Pages

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Sunday Rundown: A quick wrap-up of the Sunday talk shows.

TSA chief: Screening will be minimally invasive

By Matt DeLong and Felicia Sonmez

UPDATED at 3:26 p.m.
The Associated Press reports that TSA administrator John Pistole hassoftened his position following his CNN appearance earlier Sunday, in which he said there would be no change in the agency's passenger screening policy.
The head of the federal agency responsible for airport security says screening procedures should be as minimally invasive as possible, shifting his position that there would be no change in controversial scans and pat-downs.
The head of the Transportation Security Administration, John Pistole, said in a statement Sunday afternoon that the agency is constantly evaluating and adapting security measures and there is a continual process of refinement and adjustment to ensure air safety.

CNN: STATE OF THE UNION - TSA chief: No change to pat-down policy
Transportation Security Administration chief John Pistole acknowledged that new TSA screening procedures are "invasive" and "uncomfortable," but he denied that the agency is considering changing its policy. "No," Pistole said. "Not going to change."
Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff, said he is "encouraged" by the results of last week's NATO summit in Lisbon. He singled out the agreement that the Afghan government would assume responsibility for internal security by 2014. Mullen said he is "confident" that a drawdown of NATO forces would begin in 2011. Mullen described the U.S relationship with Afghan President Hamid Karzai as having "had its ups and downs," and reiterated President Obama's comments that "we need to listen to him, but he also needs to listen to us."
Mullen described reports that North Korea has unveiled a new nuclear plant as "belligerent behavior" that "validates the concern we've had for years about their enriching uranium, which they've denied routinely." On a new U.S.-Russia START treaty that is currently facing Republican opposition in the Senate, Mullen said "here's an opportunity to get this done now. And from a national security perspective, I really believe we need to do that." Mullen said Marine Commandant James Amos -- who has said the military should not lift its ban on allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly -- would be in lockstep with the administration if the law changes.
------

FOX NEWS SUNDAY - Clinton: Ratify START by end of year
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that last week's agreement among NATO leaders on an exit strategy for Afghanistan "was a great vote of confidence in President Obama's strategy for Afghanistan." On the issue of the new START treaty, Clinton said that the administration is "continuing to work with all of our Democratic and Republican senators to try to get to a point where we can hold that vote this year." Clinton also defended the civilian trial of Ahmed Ghailani, the terror detainee who was convicted last week on only one of 285 counts, saying that "more terrorists are serving time in prison right now because of Article III courts than military commissions." And asked whether she's done with elective office, Clinton responded, "I am."

Texas governor and incoming chairman of the Republican Governors Association Rick Perry discussed the authority of the federal government. Perry said that it's important to "devolve power out of Washington, D.C., back to the states," which he called the "laboratories of innovation." Perry also took aim at Social Security, calling it a "Ponzi scheme," and charged that Washington "made a serious mistake" in bailing out failing banks and businesses. Asked about a study last week that showed millions of jobs were saved or created by the GM and Chrysler bailouts, Perry pointed to the fact that Texas created 850,000 jobs during the last decade. Perry also said that he disagrees with George W. Bush on "what Washington's role should be," and reiterated that he's not running for president, because "the action is down here in the states."

------

NBC: MEET THE PRESS - Jindal says no to 2012 bid

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that the decision on whether to ratify the START Treaty "goes beyond politics; this should be nonpartisan, not just bipartisan." On Afghanistan, Clinton reiterated that the transition to Afghans taking the security lead "begins next year in 2011." Clinton also weighed in on the recent TSA screening controversy, saying that the "vast majority" of flyers are "law abiding citizens," but that "terrorists are adaptable;" she added that she's "absolutely confident" that the process will get "better and less intrusive." Clinton also again pushed back on the notion that she may one day run for president, saying that she's "out of politics."

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) said that he's not running for president in 2012, but he didn't rule out the possibility of serving as the Republican nominee's running mate. "I'm not gonna turn down something that's not been offered," Jindal said, noting that he's running for re-election as governor in 2011. Jindal sharply criticized the TSA's new screening process, charging that the Obama administration "rolled this out right before the busiest travel time of the year, never making their case to the American public." He also took aim at the administration's response to the Gulf oil spill. "The frustration was actually getting a response, actually getting moving assets on the ground," he said.
------

ABC: THIS WEEK - Mullen: START ratification is a national security issue
Mullen said North Korean President Kim Jong-Il is "predictable in his unpredictability" and "constantly desires to destabilize the region." Mullen said North Korea has defied multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions and described reports that the country has a new nuclear plant are "a huge concern for all of us." He added that "the assumption ... is that they continue to head in the direction of additional nuclear weapons." Mullen described the new START treaty as "a national security issue." He said he was comfortable with virtually all aspects of the agreement, but declined to accuse Senate Republicans of playing politics by holding up ratification of the treaty. However, "the sooner we get it done, the better," he said.
Mullen said he "absolutely" supports repealing the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy and said it "belies us as an institution." He said he would prefer that Congress pass a law to end the policy rather than leaving it to the court system.

