Uncle Toobz? Are You Obstructing Oversight of TARP?

/67 Comments/in , /by
by Genista

by Genista

POGO notes something I hadn’t seen reported elsewhere–the last paragraph of a Chris Dodd statement regarding the selection of Neil Barofsky as Inspector General for the TARP bailout funds.

Unfortunately, the confirmation has been delayed by at least one Senator. That delay is regrettable and not in the best interest of American taxpayers.  It is my sincere hope that those who are blocking this nomination will reconsider their actions and confirm Mr. Barofsky at the earliest opportunity.

I posit Ted Stevens as one potential source of the hold only because he has been known to put holds on finance oversight in the past. Plus, he’s probably been in an ornery mood of late.

But there are plenty of other Republicans who like to obstruct good legislation. There’s John Kyl’s hold on FOIA reforms.  John Ensign’s hold on electronic filing of Senate disclosure forms. And there’s Tom Coburn’s hold on just about everything–though to be fair to Coburn, his MO is usually to obstruct things he finds culturally offensive, not matters pertaining to oversight.

Still, someone’s out there making sure that no one is watching over our $700 billion dollars. 

Now why would some corporate shill want to do that?

Richard Shelby Wants To Place US Government In Bankruptcy And Eliminate Military Pensions And Benefits

/84 Comments/in , , , /by

Seriously. He must be saying that, right?

Because here is what Shelby (and many other belligerent Republican union busters) has been spewing in every microphone and videocam he can get his demented Chesire cat grin in front of:

"I think a lot of it will be life support," Shelby, R-Ala., said. "I believe their best option would be some type of Chapter 11 bankruptcy … These leaders have been failures and they need to go."

Let me draw an analogy that will drive Richard Shelby and his fellow mouth breathing bottom feeders nuts. What about military pensions and benefits after retirement? Well, come on, what about it blowhards that are so quick to call for trashing the pensions and benefits of the auto workers, are you also arguing to trash and burn the same for those in the military???

Because, there is a lot of yammering about how the CEOs of the auto companies made bad decisions and are upside down financially; and, based on that, group think that the auto workers ought to be taken to the woodshed. How is that any different than the employer of the military? Their employer, the US Government, makes the auto company executives look like the most brilliant and responsible financial minds on the planet in comparison. Talk about yer upside down and bad management.

Who has been more of a failure in leadership, the auto executives or the Bush/Cheney Administration and their Republican toadie enablers like Richard Shelby and friends?

And speaking about people who take early retirements; jeebus, a lot of military people are retired and taking full benefits at 40-45 years old. Sorry. How do we afford this if we can’t afford a miniscule bridge loan for American auto manufacturers so they can save their auto workers?

You want to bankrupt GM? Then bankrupt the US too; they need the "reorganization" a hell of a lot more.

This is what Richard Shelby and his ilk are advising. It must be. Because, otherwise, they would just be mindless, hypocritical, bloviating bags of hot foul air.

I think we know the real answer.

Kucinich or Cummings for Oversight

/33 Comments/in /by

I said most of what I’m going to say about the Waxman-Dingell fight in this post (though I will reiterate my concern that Waxman–who will now be in charge of shepherding healthcare through the House–has said almost nothing about it thus far).

Except that, now that Waxman has won, I think it crucially important that we find someone very effective to replace Waxman at Oversight. Waxman leaves some important unfinished business at oversight, including his investigation into the White House emails, the Bush Administration’s lackadaisical policy towards leakers (including Scooter Libby), and recent oversight into the financial crash. Furthermore, Darrell Issa is by most accounts set to take over as Ranking Member on Oversight. Oversight is one committee where the Ranking Member has the means to be a real pain in the arse, and Issa is a bigger pain in the arse–and more effective–than most Republicans. Finally, I don’t want to make the mistake the Republicans made; I want someone to exercise real oversight over the Obama Administration. For all these reasons, we need a real leader replacing Waxman at Oversight.

I recommend either Dennis Kucinich or Elijah Cummings.

The senior member on Oversight, after Waxman, is Edolphous Towns. I don’t know all that much about Towns–though I find it telling that, as someone who watches a great deal of Oversight’s hearings, I’ve almost never seen him contribute substantively (for that matter, I rarely see him, at all, at full committee hearings). That, plus he’s the recipient of some big love from the Pharma/Health Care and Finance industries–two industies that must remain targets of oversight.

