Blog Archive: January, 2007

To insist on integrity in American business we passed tough reforms, and we are holding corporate criminals to account. Some might call this a good record. I call it a good start.

-- President George W. Bush, State of the Union 2003

President Bush cautioned against overregulation of corporate behavior, likely fueling efforts by business to scale back post-Enron rules.

-- Wall Street Journal's Washington Wire, 1/31/07

Surprise, surprise, when the public attention has shifted elsewhere, Dubya goes back on his word.

But how can he change the laws to favor irresponsible corporations, now that conservatives no longer control Congress?

Laws, shmaws! Bush said today: "We don't need to change the law. We need to change the way the law is implemented."

And conveniently, as noted here yesterday, he just issued an executive order giving political hacks more control over our civil servants who implement the laws.

Again, this is conservative government in action.

Not just putting the special interest over the public interest, but putting the special interest over our constitutional system of checks and balances, designed to protect the public interest.

When it comes to health care, will the new Congress, unlike the previous conservative Congress, side with the public interest over the special interest?

The pharmaceutical giants are worried the answer is yes.

So they're hooking up with Democratic lobbyists in hopes of keeping Congress in their corner. Bloomberg has the story:

Pharmaceutical companies ... are among the companies scrambling to hire lobbyists with Democratic ties as they prepare for congressional investigative hearings next week.

Pfizer Inc., the world's biggest drugmaker, has hired the Glover Park Group, whose partners include Joe Lockhart, a former spokesman for President Bill Clinton, and Howard Wolfson, a spokesman for Senator Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. Roche Holding AG picked as its lobbyist William Clyburn, cousin of the House's third-ranking Democrat, Jim Clyburn of South Carolina.

The increased hiring coincides with the Democratic congressional sweep that has sent shudders through corporate boardrooms.

...

The pharmaceutical industry, which the Center for Responsive Politics says gave 68 percent of its 2006 campaign gifts to Republicans, may be the biggest target for investigators. The House voted Jan. 12 to require the Medicare program, which provides health care for the elderly and disabled, to negotiate prices with drug companies; five congressional committees plan hearings into industry practices, including the generic-drug approval process and drug safety.

The Senate has yet to act on that House bill, and there have been reports that unlike the House, Sen. Max Baucus' bill will not require negotiation of drug prices.

So the stepped-up lobbying -- along with the early ad campaign (I'm regularly seeing "Medicare's prescription drug benefit. It's working!" ads from PhRMA, the industry lobbying arm, on cable news) -- could have an impact.

If grassroots voices can't shout over their well-financed megaphone.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid held a conference call with bloggers earlier this afternoon. I asked him where the minimum wage bill will go after this week's expected approval of a version including business tax breaks.

Yesterday's NY Times said that the Senate bill either will go to a House-Senate conference, where it can be reconciled with the House bill, clean of tax favors. Or, the House can arbitrarily strip out the tax favors and send a clean bill back to the Senate.

Reid reiterated what his spokesperson said to the NY Times: that he believes he can't get a clean bill past a conservative filibuster, and would prefer a House-Senate conference.

He also conceded that the House has the power to "blue slip" and block the Senate bill, on the grounds that tax measures can't originate in the Senate.

If a member of the House pulls a blue slip -- and Rep. Charlie Rangel has already threatened to -- then the tax provisions get stripped and the clean bill returns to the Senate.

Reid is clearly going to press the House not to do that. But if the House rebuffs him and insists on a clean bill, he still will be able to do what he hasn't yet:

Put maximum pressure on Senate conservatives to either pass a straight-up pay raise for America's workers, or face the voters in 2008.

Bill Scher blogs for Campaign for America's Future.

more »

Today's NY Times reports that Bush issued a new executive order intended to undermine our civil service:

...each [government] agency must have a regulatory policy office run by a political appointee, to supervise the development of rules and documents providing guidance to regulated industries. The White House will thus have a gatekeeper in each agency to analyze the costs and the benefits of new rules and to make sure the agencies carry out the president's priorities.

