commerce Committee hearing into S2045, the CPSC overhaul bill (it passed), I came across this tidbit from Broadcasting and Cable -
The upshot of it all? The Republicans want to base public policy that is supposed to protect consumers on an industry-oriented study.
That's not exactly breaking news, but their current openness about it is rather reassuring.
"Reassuring" in the sense that it's obvious that despite some missteps by the Democrats in Congress (FISA bill, continued funding for Bush's war in Iraq), the Republicans are ceding next year's elections to the Democratic Party.
Well, it's either that or else the Republicans are utterly incapable of learning from last year's resounding defeat.
And you know, while I've written many words about Republicans (though few of them have been complimentary ones :)) ), "stupid" hasn't been one of them.
They know what happened last year, and why.
Bottom line: Whether it's SCHIP, civil liberties, the war in Iraq, or any other of a hundred issues, they aren't even pretending to represent the interests of the average American.
Note: Arizona's John Shadegg(R-AZ3) is also on the House Commerce Committee.
While looking for info about the results of the Senate Commerce Committee hearing into S2045, the CPSC overhaul bill (it passed), I came across this tidbit from Broadcasting and Cable -
House Republicans Seek Info on GAO DTV StudyThe Republicans on the House Commerce Committee, led by Reps. Joe Barton of Texas and Fred Upton of Michigan, sent a letter to the GAO requesting all sorts of information related to a planned GAO study on the pending transition to digital TV.
Barton, Upton Question Need for GAO Study in Wake of CEA Study
Top House Republicans suggested that a Government Accountability Office study on the digital-TV transition has its work cut out for it if it wants to match one already completed on the same subject by the Consumer Electronics Association.
The upshot of it all? The Republicans want to base public policy that is supposed to protect consumers on an industry-oriented study.
That's not exactly breaking news, but their current openness about it is rather reassuring.
"Reassuring" in the sense that it's obvious that despite some missteps by the Democrats in Congress (FISA bill, continued funding for Bush's war in Iraq), the Republicans are ceding next year's elections to the Democratic Party.
Well, it's either that or else the Republicans are utterly incapable of learning from last year's resounding defeat.
And you know, while I've written many words about Republicans (though few of them have been complimentary ones :)) ), "stupid" hasn't been one of them.
They know what happened last year, and why.
Bottom line: Whether it's SCHIP, civil liberties, the war in Iraq, or any other of a hundred issues, they aren't even pretending to represent the interests of the average American.
Note: Arizona's John Shadegg(R-AZ3) is also on the House Commerce Committee.
The Bush Administration Consumer Protection Plan:
Oppose efforts to increase consumer protections.
From the International Herald Tribune -
It should come as no surprise that Ms. Nord's bio on the CPSC website touts her corporate protection experience (she was a corporate lawyer and water carrier for the Republicans before her stint at CPSC) while ignoring any consumer protection experience (well, to be honest, I couldn't find any, so maybe 'ignore' is the wrong word :) ).
The IHT article later covers the White House's contention that while Ms. Nord did not coordinate her opposition to the pending legislation, it too opposes that legislation.
Maybe the Administration will propose a 'consumer affairs' bill, one similar in intent and effect to NCLB (No Child Left Behind.)
They can call it "NCLF" for No Child Lead-Free.
ProgressNowAction's take on this here. (note: PNA compares Ms. Nord to Irwin Mainway. Background info on Mr. Mainway here. :)) )
OMBWatch's take is here.
Background info - the bill that the administration opposes seems to be S2045, CPSC Reform Act of 2007. Info at the link.
Later!
From the International Herald Tribune -
The top official for consumer product safety has asked Congress in recent days to reject legislation that would strengthen the agency that polices thousands of consumer goods, from toys to tools.
On the eve of an important Senate committee meeting to consider the legislation, Nancy Nord, the acting chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, has asked lawmakers in two letters not to approve the bulk of legislation that would increase the agency's authority, double its budget and sharply increase its dwindling staff.
Nord opposes provisions that would increase the maximum penalties for safety violations and make it easier for the government to make public reports of faulty products, protect industry whistleblowers and prosecute executives of companies that willfully violate laws.
It should come as no surprise that Ms. Nord's bio on the CPSC website touts her corporate protection experience (she was a corporate lawyer and water carrier for the Republicans before her stint at CPSC) while ignoring any consumer protection experience (well, to be honest, I couldn't find any, so maybe 'ignore' is the wrong word :) ).
The IHT article later covers the White House's contention that while Ms. Nord did not coordinate her opposition to the pending legislation, it too opposes that legislation.
Maybe the Administration will propose a 'consumer affairs' bill, one similar in intent and effect to NCLB (No Child Left Behind.)
They can call it "NCLF" for No Child Lead-Free.
ProgressNowAction's take on this here. (note: PNA compares Ms. Nord to Irwin Mainway. Background info on Mr. Mainway here. :)) )
OMBWatch's take is here.
Background info - the bill that the administration opposes seems to be S2045, CPSC Reform Act of 2007. Info at the link.
Later!
Monday, October 29, 2007
Short Attention Span Musing
Just a Republicans being Republikkkans kind of day...
...Dick Cheney went hunting today.
The good news (by Republican standards, anyway :) ) - no lawyers were shot.
The bad news (by the standards of normal folks, anyway) - the hunting trip was to a private club that displays (get this!) a Confederate flag.
From the New York Daily News -
...Want positive proof that the 'family values' Arizona Republicans make a mob family look like the Waltons?
Now the Maricopa County Republicans are promoting a "gala reception" for Russell Pearce (R-National Alliance) as he "explores" a run against Congressman Jeff Flake (CD6), one of their very own.
What does Flake have to do to get a little love from his own party? I can understand Democrats disliking him - on social issues, he makes Barry Goldwater look like a bleeding heart and his "crusade" against earmarks always seems to focus more on community-based projects than on real waste like no-bid contracts and the like - but why do other Republicans hate him so much?
In addition to all of the reasons that Democrats can't stand him, he's intelligent, hard-working, untainted by scandal, and while he is *definitely* wrong on nearly every important issue, he isn't an embarrassment to his district or his state.
Hmmm..."not an embarrassment"...hmmm....
Maybe, in a perverse sort of way, that's the real problem here.
Consider the scheduled headline endorsers at Pearce's soiree -
Joe Arpaio and Andrew Thomas of "let's arrest journalists for writing uncomplimentary articles about us" fame.
Those two are perfect for Pearce - nobody can say they don't embarrass the state.
...The Bush State Department has given the Blackwater security guards responsible for killing 17 Iraqi civilians immunity from prosecution.
No wiseass-ery here. This is just too disgusting.
Later!
...Dick Cheney went hunting today.
The good news (by Republican standards, anyway :) ) - no lawyers were shot.
