The Blue State

Thursday Editorial: The buck stops with incompetent micro-managers, not FEMA employees

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill want the agency of FEMA to be eliminated because it represents a "symbol of a bumbling bureaucracy," said a Senate panel today.

Conservative Democratic Senator from Connecticut Joseph Lieberman provided what many progressives would consider a once in a lifetime criticism of the Administration:

"For Hurricane Katrina, the president failed to provide criticalleadership when it was most needed, and that contributed to a grosslyineffective federal response."

But if that is true, why is the agency itself at fault?  If the President, Michael Chertoff, Michael Brown and New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin fumbled the response, why should the burden fall on all of FEMA?  Most Americans agree that the poor response was a result of the incompetent individuals at the top, not the hard-working relief workers at FEMA that weren't given the resources to do their job.  That is like not giving our military soldiers body armor and deflecting blame away from the people at the very top.

If anything, the poor hurricane Katrina response actually proves that giving your bureaucracy proper resources, as opposed to relying on a bunch of micro-managers that don't know what they are doing, is the most effective system to get the job done.  Remember that FEMA was under the umbrella of Michael Chertoff's Department of Homeland Security.  Had FEMA been its own agency and able to directly lobby Congress for money without the oversight of Chertoff's abroad-first budgetary mentality, then maybe the rescue effort would have been more organized. 

The whole notion that dissolving FEMA is the answer to the problem is preposterous, at best.  Why should a small handful of inept, egotistical micro-managers get the pleasure of knowing that their actions caused Congress to bring down an entire agency and temporarily cost thousands of government workers their jobs?  The buck should never stop with the workers, because they don't make the bureaucratic decisions that impact millions of Americans.  But the buck should stop with the President, and result in the firing of Michael Chertoff.

Gas prices are causing 69% of Americans hardship

Regardless of how unserious Republicans want to make the issue of gas prices, the American people are worried, according to the latest CNN Poll:

"Have recent price increases in gasoline caused any financial hardship for you or your household?" If yes: "Is that a severe hardship that affects your ability to maintain your current standard of living, or is it a moderate hardship that affects you somewhat but does not jeopardize your current standard of living?"

Severe Hardship - 23%

Moderate Hardship - 46%

No Hardship - 28%

Unsure - 1%

Here is the Democrats' plan to put a dent in high gas prices.

What you didn't know about the Drumheller interview on "60 Minutes"

Last Sunday on the CBS show "60 Minutes", the former top CIA spy working in Europe said that before the Iraq war the White House subjectively chose to use intelligence that helped their case for war, while discarding intelligence that did not.

As the news watchdog group Media Matters emphasized this week, the mainstream media pretty much ignored the "60 Minutes" report:

None of the three major networks reported on the story on either their morning shows or evening news broadcasts.

That is not the part you did not know.  What pretty much no one was aware about regarding the "60 Minutes" exclusive last Sunday was the fact that it was going to air right before the 2004 election.  The online magazine "The Nation" reported this week that they were politely asked by the CBS news staff in the fall of 2004 not to write about the Drumheller's revelation.  Here is the lowdown, as revealed by "The Nation" magazine:

Specifically, I joined other journalists in denying the public theright to learn of a definitive investigative report by CBS' 60Minutes on President Bush's disregard for the truth concerning theweapons of mass destruction threat allegedly posed to the United Statesby Iraq. Having received an advance copy of the devastating segment, Ihonored CBS' proprietary request not to write about the news it carrieduntil after it aired.

Only, it never aired. CBS got cold feet, probably because of DanRather's troubles over an unrelated story critical of the President.The suppressed story was solidly reported and, by exposing the BushAdministration's utter disregard for the truth concerning SaddamHussein's weapons of mass destruction, should have been made availableto the public before the November election. Now, no one seems to care.

The segment finally aired this past Sunday, in a more robust form.Unfortunately, the response has been tepid; it seems the media, atleast, have become jaded with all the endless examples of thePresident's perfidy. But the CBS story remains very important asfurther evidence of the depths of the Bush Administration's deception.

Just think: maybe the November election in '04 would have turned out differently.  It's things like this, after the fact, that really make you shake your head in embarrassment.

Bush investigating oil companies? And the world is flat too?

President Bush is threatening to investigate possible price gouging at the pump:

Responding to growing public frustration over soaring gasolineprices, President Bush called Tuesday for a nationwide investigationinto possible price manipulation.