Kucinich and Cummings are both relatively senior members of the Committee. And both have proven to be the kinds of effective 

Kucinich currently serves (opposite Issa) as Chair of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee (and many of the most critical oversight issues in the next Congress will be domestic ones). And his work on impeachment shows that his staffers have the ability to do great work and Kucinich has the ability to deliver them. Plus, he’s the perfect kind of gadfly to keep our new President honest. I suspect that Kucinich would have a tough time getting the votes in a straight fight, but if there are multiple candidates, he’d have a shot.

Read more →

More on Joementum

/39 Comments/in /by

Two interesting details in this Politico story.

“Sen. Lieberman’s preference is to stay in the caucus, but he’s going to keep all his options open,” a Lieberman aide said. “McConnell has reached out to him, and at this stage, his position is he wants to remain in the caucus but losing the chairmanship is unacceptable.”

[snip]

Lieberman’s aide told Politico on Friday morning that “essentially what transpired is that Sen. Reid talked about taking away his position perhaps for another position, and Sen. Lieberman indicated that was unacceptable.”   

[snip]

The aide also said that Lieberman was not offered a subcommittee, as has been reported, but rather was offered chairmanship of a lesser committee. He didn’t specify which one he was referring to. However, if Lieberman left Homeland Security, Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii) would be next in line and would have to give up Veterans Affairs, which would then be open for Lieberman.

Shorter Joe "tough on security" and "count the military votes even if they were sent after the election" Lieberman:

Making sure we pass legislation that will ensure we treat the men and women who have bravely served our country fairly is "unacceptable."

I’m also very curious about the sourcing of this paragraph:

Lieberman has since been having phone conversations with colleagues, but he has yet to meet with any in person. Most senators are receptive to Lieberman’s argument that allowing him to stay represents the type of unity that President-elect Barack Obama espouses. 

Is this Dangerstein’s Lieberman’s anonymous aide’s claim that Democratic Senators are receptive to his spiel, or did Ryan Grim actually talk to any of these Democratic Senators? Given that there is one source cited in the article, I suspect it is the former–but it’d sure be nice if Grim would let us know if Democrats are going wobbly for Joe again.  Update: From Redshift in comments:

I contacted Ryan Grim (he was the one who interviewed me for the blogger profile column in Politico a while back.) He said the source for the statement:

Most senators are receptive to Lieberman’s argument that allowing him to stay represents the type of unity that President-elect Barack Obama espouses

was the unnamed Lieberman aide, and the article will be updated to reflect that.

In other words, Lieberman is spreading claims that he has support, but there is no real indication that anyone but Evan Bayh really does support him.

Sanctimonious Joe in the Crossfire

/46 Comments/in /by

If I had my way, Harry Reid would bounce Sanctimonious Joe out of the Democratic Party unceremoniously (after all, in matters having to do with Joe Lieberman, one is usually well-advised to follow Jane’s lead). But I wanted to explore some of the other tensions spelling doom for Joementum.

Generally, the press claims that the Republicans would be happy to have him. After all, they’ve lost 5 seats (at least) in two elections in a row, so by taking Holy Joe, they can pad their numbers and retain a little more power. Yet almost all those claims rely on this quote from John Ensign:

Republicans over the past weeks have made it clear they’d welcome Lieberman if he chooses to defect. "Joe Lieberman is certainly going to be a wild card," Senator John Ensign, a Nevada Republican, told MSNBC last week. "And it depends — you know, we welcome Joe. I think Joe’s a terrific guy with a lot of integrity and does what he believes."

Ensign, of course, was head of the NRSC this year–the guy tasked with ensuring electoral success for Republican Senate candidates. Things didn’t work out so well for Ensign in that role. So it is understandable that he’d want to downplay his own failure by adding Joe to the "R" column.

But hearing John Ensign say he’d welcome Joe with open arms is very different from hearing Mitch McConnell say the same thing. And for McConnell–who is now tasked with trying to prevent wholesale Democratic policy victories, having an occasionally liberal Senator from Connecticut on your team has some drawbacks. In recent years, Joementum has shown no taste for party discipline; he might be different under the Republicans, but if so, he will certainly lose re-election in 2012. McConnell is a damn good Minority Leader (unfortunately), but I suspect he is weighing seriously whether he wants to deal with the headache of Joe’s whining over the next several years. 

And then there’s the matter of what the Republicans could offer Joe. As it is, they’re either going to have to beg the Democrats to expand the committees, or they’re going to have to take committee assignments away from some senators (for example, Tom Coburn will lose his membership in SJC unless they expand that committee). So does McConnell really want to add another senator to the list of those who need committee assignments? Read more →

The Waxman Challenge to Dingell

/34 Comments/in /by

Two of my favorite Congressmen–my own representative, John Dingell, and the current Chair of the Oversight Committee, Henry Waxman–are in a fight over the Chair of the powerful Commerce Committee, which John Dingell currently chairs. Here are some thoughts:

Two Good Chairmen

Understand, this is ideological and political, not functional.  That is, this is a fight between two of the most effective Chairmen in the House.