The bad news (by the standards of normal folks, anyway) - the hunting trip was to a private club that displays (get this!) a Confederate flag.
From the New York Daily News -
Nobody got shot, but Vice President Cheney still fired up controversy Monday when he went hunting at a private club that hangs the Confederate flag.
A Daily News photographer captured the 3-by-5 foot Dixie flag affixed to a door in the garage of the Clove Valley Gun and Rod Club in upstate Union Vale, N.Y.
...Want positive proof that the 'family values' Arizona Republicans make a mob family look like the Waltons?
Now the Maricopa County Republicans are promoting a "gala reception" for Russell Pearce (R-National Alliance) as he "explores" a run against Congressman Jeff Flake (CD6), one of their very own.
What does Flake have to do to get a little love from his own party? I can understand Democrats disliking him - on social issues, he makes Barry Goldwater look like a bleeding heart and his "crusade" against earmarks always seems to focus more on community-based projects than on real waste like no-bid contracts and the like - but why do other Republicans hate him so much?
In addition to all of the reasons that Democrats can't stand him, he's intelligent, hard-working, untainted by scandal, and while he is *definitely* wrong on nearly every important issue, he isn't an embarrassment to his district or his state.
Hmmm..."not an embarrassment"...hmmm....
Maybe, in a perverse sort of way, that's the real problem here.
Consider the scheduled headline endorsers at Pearce's soiree -
Joe Arpaio and Andrew Thomas of "let's arrest journalists for writing uncomplimentary articles about us" fame.
Those two are perfect for Pearce - nobody can say they don't embarrass the state.
...The Bush State Department has given the Blackwater security guards responsible for killing 17 Iraqi civilians immunity from prosecution.
No wiseass-ery here. This is just too disgusting.
Later!
Superfund site update meeting in Scottsdale on November 15
Earlier today, the East Valley Tribune published a story about an upcoming community meeting to be held by the EPA regarding the status of cleanup activities at the North Indian Bend Wash Superfund site.
From the article -
Given that I live in the affected area, my interest was piqued, to say the least.
I contacted Vicki Rosen, the EPA community involvement coordinator handling the event for more info (her name and number is in the article).
Turns out that the article is accurate as far as it goes, but isnt quite complete.
After reading the article, particularly the part about Motorola wanting to be allowed to pollute the area more (not to save money and enhance their profit margin, of course :) ), I called Ms. Rosen for more info.
She characterized the meeting as a "common" community involvement meeting where emissions controls will just be a small part of the meeting agenda.
She later emailed the meeting notice to me, and yes, it does seem to be a "normal" meeting. The meeting's discussion will have a strong "trichloroethylene" (TCE) element, but that's to be expected - it's the primary pollutant contaminating the North Indian Bend Wash Superfund site.
These meetings have been held periodically over the last few years to provide information, address community concerns and answer questions.
Also done on a periodic basis is Motorola's attempt to wriggle off of the cleanup hook, and that's probably where Ari Cohn, the Trib reporter who wrote today's article, got the theme of the piece.
Ms. Rosen was clear on the EPA's position that it does not support the removal of carbon filters as Motorola has requested.
On the other hand, while the article may be a *little* alarmist, when you can read about ExxonMobil's efforts to get out of paying for the Exxon Valdez spill and how they are turning to the U.S. Supreme Court to get off the hook for billions of dollars in damages or how the White House censors scientific reports on global warming or that FEMA holds fake news conferences, well, it's easy to get alarmed when a government agency, a huge multinational corporation, and our health and safety all get tangled together.
Note: None of this is meant to be a dig at Cohn - he does a great job covering Scottsdale for the Trib. This issue just highlights one of the problems with the growing regionalization and/or centralization of the news media. The Trib only has a couple of people covering Scottsdale's happenings and there's no way a couple of people can completely cover a growing city of Scottsdale's size. Anybody doing the job, even someone with Cohn's ability, is occasionally going to miss some of the nuances and history behind a "current" story.
Anyway, the meeting will be at the Scottsdale Center for the Performing Arts, 2nd Floor, 7384 E. Second St. on November 15 from 5:30 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.
If you live in or near south Scottsdale, this is a meeting worth attending.
Later!
From the article -
Federal environmental officials plan to hold a public meeting Nov. 15 on Motorola’s request to remove equipment that filters suspected cancer-causing chemicals from the air at a south Scottsdale Superfund treatment site.
Given that I live in the affected area, my interest was piqued, to say the least.
I contacted Vicki Rosen, the EPA community involvement coordinator handling the event for more info (her name and number is in the article).
Turns out that the article is accurate as far as it goes, but isnt quite complete.
After reading the article, particularly the part about Motorola wanting to be allowed to pollute the area more (not to save money and enhance their profit margin, of course :) ), I called Ms. Rosen for more info.
She characterized the meeting as a "common" community involvement meeting where emissions controls will just be a small part of the meeting agenda.
She later emailed the meeting notice to me, and yes, it does seem to be a "normal" meeting. The meeting's discussion will have a strong "trichloroethylene" (TCE) element, but that's to be expected - it's the primary pollutant contaminating the North Indian Bend Wash Superfund site.
These meetings have been held periodically over the last few years to provide information, address community concerns and answer questions.
Also done on a periodic basis is Motorola's attempt to wriggle off of the cleanup hook, and that's probably where Ari Cohn, the Trib reporter who wrote today's article, got the theme of the piece.
Ms. Rosen was clear on the EPA's position that it does not support the removal of carbon filters as Motorola has requested.
On the other hand, while the article may be a *little* alarmist, when you can read about ExxonMobil's efforts to get out of paying for the Exxon Valdez spill and how they are turning to the U.S. Supreme Court to get off the hook for billions of dollars in damages or how the White House censors scientific reports on global warming or that FEMA holds fake news conferences, well, it's easy to get alarmed when a government agency, a huge multinational corporation, and our health and safety all get tangled together.
Note: None of this is meant to be a dig at Cohn - he does a great job covering Scottsdale for the Trib. This issue just highlights one of the problems with the growing regionalization and/or centralization of the news media. The Trib only has a couple of people covering Scottsdale's happenings and there's no way a couple of people can completely cover a growing city of Scottsdale's size. Anybody doing the job, even someone with Cohn's ability, is occasionally going to miss some of the nuances and history behind a "current" story.
Anyway, the meeting will be at the Scottsdale Center for the Performing Arts, 2nd Floor, 7384 E. Second St. on November 15 from 5:30 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.
If you live in or near south Scottsdale, this is a meeting worth attending.
Later!
Bad news/good news - Tancredo edition
The Bad News - Tom Tancredo isn't dropping out of the race for the Republican nomination for President.