This strengthens the hand of the White House in shaping rules that have, in the past, often been generated by civil servants and scientific experts. It suggests that the administration still has ways to exert its power after the takeover of Congress by the Democrats.

The Bushies sought to spin this power grab as just "a classic good-government measure that will make federal agencies more open and accountable."

Hilarious. Especially on the same day that Dem Rep. Henry Waxman and GOP Rep. Tom Davis hold a public hearing on how Bush's political appointees pressured our civil servant scientists to downplay climate change ... and the White House refuses both of their requests to release relevant documents.

This is classic secret and unaccountable government. Classic bad government. Classic conservative government.

This power grab is not simply a feature of George W. Bush's personal, monarch-esque tendencies.

It is the foundation of how Washington conservatives believe our government should be managed, or more accurately, mismanaged.

In January 2001, when Bush was assuming the presidency, the right-wing Heritage Foundation issued a white paper: Taking Charge of Federal Personnel.

That report effectively counseled Bush to suffocate the ability of our civil servants to provide objective and factual information, making it impossible for the public to make informed decisions and communicate our will to policymakers in Washington.

It sniffed at the "Public Administration Model" of government as "emphasiz[ing] the Progressive ideal--a value-free 'scientific' program of government administration."

Instead, it preferred the "Political Administration Model" which it defined as "providing presidential leadership to committed top political officials...holding them and their subordinates personally accountable for achievement of the President's election-endorsed and value-defined program."

We've seen Bush implement Heritage's vision of conservative government for six years. We've seen his political appointees:

The latest effort to apply the principles of Thomas Paine to our contemporary world comes from journalist and Denver talk show host Judah Freedmore »

Congressional committee appointments are certainly inside baseball (come to think of it, the term "inside baseball" is inside baseball) but Speaker Pelosi's move to create a Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming is a big deal.

You might think that it would be easy for Democrats to coalesce around a single plan to combat global warming, but there will likely be a myriad of plans -- with varying degrees of boldness and timidity.

And it's going to take leadership, along with grassroots pressure, to get Congress to put one strong plan on the president's desk.

One obstacle may be Rep. John Dingell, who chairs the Energy and Commerce Committee, who is close to Michigan's automakers and not interested in quick, aggressive action.

Recognizing that the public won't stand for foot-dragging, Pelosi plans to create a new committee to ensure Dingell or others can't bury the issue.

The new committee won't have legislative authority, but will give the issue the high-profile necessary to stoke public interest and push Congress to act.

Two weeks ago, the global warming deniers at the Big Oil-funded Competitive Enterprise Institute scoffed at the move, telling the right-wing Cybercast News Service: "One should not try to get into a pulling match with John Dingell over jurisdiction ... It's the same kind of mistake - the same kind of damage - as [Pelosi] supporting Jack Murtha over Steny Hoyer [for Majority Leader.]"

Yes, such damage Pelosi suffered. With her caucus unity shattered, she only beat the 100 hours clock with 58 hours to spare.

Suckers for Democratic intra-party conflict, the Washington Post parroted the right-wing message, with the headline, "Internal Rifts Cloud Democrats' Opportunity on Warming".

But Pelosi didn't flinch. And today's Congressional Quarterly indicates that, despite some whining, her move is working out just fine:

Although Dingell has complained about Pelosi’s new panel to the press, he has not launched an effort to block the move when a committee funding resolution comes before the House, Democratic aides said.

When Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill Jr. was Speaker, Dingell “would have gone to the mat” over the creation of the global warming panel, said University of Oklahoma political scientist Ronald M. Peters.

Pelosi: stronger than Tip O'Neill!

There are still a lot of hurdles to clear, but strong leadership will be crucial in overcoming them.

Today, the NY Times checks in on the minimum wage battle, and we may be seeing a little movement towards a push for a clean bill without business tax giveaways.