But even as he announced other steps intended to free up gasoline supplies, Bush warned that prices are likely to climb higher.

Is it just me, or is President Bush investigating the oil companies just as fake as if the San Francisco Giants offered to investigate Barry Bonds' steroid abuse?  Neither are going to happen.  And if they did happen, who is to say that those investigations would produce anything legitimate?

GOP Congress ticks off White House on border security front

For anyone that has been following the immigration battle in the Senate, and the utter frustration coming from the White House as a result, the latest Senate bill passed that diverts some Iraq war money to the U.S. border patrol is enough to make you hold your head and laugh out loud.  You simply cannot put into words how angry White House officials have been at GOP leaders like Bill Frist over the immigration dispute.  John McCain and Ted Kennedy had a bill all worked out -- a bill that the White House supported.  Now immigration reform is being stalled, and the diverting of $1.9 billion worth of Iraq war money to step up border security efforts is making the White House lose its temper:

..the White House said the bill contains too manyitems that are "unrelated to the war or emergency hurricane reliefneeds." It said a final House-Senate compromise on it "must remainfocused on addressing urgent national priorities while maintainingfiscal discipline."

The White House has pretty much lost all control of the Legislative Branch as we approach the 2006 midterm elections.

But surprisingly, the vote was not supported by a number of Democrats, including Hillary Clinton:

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., said Gregg's cuts would "take money from troop pay, body armorand even joint improvised explosive device defeat fund. Now that is afalse choice and it is a wrong choice."

Republican Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire authored the bill, and gave this reasoning for it:

"Fighting the war in Iraq is critical to this war on terrorism.Fighting the war in Afghanistan is critical to this war on terrorism.But I have to think equally important is making sure that our bordersare secure. That is as big an issue as we have today in the area offighting the war on terrorism. We can't be effective on that issueunless we have the resources and the people in order to take care ofsecuring the border."

I happen to think that Gregg is right in what he said regarding the two issues being equal.  But are they related?  In other words, is it right to take a cut funds from an issue and appropriate them to an issue that is completely separate?  Probably not.  So I can see where Hillary is coming from.  But such a bill shows how the White House has completely lost its control over the Senate and the Congress.

 

Mainstream media trying to legitimize Tony Snow

It's official: John Snow is the new White House Press Secretary.  Unfortunately for truth-seekers out there, the mainstream media did not highlight his radical right-wing views.  MSNBC downplayed the conservatism of the Fox News star:

"President Bush on Wednesday named Tony Snow, a conservative pundit whohas nonetheless been critical of the administration, as his presssecretary — the latest move in Bush’s effort to remake his troubledWhite House."

CNN echoed that media spin:

"As a commentator, Snow, 50, has had some critical things to say about the president."

And expected, Fox News offered the same spin:

"Some critics point to Snow's criticisms of thepresident's policies in the past as a cause for possible discord in theWhite House, but Martin Frost, a former Texas Democraticrepresentative, said Snow will just have to tamp down on those in hisnew position."

Is it just me, or is it surprising that the mainstream media wants to focus more on Snow's criticisms of the Bush Administration than the fact that Fox News serves as the unpaid White House media echo-chamber?  Fox News' conservative bias is the real story here!

Furthermore, even the idea that Snow is regularly critical of the Administration is far-fetched.  Snow has defended the White House on just about everything:

- "American journalists and politicians made a perfect spectacle of themselves in discussing the Abu Ghraib prison controversy."
- "In other words, Social Security is every bit as insecure as the stock market."
- "It serves notice that President Bush is seriousabout promoting freedom, because free societies are a lot morepeaceable than dictatorships and monarchies."
- "Journalists love a feeding frenzy, and the presscorps would have loved nothing more than a tale that would have nailedthe president and Donald Rumsfeld with fresh prisoner-abuse allegations."
- "The idea of leaving Iraq by a date certain also smacks of imbecility."
- "President Bush has committed billions to the fightagainst AIDS, thus making retroviral drugs available to millions ofHIV-positive Africans."

What the mainstream media calls a dissenter I call a longtime ally.

The Northern Iraq problem

Iraq poses a two-front challenge for the United States.  On one end of the battle -- the more publicized end -- U.S. forces are helping train Iraqi troops and hoping that political parties will successfully form a unity government. 