The Good News - He announced that he won't run for re-election to Congress, no matter how his Presidential bid goes.
From the Washington Post -
Before the dancing in the streets starts, however, it should be noted that there has been talk of him running for U.S. Senate. If he goes that particular root, he'll find a strong candidate already running for the job, Rep. Mark Udall.
The full Rocky Mountain News article on Tancredo's announcement is here.
Later!
The Good News - He announced that he won't run for re-election to Congress, no matter how his Presidential bid goes.
From the Washington Post -
Tancredo Won't Seek New Term
Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo has had enough. Of Congress, that is.
The five-term member of the U.S. House and long-shot presidential candidate has decided he will not run for reelection in 2008, ending his congressional career as he continues to seek the White House.
Before the dancing in the streets starts, however, it should be noted that there has been talk of him running for U.S. Senate. If he goes that particular root, he'll find a strong candidate already running for the job, Rep. Mark Udall.
The full Rocky Mountain News article on Tancredo's announcement is here.
Later!
A good weekend to be a Boston sports fan...
...in Arizona.
And it was actually a pretty good weekend for AZ sports fans, too. :)
Non-political post ahead...
Let's see...
The Red Sox won the World Series, showing that the combination of an explosive offense and timely pitching is a championship combination...
- - - The Diamondbacks may not have won the World Series this year, but their surprising trip to the League Championship Series is something to build on.
The Patriots blew out Washington, setting up a sure-to-be-overhyped matchup of unbeaten teams next weekend when they face the Indianapolis Colts.
- - - The Cardinals didn't play, ergo, they didn't lose.
Boston College's undefeated football team solidified its hold on the #2 ranking in the national polls with a comeback victory over Virginia Tech.
- - - Likewise, the Arizona State Sun Devils maintained their undefeated record with a solid win over Cal (a win that propelled ASU to the #6 ranking in the polls.)
The Boston Celtics will be starting their regular season this week with a team that is Boston's best chance in many seasons for a long playoff run. Adding Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett to a team in the NBA's very weak Eastern Conference will do that for a team.
- - - The Phoenix Suns also start their regular season soon; unlike the Celtics, however, just a "playoff run" will be a disappointment Now that Tim Donaghy isn't an NBA referee, the Suns are a championship-caliber team.
The Boston Bruins are playing. The good news is that the NHL's national TV contract with the Versus sports network means that almost no one will see them.
- - - The Phoenix Coyotes: Ditto.
New Englanders can still golf in November (which starts this week!); they just put on a coat, hat, and gloves.
- - - Arizonans can still golf in November; they just put on shorts, a t-shirt, and sunblock.
Note: :)))
And it was actually a pretty good weekend for AZ sports fans, too. :)
Non-political post ahead...
Let's see...
The Red Sox won the World Series, showing that the combination of an explosive offense and timely pitching is a championship combination...
- - - The Diamondbacks may not have won the World Series this year, but their surprising trip to the League Championship Series is something to build on.
The Patriots blew out Washington, setting up a sure-to-be-overhyped matchup of unbeaten teams next weekend when they face the Indianapolis Colts.
- - - The Cardinals didn't play, ergo, they didn't lose.
Boston College's undefeated football team solidified its hold on the #2 ranking in the national polls with a comeback victory over Virginia Tech.
- - - Likewise, the Arizona State Sun Devils maintained their undefeated record with a solid win over Cal (a win that propelled ASU to the #6 ranking in the polls.)
The Boston Celtics will be starting their regular season this week with a team that is Boston's best chance in many seasons for a long playoff run. Adding Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett to a team in the NBA's very weak Eastern Conference will do that for a team.
- - - The Phoenix Suns also start their regular season soon; unlike the Celtics, however, just a "playoff run" will be a disappointment Now that Tim Donaghy isn't an NBA referee, the Suns are a championship-caliber team.
The Boston Bruins are playing. The good news is that the NHL's national TV contract with the Versus sports network means that almost no one will see them.
- - - The Phoenix Coyotes: Ditto.
New Englanders can still golf in November (which starts this week!); they just put on a coat, hat, and gloves.
- - - Arizonans can still golf in November; they just put on shorts, a t-shirt, and sunblock.
Note: :)))
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Short Attention Span Musing...
edited to add a link below...
Edit2 on 10/26 to add to the "Trent Franks" part of the post below...
...and reminders of a couple of events...
...Tonight, Thursday October 25, the Arizona Chapter of the National Jewish Democratic Council will meet at 6991 E. Camelback in Scottsdale at 7:00 p.m. Congressional candidate Bob Lord (CD3) is scheduled to speak. For more info, contact Jerry at njdc[at]cox.net.
...Saturday, October 27 - Presidential candidate Governor Bill Richardson (D-NM) is visiting Tucson and Phoenix.
Phoenix event info: Fajita Fundraiser and Launch of Inaugural Phoenix Chapter of Mi Familia con Bill Richardson, IBEW Building, 5808 North 7th Street, Phoenix, AZ. Time: 2:00 p.m.
Now on to the snarkiness (aka the 'short attention span' part of the post :) )
...The Tancredo campaign seems to be getting desperate, or perhaps he's just getting back to his Catholic roots. In an effort to eliminate one of the frontrunners for the Republican nomination, he's throwing the political equivalent of a "Hail Mary" pass.
From boston.com -
As you can see from the headline to the piece, the Romney campaign declined to accept the bet.
Tom, face facts - the Rockies have a far better chance of winning the World Series than you ever did of winning the Presidency. Hell, my nephew's little league team has a better chance of winning the WS than you do of winning the Presidency, but I digress. :)
...In other Romney news, the latest Rolling Stone has an in-depth article on him. However, he may not like the national publicity.
The title -
...continuing with the whole "Mitt" theme, today, he showed that he has the same attitude toward, and knowledge of, the use of military force as does Bush.
From AP via Yahoo! News -
"Bombardment of some kind"??
Nice incisive military analysis there, Mitt.
...Bush is showing in southern California that perhaps he (or more likely, his handlers) has learned some lessons from the Katrina debacle.
From AP via Yahoo! News -
Yup, Bush has learned some lessons.
Either that, or the victims of the wildfires in southern Cal tend to be somewhat paler and wealthier than the victims of Katrina in New Orleans and the Gulf Region were.
Not that I'm a cynic or anything... :))
...Edit to add: Blogger and activist Eli Blake at Deep Thought makes the same observation in this post, and does a far better job of it. He is perhap the best pure writer in the AZ political blogosphere, right or left, and his blog is worthy of bookmarking.
End edit...
Note: LA Times coverage of Bush's California visit here.
...The House passed HR3963, the revised SCHIP bill by a vote of 265 - 142. From the Arizona delegation: Pastor, Giffords, Grijalva, Mitchell, and Renzi voted 'aye'; Franks, Flake, and Shadegg voted 'nay.'