The piece notes that after the Senate passes its bill with such tax favors, two different procedural things could happen: "the Senate could hold on to the bill, leaving it to leaders from both chambers to work out the differences. Or, it could send the bill to the House, where the House could strip out the tax breaks and send it back to the Senate for a new vote."

In theory, the tax provisions could be stripped in either scenario, but in the latter, the House is forcing the matter.

As noted here previously, NYT says House Dems remain split how to proceed, but indicates that the overriding sentiment is for a clean bill.

Aides to some House leaders say they would be willing to allow some of the tax breaks. But others, including Representative Charles B. Rangel, Democrat of New York and the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, are insisting that they will not concede any tax cuts.

House Democrats say that by forcing a vote on a clean bill they would force Senate Republicans to put themselves on record as opposing a wage increase, which was a popular campaign issue in the midterm elections.

And while Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's spokesperson expressed skepticism that a clean bill would clear their chamber, another Senate Dem leader shifted towards standing on principle.

Vice-Chair of the Dem Conference, Sen. Chuck Schumer, earlier showed support for tax breaks, but today's NYT reports:

...Schumer...believed the Senate might go along if the House sent back a bill stripped of the tax breaks. “This is good cover for the Republicans,” he said. “They’re saying, ‘I’m not against a minimum wage increase, I just want tax breaks for small businesses.’

“But when the choice is yes or no because the House did something out of our control,” he added, “I think we’ll get more of them on our side.”

That's exactly the right attitude. Perhaps the increased attention from the netroots is pushing our leaders in the right direction.

Yesterday, Bob Geiger and the AFL-CIO Blog broke the story that 28 conservative Senators tried to outright eliminate the federal minimum wage.

Immediately, the blogosphere reacted in shock, at both the raw cruelty and the political inanity.

TomPaine.com labelled the whole lot, "The Senate Anti-Worker Caucus," fundamentally out of touch with the electorate, since "Voters in November had a simple request: They wanted an increase in the federal minimum wage."

Mahablog argues this just means the decades-long, right-wing "War on Workers" refuses to quit and must be forcefully challenged.

MyDD named some key names: "Does [Sen. John] Cornyn think that he is invincible in Texas in 2008, despite his 44% approval rating? Does [Sen. John] Sununu even plan on running for re-election in New Hampshire? Does anyone still think [Sen. John] McCain is a moderate? ... can we please tone down the Hagel worship in the blogosphere?"

The Carpetbagger Report zeroed in on McCain: "McCain surely knew that [the] measure wouldn't pass, so by voting for it, he indicated that he really believes in it. ... Is it me, or is this an unusually risky political move for the leading GOP presidential candidate? ... Sounds to me like a possible campaign issue."

Emboldened set its sights on Hagel: "Hagel is not a moderate or a RINO ... This is an extreme position to hold, far outside the mainstream of America."

Potentially more significant is the reaction from local bloggers, shining a spotlight on their own Senators.

The U. of Nebraska-Omaha College Dems blog hit Hagel for "more hypocrisy."

Georgia's So Far, So Left called out its two Senators: "Among the shameful 28, our very own Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson."

Blue Hampshire warned its Senators Judd Gregg and John Sununu, "These guys are so out of touch with their constituents they should consider just resigning now and keeping their campaign warchests. They're dead, Jim."

Blue Lyon and Nye -- Gateway to Nevada's Rurals slapped their Senator, John Ensign.

And perhaps the most significant comment of all comes from Kentucky's BlueGrassReport.org. After rapping its two Senators Mitch McConnell (the Senate Minority Leader) and Jim Bunning, it also rapped the Kentucky media: "I failed to find any mention of this outlandish effort in any Kentucky newspapers."

That's not only true in Kentucky. The attempt to abolish the federal minimum wage does not appear to have been picked up by any media outlet at all.

If the media isn't going to report the news, it's up to you.

If one of your Senators is on the List of Shame, write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper, and let your neighbors know what their representatives are up to.

Cross-posted at The Huffington Post

Voters in November had a simple request: They wanted an increase in the federal minimum wage. more »