Several Washington sources said they were puzzled by Waxman’s challenge because the committee had run smoothly in recent years, steadily producing complex bills. Committee chairmanships usually go to the member who has served the longest, although junior members have pulled upsets in cases where a chairman was clearly ineffective.

Dingell has been recovering from knee replacement surgery last month after spending much of the past year on crutches, sometimes moving slowly and in visible pain around the Capitol. But Dingell, first elected in 1955, has shown few other signs of age.

"He’s sharper than most members on his bad days," Stupak said.

Yeah, Stupak is an incredibly close Dingell ally, but as someone who speaks with Dingell regularly, I can attest that he’s very sharp. There are committees out there–some pretty important ones–that would benefit mightily from having more competent Democratic leadership, but Commerce is not one of them.

So frankly, I’m more concerned about the absence of a strong leader on Oversight than I am whether Commerce will have an effective leader. Darrell Issa is set to take over Oversight for the Republicans and he can be a consummate pain in the ass; we need to have someone to counter Issa. And frankly, I want real oversight of the Obama administration, particularly of the proceedings of the Treasury bailout. If Waxman were to leave, the next most senior leader of any note (IMO) is Elijah Cummings or Dennis Kucinich. While Kucinich might actually be good at keeping the obnoxious Issa in line and the bailout money doing what it’s supposed to, I doubt that leadership wants to give him a gavel.

Energy Issues and Climate Change

Waxman’s challenge is, above all, an attempt to force more progressive legislation through Commerce on climate change and energy issues. As the chief ally of the American auto industry in Congress, Dingell has long fought any legislation that would make life more difficult on the auto industry, notably increased CAFE standards and air quality regulations.

But on this issue–even as a Michigander–I side with Waxman. Climate change and energy security are just too important to be subjugated to the short-sightedness of the incredibly short-sighted auto industry. Besides, faced with proactive climate regulation, auto companies are going to have to get more limber, which they’re going to have to do anyway, if they want to survive. Read more →

Rahm-ors

/30 Comments/in /by

The AP is out with a story that Rahm Emmanuel has been offered the position of Chief of Staff in an Obama Administration.

Barack Obama’s campaign has approached Illinois Rep. Rahm Emanuel about possibly serving as White House chief of staff, officials said Thursday as the marathon presidential race entered its final, frenzied stretch with a Democratic tilt.

[snip]

The Democrats who described the Obama campaign’s approach to Emanuel spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to be quoted by name. An aide to the congressman, Sarah Feinberg, said in an e-mail that he "has not been contacted to take a job in an administration that does not yet exist. Everyone is focused on Election Day, as they should be. "

I think this is, at the very least, overblown not just for the reasons Ambinder lays out:

… but if Obama has the made decision, he wouldn’t tell anyone on his campaign, he would tell people on his transition team — and they’re not speaking to the press. People on the campaign say that Obama hasn’t had a free hour to concentrate about this stuff — which they would say, of course, but the sources are genuinely reliable. Surely he has an idea or two in mind, and maybe it would make sense to give the people he’s thinking about asking to serve a heads up.  It’s hard to say no to a president.

Emanuel has been a regular behind-the-scenes adviser to Obama, knows everyone in Washington, is one of the better communicators in the party, and certainly is qualified for the post.  But he’s … got a very strong personality that doesn’t exactly jibe with the tone Obama likes to set for his endeavors. (David Plouffe and Rahm Emanuel could not be more different in temperament.)  He also has a young family, and he has not moved them to Washington, and his hours as chief of staff would be hellish.

Incidentally: nothing would be more devastating to Emanuel’s chances than a public story like this, one that could allow Republicans to use Emanuel’s brass-knuckle reputation against Obama a few days before the election. [snip]

Rahm has a practice of starting rumors about himself Read more →

Senate Tea Leaves

/128 Comments/in /by

Gosh, you think this is why Sanctimonious Joe got all complimentary of Obama the other day?

Democratic leaders are discussing a major reshuffling of Senate committee chairmanships, according to multiple sources, and the proposed changes include ousting Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) from his coveted chairmanship.

Lieberman, a former Democrat who supports Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for president, is likely to lose his gavel on the Homeland Security Committee he has chaired since January 2007, say the sources who see him being replaced by Sen. Daniel Akaka (Hawaii), the committee’s third-ranking Democrat.

The article is more interesting, though, for the changes it describes on other committees, assuming (touch win) Obama does pull this off on Tuesday. 