I didn't get to see the entire debate, but in a 'one-minute speech' after regular legislative business, Trent Franks (R-AZ2) surprisingly *didn't* cite a concern for insurance company profits, the Republicans' usual reason for voting against health care for poor children.
Nope, in an exhibition of Bush-like reasoning skills, he concocted a hobo's stew of reasons, stirring in "Hillary-care", abortion, and "attacks on the family" among others as the reasons that he opposed SCHIP.
John Thrasher 2008. 'Nuff said.
Edit to add: Apparently, I wasn't the only person to watch and comment on Congressman Franks' diatribe.
From Melissa McEwan at the blog Shakespearessister, who puts it far more *colorfully* than I did :)) -
As indicated in the quote, she posted a video of Franks' floor speech. Follow the link - it's worth watching.
End edit.
Later!
Edit2 on 10/26 to add to the "Trent Franks" part of the post below...
...and reminders of a couple of events...
...Tonight, Thursday October 25, the Arizona Chapter of the National Jewish Democratic Council will meet at 6991 E. Camelback in Scottsdale at 7:00 p.m. Congressional candidate Bob Lord (CD3) is scheduled to speak. For more info, contact Jerry at njdc[at]cox.net.
...Saturday, October 27 - Presidential candidate Governor Bill Richardson (D-NM) is visiting Tucson and Phoenix.
Phoenix event info: Fajita Fundraiser and Launch of Inaugural Phoenix Chapter of Mi Familia con Bill Richardson, IBEW Building, 5808 North 7th Street, Phoenix, AZ. Time: 2:00 p.m.
Now on to the snarkiness (aka the 'short attention span' part of the post :) )
...The Tancredo campaign seems to be getting desperate, or perhaps he's just getting back to his Catholic roots. In an effort to eliminate one of the frontrunners for the Republican nomination, he's throwing the political equivalent of a "Hail Mary" pass.
From boston.com -
Romney passes on high-stakes baseball bet
{snip}
Republican presidential hopeful Tom Tancredo wants to put something important on the line -- his candidacy. His campaign called ABC News to issue this challenge: The Colorado congressman will drop out of the race if the Rockies lose the World Series -- if rival Mitt Romney agrees to pack it in if the Red Sox lose.
As you can see from the headline to the piece, the Romney campaign declined to accept the bet.
Tom, face facts - the Rockies have a far better chance of winning the World Series than you ever did of winning the Presidency. Hell, my nephew's little league team has a better chance of winning the WS than you do of winning the Presidency, but I digress. :)
...In other Romney news, the latest Rolling Stone has an in-depth article on him. However, he may not like the national publicity.
The title -
Mitt Romney: The Huckster
He May Have Made $250 Million as a Venture Capitalist, but the Republican Candidate Is Trying to Sell a Party that's Gone Bankrupt
...continuing with the whole "Mitt" theme, today, he showed that he has the same attitude toward, and knowledge of, the use of military force as does Bush.
From AP via Yahoo! News -
Republican Mitt Romney said Thursday he would be willing to use a military blockade or "bombardment of some kind" to prevent Iran from gaining a nuclear weapon.
"Bombardment of some kind"??
Nice incisive military analysis there, Mitt.
...Bush is showing in southern California that perhaps he (or more likely, his handlers) has learned some lessons from the Katrina debacle.
From AP via Yahoo! News -
Bush visits California wildfire victims
{snip}
In San Diego's hard-hit community of Rancho Bernardo, Bush stepped through rubble on a street of Mediterranean-style homes, where houses that remained unscathed were interspersed with what amounted to mere shells of the American dream. He stood with Jay and Kendra Jeffcoat near where a single spiral staircase rested amid rubble that used to be their home and where their burnt-out car had melted into the scorched earth.
"Those of us who are here in government, our hearts are right here with the Jeffcoats," the president said, his arm draped around Mrs. Jeffcoat. Holding her small brown dog on a leash, she fought back tears and Bush kissed her on the head.
Yup, Bush has learned some lessons.
Either that, or the victims of the wildfires in southern Cal tend to be somewhat paler and wealthier than the victims of Katrina in New Orleans and the Gulf Region were.
Not that I'm a cynic or anything... :))
...Edit to add: Blogger and activist Eli Blake at Deep Thought makes the same observation in this post, and does a far better job of it. He is perhap the best pure writer in the AZ political blogosphere, right or left, and his blog is worthy of bookmarking.
End edit...
Note: LA Times coverage of Bush's California visit here.
...The House passed HR3963, the revised SCHIP bill by a vote of 265 - 142. From the Arizona delegation: Pastor, Giffords, Grijalva, Mitchell, and Renzi voted 'aye'; Franks, Flake, and Shadegg voted 'nay.'
I didn't get to see the entire debate, but in a 'one-minute speech' after regular legislative business, Trent Franks (R-AZ2) surprisingly *didn't* cite a concern for insurance company profits, the Republicans' usual reason for voting against health care for poor children.
Nope, in an exhibition of Bush-like reasoning skills, he concocted a hobo's stew of reasons, stirring in "Hillary-care", abortion, and "attacks on the family" among others as the reasons that he opposed SCHIP.
John Thrasher 2008. 'Nuff said.
Edit to add: Apparently, I wasn't the only person to watch and comment on Congressman Franks' diatribe.
From Melissa McEwan at the blog Shakespearessister, who puts it far more *colorfully* than I did :)) -
Brain-Numbing Dipshittery During the SCHIP Debate
...here is video of Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) on the House floor earlier today, explaining why he must cast a vote against SCHIP, with a giant picture of a fetus behind him. It's like someone bet this douchebag money that he couldn't hit every square on an anti-choice Bingo card, and he said, "Oh yeah? Watch me."
As indicated in the quote, she posted a video of Franks' floor speech. Follow the link - it's worth watching.
End edit.
Later!
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Jon Kyl just doesn't get it, does he?
From an article in Wednesday's Arizona Republic -
So somebody help me understand this -
Is he placing the leaks that exposed the crimes committed at Abu Ghraib on the same ethical level as the leaks that endangered the life of the wife of Joe Wilson, the "administration critic" that he spoke of?
Perhaps the more pertinent question is "does Jon Kyl have a moral compass that points only toward the White House?"
Oh, and as an aside, did anyone else notice the 'irony' in how Kyl bemoaned partisanship while he very partisanly defended the retaliation against a critic of the administration?
He just doesn't seem to understand that his job is to represent Arizona's interests, not the White House's.
In an interview with The Republic, Kyl said leaks take on partisan overtones on Capitol Hill.
Democrats appreciate leaks that embarrass the Bush administration, such as the stories exposing torture and humiliation at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, while Republicans decry them.
