In the run-up to what had better be the most inspiring inaugural address ever, Barack Obama keeps breaking bad news about the economy, yesterday warning of "trillion-dollar deficits for years to come."
(Today the Congressional Budget Office upped the ante by estimating a $1.2 trillion shortfall for 2009.)
During his "media availability" yesterday, the President-Elect continued his running commentary on the evolution of the stimulus package he will present to Congress, disclosing it will be free of earmarks, thereby subsuming all of John McCain's economic policy during the campaign into a throwaway line.
Even before he takes the oath, Obama is bringing what Peggy Noonan calls the "bright promise" of "a certain freshness to the proceedings in Washington" by confiding in the American people about what he is learning and how he is going about becoming The Decider. We have traded in the Wizard of Oz for an FDR-like president of fireside chats.
That the news is all terrifying up to now only underscores the need for the new transparency. The subtext of our situation is a fight against panic, and Obama seems to understand that what would feed fears most is keeping us in the dark.
So keep bringing on the trillion-dollar bad news and talk to us about it like grownups. It may not keep us from wanting to hide under the covers, but it's comforting to know that our new president won't be there with us.
Showing posts with label Congressional earmarks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Congressional earmarks. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Friday, June 13, 2008
Pork a la Lieberman
The most sanctimonious Senator of them all, who is supporting earmark-hater John McCain for president, has a ravenous appetite for the stuff, according to a new report showing Congress on an election-year binge despite all promises to the contrary.
According to Taxpayers for Common Sense, Joe Lieberman has led the way in looting the new Defense Authorization bill by participating in 14 requests worth more than $292 million.
But he is not alone in grabbing money for voters back home. "Both parties talk a good game on cutting earmarks, but at first opportunity, the House larded up," said Stephen Ellis of the watchdog group. "This is just another broken promise."
Arizona Congressman Jeff Flake points out that the budget system lets lawmakers use earmarks not only to woo voters but draw campaign contributions from recipient organizations and their lobbyists in what Taxpayers for Common Sense describes as the "pay-to-play system."
The new data show most members of the House Armed Services Committee getting financial returns from companies that benefit from being showered with taxpayer money.
"It's corrupting. It's a much bigger problem than the sum of its parts. It's much more than just waste," says Flake, a critic of both parties. "One good defense earmark can yield tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions."
Meanwhile, fellow Arizona John McCain is running for president on the issue, while his chief cheerleader Joe Lieberman is gorging on one bill alone for more than a quarter of a billion dollars.
According to Taxpayers for Common Sense, Joe Lieberman has led the way in looting the new Defense Authorization bill by participating in 14 requests worth more than $292 million.
But he is not alone in grabbing money for voters back home. "Both parties talk a good game on cutting earmarks, but at first opportunity, the House larded up," said Stephen Ellis of the watchdog group. "This is just another broken promise."
Arizona Congressman Jeff Flake points out that the budget system lets lawmakers use earmarks not only to woo voters but draw campaign contributions from recipient organizations and their lobbyists in what Taxpayers for Common Sense describes as the "pay-to-play system."
The new data show most members of the House Armed Services Committee getting financial returns from companies that benefit from being showered with taxpayer money.
"It's corrupting. It's a much bigger problem than the sum of its parts. It's much more than just waste," says Flake, a critic of both parties. "One good defense earmark can yield tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions."
Meanwhile, fellow Arizona John McCain is running for president on the issue, while his chief cheerleader Joe Lieberman is gorging on one bill alone for more than a quarter of a billion dollars.
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Dr. Paul Wants to Amputate
If you consulted Ron Paul as a doctor, you would be lucky to leave with all your limbs. The man is not an incrementalist. Cut out the income tax, he told Tim Russert on Meet the Press today, bring home our troops from everywhere and, with only a few caveats, Dr. Paul doesn't see much more value in the FBI, CIA, public schools and Social Security than tonsils or the appendix.
But the man who raised $19 million in two months is no crackpot. He has clearly tapped into a vein of voter discontent, and his opposition to US military and fiscal over-involvement all over the world deserves serious consideration.
Yet Paul's arguments come wrapped in a dogmatic personality with impatience about detail and with anyone who questions contradictions in his record. He insisted Russert was "confused" when asked about the apparent contradiction between Paul's theories and all the pork he collects for his district. "I vote against it," he said, "but that's the system."
Paul seems to find Mike Huckabee's sudden ascent galling and, while hedging his "fascism" response to the new front runner's commercial with the cross, complained about a general "softer fascism: loss of civil liberties, corporations running the show, big government in bed with big business. So you have the military industrial complex, you have the medical industrial complex, you have the financial industry, you have the communications industry. They go to Washington and spend hundreds of millions of dollars. That's where the control is. I call that a soft form of fascism, something that is very dangerous."
Ron Paul sounds like a right-leaning Ralph Nader, and it remains to be seen if, in the Republican primaries or as an independent candidate, he exerts as much influence on the outcome of next year's elections as Nader did in taking votes from Al Gore and electing Bush in 2000.
But the man who raised $19 million in two months is no crackpot. He has clearly tapped into a vein of voter discontent, and his opposition to US military and fiscal over-involvement all over the world deserves serious consideration.
Yet Paul's arguments come wrapped in a dogmatic personality with impatience about detail and with anyone who questions contradictions in his record. He insisted Russert was "confused" when asked about the apparent contradiction between Paul's theories and all the pork he collects for his district. "I vote against it," he said, "but that's the system."
Paul seems to find Mike Huckabee's sudden ascent galling and, while hedging his "fascism" response to the new front runner's commercial with the cross, complained about a general "softer fascism: loss of civil liberties, corporations running the show, big government in bed with big business. So you have the military industrial complex, you have the medical industrial complex, you have the financial industry, you have the communications industry. They go to Washington and spend hundreds of millions of dollars. That's where the control is. I call that a soft form of fascism, something that is very dangerous."
Ron Paul sounds like a right-leaning Ralph Nader, and it remains to be seen if, in the Republican primaries or as an independent candidate, he exerts as much influence on the outcome of next year's elections as Nader did in taking votes from Al Gore and electing Bush in 2000.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)