In a change that I think is a marginal improvement over the weak leadership of Jello Jay Rockefeller, DiFi looks set to take over SSCI.

The shift also hinges on Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) stepping down as chairman of the powerful Appropriations Committee, which aides say is included in the proposed changes. Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) would replace him. Byrd, who turns 91 in November, has been hospitalized three times this year and some have questioned if he is capable of leading the committee.

Other moves include Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) taking over the Senate Commerce Committee, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) taking over the Senate Select Intelligence Committee and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) moving to the helm of the Senate Rules and Administration Committee.

There is no set plan to replace Biden, but one source cited Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) as a possibility.

However, another Democratic source said Dodd is likely to hold onto his chairmanship of the Senate Banking Committee and be available to replace Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, should Kennedy’s health fail.

[snip]

Sen. Patty Murray (Wash.), who is currently the Democratic Conference Secretary but has only a subcommittee chairmanship, is likely to take over the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, while Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) would likely stay chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

Leahy still wants the chairmanship of the Appropriations Committee, sources said, but also wants to be a key player in any Supreme Court nominations from an Obama presidency.

Read more →

Down Goes Toobz! Down Goes Toobz!

/119 Comments/in , , , /by

Where is Howard Cosell when you need him? The Hulk has been smashed by a guilty verdict on all counts in his corruption trial. This is good news for all those that have fought Stevens, Alaskan corruption (Palin is not really one of them either), and the GOP lions that have laid waste to the United States Senate for so long. From The Hill:

Ted Stevens, the longest-serving Senate Republican in history and patriarch of Alaska politics, was found guilty of all seven felony charges for making false statements.

The verdict could spell the end of a 40-year Senate career for a man who rose to be one of the most dominant figures in the upper chamber and who helped transform Alaska in its 50 years of statehood. The verdict was reached after the jury deliberated since Wednesday and found the 84-year-old senator guilty of failing to report more than $250,000 in gifts from Bill Allen, the former head of Veco Corp., and other friends.

Many have been convinced, since the trial started, that the prosecution was intentionally trying to dump the case. Yeah boy, the prosecution tried so hard to tank this trial that they convicted Stevens of all counts.

People may take joy in the verdict if they wish; personally I will take none. My personal distaste for Stevens and his politics, and desire to win his seat, is no match for my desire to have the rule of law followed, due process guaranteed to every defendant, and an honest prosecution with full disclosure and fairness shown to the defendant. Even Ted Stevens. All of those considerations were completely and heinously violated by this prosecution team. The consistent effect over the course of the trial was astounding and the cumulative effect disturbing.

This case should have been dismissed for prosecutorial misconduct before it ever reached the contaminated and bizarre jury process that led to this verdict.

Miers And Bolten Can Kicked Down The Road

/in , , , , /by

images1.thumbnail.jpegThe opinion by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals in the Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten subpoena matter has just been issued. The court has granted the stay requested by the Bush Administration; which, by all appearances, will effectively end the litigation as the subpoenas presumptively expire on January 3, 2009 when the term of the current 110th Congress expires. The opinion is short, easily understandable and should be read by one and all to get a first hand look at truly mendacious appellate judicial practice.

The present dispute is of potentially great significance for the balance of power between the Legislative and Executive Branches. But the Committee recognizes that, even if expedited, this controversy will not be fully and finally resolved by the Judicial Branch—including resolution by a panel and possible rehearing by this court en banc and by the Supreme Court—before the 110th Congress ends on January 3, 2009. At that time, the 110th House of Representatives will cease to exist as a legal entity, and the subpoenas it has issued will expire.
….
In view of the above considerations, we see no reason to set the appeal on an expedited briefing and oral argument schedule. If the case becomes moot, we would be wasting the time of the court and the parties.

Last I heard consummate can down the road kicking was not an affirmative duty in the judicial canons. This is buggered up. Basically the Court has said "We’re going to presume there would be further appeal, which we are going to presume will take us past the moot date of Congress turn over – and VIOLA – it is already therefore effectively moot. Buh bye, gotta go lunch and martini now!"

Lest you think I am kidding about the pernicious nature of this decision, get a load of the specially concurring, and kind of dissenting, Judge Tatel:

Nevertheless, I am perplexed by the panel majority’s willingness to grant a stay while hypothesizing that the expiration of the 110th Congress might moot the case before it is heard on the merits. Never have we granted a stay that would have the effect of irrevocably depriving a party of its victory in the district court. Nor have we authority to do so, for a stay in such circumstances would necessarily cause "substantial” — indeed, overwhelming — harm.

Man; no kidding. That is kind of an understatement there Judge.

Read more →