But Democrats demanded to know who in the White House leaked the information that Valerie Plame, the wife of an administration critic, worked for the CIA.
"It's a crime to leak classified information, and it should be," Kyl said. "It looks a little bit to me like it depends what the political cause is. If we're for the leak, then we don't want to ever try catching anybody. But if we're against the leak, well, then it's OK."
So somebody help me understand this -
Is he placing the leaks that exposed the crimes committed at Abu Ghraib on the same ethical level as the leaks that endangered the life of the wife of Joe Wilson, the "administration critic" that he spoke of?
Perhaps the more pertinent question is "does Jon Kyl have a moral compass that points only toward the White House?"
Oh, and as an aside, did anyone else notice the 'irony' in how Kyl bemoaned partisanship while he very partisanly defended the retaliation against a critic of the administration?
He just doesn't seem to understand that his job is to represent Arizona's interests, not the White House's.
Call your senator to urge support of the DREAM Act
The Senate is expected to vote for cloture on S. 2205, the DREAM Act later today.
In summary, the DREAM Act would apply only to individuals brought to the U.S. at least 5 years ago as children, who have grown up here (but are still under 30 years old), and who have remained in school and out of trouble. They could get a green card 6 years after graduating from high school if during that time they continue on to college or serve in the military.
If cloture fails, S. 2205 will be removed from the floor
Contact info for Arizona's Senators:
Jon Kyl (602) 840-1891 Washington (202) 224-4521 Fax (202) 224-2207
John McCain (602) 952-2410 Washington (202) 224-2235 Fax (202) 228-2862
And if the fact that it's a good bill isn't enough to make the bill worthy of support, remember this one fundamental truth -
If it passes, Republican Congressman and presidential candidate Tom Tancredo (R-CO) will be seriously pissed.
This is the loon who followed up last week's call for DNA testing of immigrants with a demand that ICE raid a Tuesday meeting at the Senate that was held in support of the DREAM Act.
His theory was that meeting-goers would be illegal immigrants.
ICE thought so much of his demand that they didn't show up.
Note: Man Eegee has a far more complete post about the DREAM Act here.
Later!
In summary, the DREAM Act would apply only to individuals brought to the U.S. at least 5 years ago as children, who have grown up here (but are still under 30 years old), and who have remained in school and out of trouble. They could get a green card 6 years after graduating from high school if during that time they continue on to college or serve in the military.
If cloture fails, S. 2205 will be removed from the floor
Contact info for Arizona's Senators:
Jon Kyl (602) 840-1891 Washington (202) 224-4521 Fax (202) 224-2207
John McCain (602) 952-2410 Washington (202) 224-2235 Fax (202) 228-2862
And if the fact that it's a good bill isn't enough to make the bill worthy of support, remember this one fundamental truth -
If it passes, Republican Congressman and presidential candidate Tom Tancredo (R-CO) will be seriously pissed.
This is the loon who followed up last week's call for DNA testing of immigrants with a demand that ICE raid a Tuesday meeting at the Senate that was held in support of the DREAM Act.
His theory was that meeting-goers would be illegal immigrants.
ICE thought so much of his demand that they didn't show up.
Note: Man Eegee has a far more complete post about the DREAM Act here.
Later!
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Harry Mitchell and John Shadegg - getting their messages out to the people they represent
...sometimes, the Republicans just serve up the political equivalent of a batting practice fastball.
Earlier this week, the House unsurprisingly failed to override the President's veto of the SCHIP renewal bill.
Also unsurprising was the fact that Arizona Representatives John Shadegg (R-AZ3) and Harry Mitchell (D-AZ5) were on opposite sides of the vote.
And in yet another unsurprising development, they each wrote op/ed pieces on SCHIP, detailing their positions and opinions on the subject.
Harry Mitchell's piece was published in both the Arizona Republic and the East Valley Tribune (no link available), the papers of record in his district. Between the two outlets and the email he sent out, his district is thoroughly covered. People who voted for him, who voted for somebody else, or who didn't vote at all, were able to read it.
John Shadegg's piece?
It was in Investor's Business Daily.
At least we've gotta give him credit for touching base with his base, right? That must count for something, doesn't it??
...Not really.
Shadegg was hired to represent Arizona's 3rd Congressional District, not the healthcare and insurance industries (perhaps not coincidently, when it comes to campaign contributions, those are the two industry sectors that gave him the most $$$ in the last election cycle, according to opensecrets.org.)
Shadegg's opponent for 2008, Bob Lord, is scheduled to speak at the next meeting of the Arizona chapter of the National Jewish Democratic Council this coming Thursday, October 25 at 7 p.m. The address is 6991 E. Camelback Rd. in Scottsdale. Contact Jerry at njdcphx[at]cox.net for more details.
Stop by and check out Bob's message. If you can't make it Thursday, surf by his website or contact the campaign at info[at]lord2008.com. Volunteers and contributions are always welcome.
Now, for anyone who missed it, Harry Mitchell's article, courtesy the email he sent out -
SCHIP opponents distort issue
By Rep. Harry Mitchell
We have a children's health care crisis in our country. The numbers are staggering: 9 million children, including 250,000 here in Arizona, do not have access to health insurance.
As a father, grandfather and former teacher who has seen first-hand the consequences of children without adequate health care, I believe we have a moral responsibility to solve this crisis. This is an important issue and worthy of honest debate.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program provides funding for states to decide how to best address local health care needs. In Arizona, SCHIP funds KidsCare, which currently ensures that 65,000 of Arizona's poorest children receive health care in the doctor's office instead of the emergency room.
I recently voted for, and Congress passed, bipartisan legislation to make that possible for 4 million more of the nation's 9 million uninsured children. It doesn't solve the crisis, but it is an important step forward. Here in Arizona, it means 81,000 more children would be covered through KidsCare. Unfortunately, the president defied calls from Republicans and Democrats alike, vetoed the bill and put those children at risk.
In recent weeks, children's health care opponents have used misleading information to scare others into falsely believing that Republicans and Democrats are working to shift upper middle-class children from private insurance to SCHIP.
This kind of misinformation has become widespread.
One of my colleagues, speaking on the House floor, inaccurately claimed that every new child covered through SCHIP would drop his or her private insurance. Specifically, my colleague said the bipartisan bill "will produce one person dropping private insurance for every one person who gets SCHIP insurance."
But that's simply not true. Earlier this month, I told a Valley newspaper that the false claim was a "phony argument" and "scare tactic." I stand by my words.
Just a few days ago, former state Sen. Tom Patterson wrote in the Tribune that "the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office calculates that at least half of the new beneficiaries of an expanded SCHIP would be families who are currently insured."