But up in Northern Iraq, a separate challenge is growing in concern.  Iraqi Kurdish fighters, who hope to one day unite with Kurds in Turkey and form their own independent country called Kurdistan, are causing a real headache for the Turkish government.  Turkey, the newest member of the European Union, is facing stiff pressure from other European leaders to get their border situation straightened out.

Today, as reported in the New York Times, Condoleezza Rice told Turkish officials that the United States will help in the effort to secure the Iraqi-Turkish border:

Addressing what has become a new irritant in relations with Turkey,Ms. Rice acknowledged that the problem of infiltration by Kurdishrebels into Turkey from Kurdish regions in northern Iraq had beenallowed to grow. The Turkish foreign minister, Abdullah Gül, said therehad been a surge in such infiltration in recent weeks.

TheTurkish media has been filled with reports of thousands of Turkishtroops massing on the border of Iraq, and there has been speculationthat Turkey might intervene in Iraq. Ms. Rice, without speakingdirectly to that threat, clearly sought to discourage the Turks fromdoing anything on their own.

"Of course we want anything that wedo to contribute to stability in Iraq, not to threaten that stabilityor to make a difficult situation worse," Ms. Rice said, referring tothe Turkish troop presence. "That is why a cooperative approach on thisproblem — cooperation between Iraqi and Turkey and the coalition forces— is very important."

In other words, the only way to keep Turkey from sending their forces into Iraq will be if the United States and newly-trained Iraqi forces can sustainably protect the Turkish border -- the gateway to the European Union.  But judging from how thinly-stretched U.S. forces already are in Iraq, that will be a challenge.

Edwards marched with workers

Former Democratic vice presidential candidate John Edwards stood beside janitors who were striking at the University of Miami:

About aquarter of the 425 janitors and other contract workers employed byUNICCO Service Co. at the university have been on strike since earlyMarch over alleged unfair labor practices. They want to organize aspart of the Service Employees International Union, but the company hasdisputed their organizing tactics.

"No Americans should be working full-time and still living inpoverty," Edwards told the crowd. "This struggle is about earning awage, about having health care benefits, about everyone in America, notjust a few, having a shot at the American dream.

University President Donna Shalala has said the school wouldnot take a position on the unionization of striking janitors at thecampus. But the university took out an ad Tuesday in The Miami Heraldcriticizing the union's organizing tactics, which it said aredisrupting the school's academic programs.

John Edwards has been back in the spotlight this week, especially after becoming the first Democrat to call on Alberto Gonzales to probe the Administration's conduct before the Iraq war regarding intelligence.

 

A tax gimmick worth mentioning

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities points out a major tax gimmick trying to make its way through the GOP-controlled Legislative Branch:

House and Senate conferees negotiatingan agreement on the tax reconciliation bill are widely reported to havedecided to use a change in Roth IRAs to help “offset” the cost ofcapital gains and dividend tax cuts in years after 2010.  If the taxreconciliation bill increases the deficit after 2010, it would violatea Senate rule that a reconciliation bill may not increase long-termdeficits, and the bill would be subject to a 60-vote point of order onthe Senate floor.  The Roth IRA provision, in conjunction with otherprovisions, is supposed to address this problem.

New estimates by the Joint Committee onTaxation show, however, that the Roth IRA proposal is a gimmick — whileit would raise revenues in the first few years it was in effect, itwould produce sizeable revenue losses in the years after that (see theFigure below and the Joint Tax Committee document below).  The newJoint Tax Committee estimates confirm that the proposal represents aflagrant deception, under which conferees would seek to create anillusion they were not increasing long-term deficits when in fact that would be precisely what they were doing.

Speaking of gimmicks, today President Bush expressed the notion that the low unemployment rate could not have been accomplished without tax breaks for the wealthy.  Of course, no one seems to remind Bush that the unemployment rate does not take into account those who have completely given up looking for work, nor does it factor in low wages.

Interesting trend on Bush poll numbers in April

As you all probably have heard by now, President Bush's approval rating reached a new low today: 32% in the latest CNN Poll.  But if you look at all of the major polls since the beginning of the month, Bush's approval rating has steadily declined:

LA Times/Bloomberg (April 11): 39% Approval
Gallup (April 13): 36% Approval
Pew Research (April 16): 35% Approval
FOX News (April 19): 33% Approval
Gallup (April 23): 32% Approval

As they sing during a limbo competition, "How low can you go?"