But that's not accurate, either. While his mistake may have been unintentional, Patterson seriously misrepresented the report. According to the CBO, whose report is available for the public at www.cbo.gov, the SCHIP legislation provides the resources to extend coverage to 4 million children who would otherwise go uninsured by 2012. About 3.5 million of these children already meet the states' current SCHIP coverage criteria.
As public servants, I believe we have an obligation to help inform as well as advocate, and the use of inaccurate and misleading information does not contribute to an open and honest debate. I believe, as do the vast majority of my constituents, that ensuring these 4 million children have access to health care is a much-needed and worthwhile investment.
As a teacher, I saw how children without adequate health care miss too many days of school because of illness. Children who miss too many classes are the most likely to drop out, and those who drop out are less likely to contribute to our economy, and more likely to commit crimes. Over time, that makes our neighborhoods less safe, and places an even heavier burden on taxpayers.
Some SCHIP opponents continue to accept government-supported health care for themselves, have voted to give themselves pay raises, and even delivered billions and billions of dollars in corporate welfare to the Big Oil industry. Yet, they actively work to deny health insurance to Arizona's poorest children. I believe that is wrong.
I will continue to work with Republicans and Democrats alike to solve this health care crisis and put Arizona's children first.
Later!
Earlier this week, the House unsurprisingly failed to override the President's veto of the SCHIP renewal bill.
Also unsurprising was the fact that Arizona Representatives John Shadegg (R-AZ3) and Harry Mitchell (D-AZ5) were on opposite sides of the vote.
And in yet another unsurprising development, they each wrote op/ed pieces on SCHIP, detailing their positions and opinions on the subject.
Harry Mitchell's piece was published in both the Arizona Republic and the East Valley Tribune (no link available), the papers of record in his district. Between the two outlets and the email he sent out, his district is thoroughly covered. People who voted for him, who voted for somebody else, or who didn't vote at all, were able to read it.
John Shadegg's piece?
It was in Investor's Business Daily.
At least we've gotta give him credit for touching base with his base, right? That must count for something, doesn't it??
...Not really.
Shadegg was hired to represent Arizona's 3rd Congressional District, not the healthcare and insurance industries (perhaps not coincidently, when it comes to campaign contributions, those are the two industry sectors that gave him the most $$$ in the last election cycle, according to opensecrets.org.)
Shadegg's opponent for 2008, Bob Lord, is scheduled to speak at the next meeting of the Arizona chapter of the National Jewish Democratic Council this coming Thursday, October 25 at 7 p.m. The address is 6991 E. Camelback Rd. in Scottsdale. Contact Jerry at njdcphx[at]cox.net for more details.
Stop by and check out Bob's message. If you can't make it Thursday, surf by his website or contact the campaign at info[at]lord2008.com. Volunteers and contributions are always welcome.
Now, for anyone who missed it, Harry Mitchell's article, courtesy the email he sent out -
SCHIP opponents distort issue
By Rep. Harry Mitchell
We have a children's health care crisis in our country. The numbers are staggering: 9 million children, including 250,000 here in Arizona, do not have access to health insurance.
As a father, grandfather and former teacher who has seen first-hand the consequences of children without adequate health care, I believe we have a moral responsibility to solve this crisis. This is an important issue and worthy of honest debate.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program provides funding for states to decide how to best address local health care needs. In Arizona, SCHIP funds KidsCare, which currently ensures that 65,000 of Arizona's poorest children receive health care in the doctor's office instead of the emergency room.
I recently voted for, and Congress passed, bipartisan legislation to make that possible for 4 million more of the nation's 9 million uninsured children. It doesn't solve the crisis, but it is an important step forward. Here in Arizona, it means 81,000 more children would be covered through KidsCare. Unfortunately, the president defied calls from Republicans and Democrats alike, vetoed the bill and put those children at risk.
In recent weeks, children's health care opponents have used misleading information to scare others into falsely believing that Republicans and Democrats are working to shift upper middle-class children from private insurance to SCHIP.
This kind of misinformation has become widespread.
One of my colleagues, speaking on the House floor, inaccurately claimed that every new child covered through SCHIP would drop his or her private insurance. Specifically, my colleague said the bipartisan bill "will produce one person dropping private insurance for every one person who gets SCHIP insurance."
But that's simply not true. Earlier this month, I told a Valley newspaper that the false claim was a "phony argument" and "scare tactic." I stand by my words.
Just a few days ago, former state Sen. Tom Patterson wrote in the Tribune that "the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office calculates that at least half of the new beneficiaries of an expanded SCHIP would be families who are currently insured."
But that's not accurate, either. While his mistake may have been unintentional, Patterson seriously misrepresented the report. According to the CBO, whose report is available for the public at www.cbo.gov, the SCHIP legislation provides the resources to extend coverage to 4 million children who would otherwise go uninsured by 2012. About 3.5 million of these children already meet the states' current SCHIP coverage criteria.
As public servants, I believe we have an obligation to help inform as well as advocate, and the use of inaccurate and misleading information does not contribute to an open and honest debate. I believe, as do the vast majority of my constituents, that ensuring these 4 million children have access to health care is a much-needed and worthwhile investment.
As a teacher, I saw how children without adequate health care miss too many days of school because of illness. Children who miss too many classes are the most likely to drop out, and those who drop out are less likely to contribute to our economy, and more likely to commit crimes. Over time, that makes our neighborhoods less safe, and places an even heavier burden on taxpayers.
Some SCHIP opponents continue to accept government-supported health care for themselves, have voted to give themselves pay raises, and even delivered billions and billions of dollars in corporate welfare to the Big Oil industry. Yet, they actively work to deny health insurance to Arizona's poorest children. I believe that is wrong.
I will continue to work with Republicans and Democrats alike to solve this health care crisis and put Arizona's children first.
Later!
Good news/bad news - Arizona in the national spotlight
First the good news - Barack Obama visited Tempe on Friday, and absolutely rocked the crowd of more than 6000 at ASU's Hayden Lawn. Many of the students and other supporters were already in line when the volunteers staffing the event arrived hours before gates opened.
Turns out that was a good move - the main stage area of the event filled quickly once gates opened, and overflow areas were provided for many late arriving spectators.
The event has been covered pretty thoroughly in the AZ MSM; AZ Daily Star here, AZ Republic here, East Valley Tribune here.
Now, the bad news.
Actually, it's the "jaw-droppingly ugly" news.
Earlier this week, the Phoenix New Times broke the story of how the Maricopa County Attorney, Andrew Thomas, and his special prosecutor, Dennis Wilenchik, issued grand jury subpoenas demanding that the New Times turn over all documents relating to any story they've written about Thomas' saddle parter, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, since January 1, 2004. In addition, they demanded information about anyone who has viewed the New Times website.
In a fit of pique after the New Times dared to publish the article, on the orders of the county attorney's office, Maricopa County sheriff's deputies arrested the authors of the article, Michael Lacey and Jim Larkin, for revealing grand jury information.
Then, on Friday, perhaps sensing that a Category 5 sh!tstorm was bearing down on him for his brazen contempt for the Constitution, County Attorney Thomas dropped all charges against the
New Times, Lacey, and Larkin, throwing his 'special' prosecutor under the bus by blaming Wilenchik for "serious missteps" and removing him from the job.
A few questions to ponder...
...Were Lacey and Larkin actually arrested for the crime of 'revealing grand jury information? Or was their real "crime" that of "not suffering in silence" when power-drunk public officials used their offices to harass them?
...Is it now going to be standard County policy that anyone who dares criticize County officials (such as the Sheriff and County Attorney) will be subject to arrest?
...Has wanna-be governor Thomas realized that perhaps Joe Arpaio is *not* the best political mentor for someone who hopes to win a state-wide race?
...Christmas is coming - should we all chip in on a gift for Thomas?
I'd suggest his own, personal, copy of the Constitution.
With the Bill of Rights highlighted.
Later!
Turns out that was a good move - the main stage area of the event filled quickly once gates opened, and overflow areas were provided for many late arriving spectators.
The event has been covered pretty thoroughly in the AZ MSM; AZ Daily Star here, AZ Republic here, East Valley Tribune here.
Now, the bad news.
Actually, it's the "jaw-droppingly ugly" news.
Earlier this week, the Phoenix New Times broke the story of how the Maricopa County Attorney, Andrew Thomas, and his special prosecutor, Dennis Wilenchik, issued grand jury subpoenas demanding that the New Times turn over all documents relating to any story they've written about Thomas' saddle parter, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, since January 1, 2004. In addition, they demanded information about anyone who has viewed the New Times website.
In a fit of pique after the New Times dared to publish the article, on the orders of the county attorney's office, Maricopa County sheriff's deputies arrested the authors of the article, Michael Lacey and Jim Larkin, for revealing grand jury information.
Then, on Friday, perhaps sensing that a Category 5 sh!tstorm was bearing down on him for his brazen contempt for the Constitution, County Attorney Thomas dropped all charges against the
New Times, Lacey, and Larkin, throwing his 'special' prosecutor under the bus by blaming Wilenchik for "serious missteps" and removing him from the job.
A few questions to ponder...
...Were Lacey and Larkin actually arrested for the crime of 'revealing grand jury information? Or was their real "crime" that of "not suffering in silence" when power-drunk public officials used their offices to harass them?
...Is it now going to be standard County policy that anyone who dares criticize County officials (such as the Sheriff and County Attorney) will be subject to arrest?
...Has wanna-be governor Thomas realized that perhaps Joe Arpaio is *not* the best political mentor for someone who hopes to win a state-wide race?
...Christmas is coming - should we all chip in on a gift for Thomas?
I'd suggest his own, personal, copy of the Constitution.
With the Bill of Rights highlighted.
Later!
Thursday, October 18, 2007
The House of Representatives is brimming with bipartisan pride this week...
[A bit of a rant ahead...]
...with their consideration and passage, usually by voice vote or overwhelming majority, of a number of bills.
A closer examination of the record, however, shows that only the Republicans in the House have anything of which to be proud, dubious though that pride may be.
Let's see...
Monday was spent debating non-controversial facility-naming, memorial, and "we hate XYZ disease" bills.
Tuesday was filled with more of the same, with the additional consideration and passage of the high-sounding "Free Flow of Information Act" and a motion complaining about the "withholding of information relating to corruption in Iraq."
Wednesday was devoted to another memorial and to consideration and passage of the Federal Railroad Safety Improvement Act and the RESTORE Act (aka - FISA update bill).
Today, Thursday, a vote to override the President's veto of the SCHIP renewal bill was on the agenda.
So why are the Republicans proud of their week's work?
...The "disease" bills have no actual appropriations attached to them; they can take credit for the passage of the bills (mostly by voice vote) without having to pay for it. Wouldn't want anything to divert funds from the President's war in Iraq.
...The "Free Flow Of Information Act" is all but toothless (government or commercial attorneys can pierce the shield almost at will), and the 'sense of Congress' motion concerning information about corruption in Iraq *is* utterly powerless.
Both bills were passed by overwhelming margins; the Republicans will use the votes to claim that they support Constitutional protections of the freedom of the press and are against corruption in Iraq.
What they won't say is that they tried to kill both bills by strongly opposing the Rules resolutions that permitted and controlled debate on the bills and by supporting motions to recommit the bills.
The divisions on those efforts fell almost perfectly along party lines.
...The railroad safety act *was* a non-partisan bill, and though it too passed by a large margin, was similarly opposed by the Republicans fighting the Rules resolution and with a motion to recommit.
...As for the RESTORE Act, with its increased oversight of the President and his administration?
It was simply pulled from the floor, beaten back without even a vote.
...And today's coup-de-grace? The House, *led* by 154 Republicans, upheld the President's veto of SCHIP.
The truly sad part of all of this? The fact that the SCHIP veto override debate vote was the *cleanest* of the week - Congress passed a good bill, Bush vetoed it, and more than 75% of the Republican caucus joined together to protect that veto.
The bottom line is that is something the Democrats can take some pride in. They did their jobs. They fought for the best interests of their base, their constituents and constituents' children, and crafted a reasonable and effective bill. Bush and the Republicans fought for their base, corporate interests.
While the Republicans may spend the weekend crowing about their victory in this particular political battle, in the long run, it only contributes to the further electoral marginalization of the Republican Party.
Unfortunately, the SCHIP loss is the *only* thing that the Democrats in Congress can be even the slightest bit proud of this week.
Everything that did pass was either meaningless pap or watered-down to the point that it might just as well be meaningless pap.
Last night (10/17), on the "Live with Dan Abrams" show on MSNBC, there was another "Phoenix freezes over" moment that ties in with this.
Pat Buchanan, of all people, said something that was accurate and insightful.
From the transcript linked above (emphasis mine) -
He was speaking about the war in Iraq and the efforts of Democrats in Congress to rein in or end that war, but his statement is true in many areas other than the conduct of the war.
In all practical terms, the majority of Democrats in Congress have surrendered to the Bushies.
Congressional leaders, when wondering why their job approval poll ratings are so low, should consider that when they were given control of Congress in the 2006 elections, it was to change things for the better in a very broken D.C.
Not to be "Republicans-lite" and appease or even actively collaborate with the Bushies (no, I haven't forgotten the 41 Democrats, mostly Blue Dogs, who sided with the President during the August FISA vote.)
In the end, the most disappointing thing about this Congress isn't the fact that they haven't succeeded in ending the war or in reining in Bush; it's that for the most part, they aren't even seriously trying to do so.
End rant.
...with their consideration and passage, usually by voice vote or overwhelming majority, of a number of bills.
A closer examination of the record, however, shows that only the Republicans in the House have anything of which to be proud, dubious though that pride may be.
Let's see...
Monday was spent debating non-controversial facility-naming, memorial, and "we hate XYZ disease" bills.
Tuesday was filled with more of the same, with the additional consideration and passage of the high-sounding "Free Flow of Information Act" and a motion complaining about the "withholding of information relating to corruption in Iraq."
Wednesday was devoted to another memorial and to consideration and passage of the Federal Railroad Safety Improvement Act and the RESTORE Act (aka - FISA update bill).
Today, Thursday, a vote to override the President's veto of the SCHIP renewal bill was on the agenda.
So why are the Republicans proud of their week's work?
...The "disease" bills have no actual appropriations attached to them; they can take credit for the passage of the bills (mostly by voice vote) without having to pay for it. Wouldn't want anything to divert funds from the President's war in Iraq.
...The "Free Flow Of Information Act" is all but toothless (government or commercial attorneys can pierce the shield almost at will), and the 'sense of Congress' motion concerning information about corruption in Iraq *is* utterly powerless.
Both bills were passed by overwhelming margins; the Republicans will use the votes to claim that they support Constitutional protections of the freedom of the press and are against corruption in Iraq.
What they won't say is that they tried to kill both bills by strongly opposing the Rules resolutions that permitted and controlled debate on the bills and by supporting motions to recommit the bills.
The divisions on those efforts fell almost perfectly along party lines.
...The railroad safety act *was* a non-partisan bill, and though it too passed by a large margin, was similarly opposed by the Republicans fighting the Rules resolution and with a motion to recommit.
...As for the RESTORE Act, with its increased oversight of the President and his administration?
It was simply pulled from the floor, beaten back without even a vote.
...And today's coup-de-grace? The House, *led* by 154 Republicans, upheld the President's veto of SCHIP.
The truly sad part of all of this? The fact that the SCHIP veto override debate vote was the *cleanest* of the week - Congress passed a good bill, Bush vetoed it, and more than 75% of the Republican caucus joined together to protect that veto.
The bottom line is that is something the Democrats can take some pride in. They did their jobs. They fought for the best interests of their base, their constituents and constituents' children, and crafted a reasonable and effective bill. Bush and the Republicans fought for their base, corporate interests.
While the Republicans may spend the weekend crowing about their victory in this particular political battle, in the long run, it only contributes to the further electoral marginalization of the Republican Party.
Unfortunately, the SCHIP loss is the *only* thing that the Democrats in Congress can be even the slightest bit proud of this week.
Everything that did pass was either meaningless pap or watered-down to the point that it might just as well be meaningless pap.
Last night (10/17), on the "Live with Dan Abrams" show on MSNBC, there was another "Phoenix freezes over" moment that ties in with this.
Pat Buchanan, of all people, said something that was accurate and insightful.
From the transcript linked above (emphasis mine) -
No, what the president is saying he says the Congress agree with you, it‘s hyperbole but the Congress has acquiesced in the Bush policy. Resistance has been broken.
He was speaking about the war in Iraq and the efforts of Democrats in Congress to rein in or end that war, but his statement is true in many areas other than the conduct of the war.
In all practical terms, the majority of Democrats in Congress have surrendered to the Bushies.
Congressional leaders, when wondering why their job approval poll ratings are so low, should consider that when they were given control of Congress in the 2006 elections, it was to change things for the better in a very broken D.C.
Not to be "Republicans-lite" and appease or even actively collaborate with the Bushies (no, I haven't forgotten the 41 Democrats, mostly Blue Dogs, who sided with the President during the August FISA vote.)
In the end, the most disappointing thing about this Congress isn't the fact that they haven't succeeded in ending the war or in reining in Bush; it's that for the most part, they aren't even seriously trying to do so.
End rant.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Well, at least one AZ Republican understands 'resign to run' ...
...of course, since he's leaving the job of Maricopa County Treasurer, no one will really notice.
(That's not really a personal shot at Mr. Schweikert; until he was mentioned as a potential CD5 candidate, I had *no* idea that the County Treasurer position was an elected one, much less who held the job. In short, it's a *very* low profile position.)
On Tuesday, 1st-term County Treasurer David Schweikert announced his resignation from the job with a little more than a year left in his term.
He is one of the many Republicans lining up to try to unseat Harry Mitchell in next year's CD5 race.
While Schweikert didn't officially announce his candidacy (that will come after he actually leaves office next Monday), his resignation letter reads more like a campaign statement than a letter ending his term of public service to the citizens of Maricopa County.
From the letter (courtesy the East Valley Tribune) -
OK, so maybe I cherry-picked his letter a little. :)) When his campaign becomes official, I'm sure he'll hire a decent writer as his press secretary.
Or at least someone who knows how to use 'spell check.' :)
Seriously though, his letter *was* a campaign statement, with roughly 70% of the letter devoted to touting his "accomplishments" in Republican-speak - aka "downsize" and "privatize."
The letter, in fact, reads a lot like the introductory statement on his 'exploratory' website, though, for obvious reasons, with a stronger emphasis on his activities in the county treasurer's office.
The EV Trib story on the resignation is here.
The AZ Rep's Plugged-In has coverage here.
(That's not really a personal shot at Mr. Schweikert; until he was mentioned as a potential CD5 candidate, I had *no* idea that the County Treasurer position was an elected one, much less who held the job. In short, it's a *very* low profile position.)
On Tuesday, 1st-term County Treasurer David Schweikert announced his resignation from the job with a little more than a year left in his term.
He is one of the many Republicans lining up to try to unseat Harry Mitchell in next year's CD5 race.
While Schweikert didn't officially announce his candidacy (that will come after he actually leaves office next Monday), his resignation letter reads more like a campaign statement than a letter ending his term of public service to the citizens of Maricopa County.
From the letter (courtesy the East Valley Tribune) -
"Most importantly we made the office a shinning (sic) example of how government should operate."
OK, so maybe I cherry-picked his letter a little. :)) When his campaign becomes official, I'm sure he'll hire a decent writer as his press secretary.
Or at least someone who knows how to use 'spell check.' :)
Seriously though, his letter *was* a campaign statement, with roughly 70% of the letter devoted to touting his "accomplishments" in Republican-speak - aka "downsize" and "privatize."
The letter, in fact, reads a lot like the introductory statement on his 'exploratory' website, though, for obvious reasons, with a stronger emphasis on his activities in the county treasurer's office.
The EV Trib story on the resignation is here.
The AZ Rep's Plugged-In has coverage here.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)