------

CBS: FACE THE NATION - Hoyer: Create civilian courts at Gitmo

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said "there is no doubt the START treaty is in the interest of the United States." She suggested that she is not surprised the treaty is facing opposition in the Senate. "It's always difficult to get these treaties through," Clinton said. "It always takes a lot of presidential effort." Clinton said Afghan President Hamid Karzai is "fully in support" of the NATO strategy in his country following the NATO summit. She said "the very legitimate questions" Karzai's raised with his recent criticism of the U.S. military's use of night raids is getting "blown out of proportion." She said the White House is listening to Karzai's concerns. Clinton said she would not submit to a TSA pat-down if she could avoid it. "I mean, who would," Clinton said.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said he thinks the government could create civilian courts at Guantanamo Bay and hold civilian trials there. He said bringing high-profile terror suspects to the United States for trial is "probably not going to happen" given the current political climate. Hoyer said he is willing to work with Republicans to reach an agreement on extending middle-class tax cuts. He said that he would have run for minority leader if Pelosi hadn't, and he thinks he would have won.

------

CSPAN: NEWSMAKERS - Clyburn: Rangel was treated fairly
House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.), the incoming Assistant Leader, said that it's not "essential" for the Bush-era tax cuts to be extended, because "you've got a big deficit reduction taking place, which is also a good thing." He said that he hoped both parties would soon reach an agreement on extending the cuts, adding that he is "not going to budge" on providing a middle class tax cut. On the ethics trial of Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.), Clyburn said that he believes Rangel would agree with him that "for the past two years, things have gone along relatively fairly" in the trial; he also said that Rangel is being held to a higher standard due to his standing as former Ways and Means Committee chairman.

Clyburn also argued that Democrats lost the House by a total of less than 250,000 votes, and promised that many Democrats who were defeated earlier this month will be back. "I guarantee you that if we can speed up this recovery from 25 miles-per-hour to 55 miles-per-hour and we keep growing the private sector as we have been, we will have the wind at our backs two years from now, and a lot of these people will be back," he said. He defended House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, calling her a "very focused organizer," a "prolific fundraiser" and a "great tactician."
By Matt DeLong and Felicia Sonmez  | November 21, 2010; 1:42 PM ET 

If States Opt Out Of Medicaid, They Would Increase Costs For The Federal Government

By Igor Volsky on Nov 19th, 2010 at 3:10 pm

Earlier this month, several states — led by Texas Governor Rick Perry (R) — floated the idea of resisting the requirements of the health care law by opting out of the Medicaid program. Relying on a Heritage Foundation study, the states argued that they could save money by sending back million of dollars in Medicaid matching funds and designing more efficient alternatives for covering their poorest residents.
Health care wonks and economists questioned the feasibility of the scheme and this morning, during an appearance on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal, Kaiser Health News reporter Marilyn Werber Serafini explained why it would only increase costs for the federal government:
SERAFINI: There is a proposal out there right now coming out of the Heritage Foundation that talks about one possible option for doing this and under this option he says 40 out of the 50 states would actually come out ahead by dropping all that federal matching funding. [...]
The states would take full responsibly for their long term care, their nursing home coverage and also for helping the folks who are on Medicare the senior citizens who still need help paying their premiums and with cost sharing. But the rest of the folks [below 133% of the poverty line] they qualify for subsidies. They buy private insurance through the exchange and therefore you’re essentially giving them full responsibility to the federal government…. If they did drop out of Medicaid, if these folks did qualify for the subsidies and were turned over to the federal government, it would meet a lot more spending by the federal government.
Watch it:


The federal government would have to spend more and so would the Medicaid population. Even if the poorest residents were eligible for subsidies in the exchanges (which as Serafini points out is debatable), they would have to contribute 2% of their incomes to health insurance and would likely be spending a lot more on health care than if they had stayed in the Medicaid program.
States would also have to stretch their contribution to cover individuals with disabilities and long term care services in the face of rising health care costs. Even if they somehow managed to do that, they would likely be confronted with an uptick in uncompensated care and that would and that — along with the fact that the proposal would take billions out of the state economy that goes to support hospitals and other providers — would ensure a revolt from the provider community. Hospitals and doctors would have to swallow the costs of caring for uninsured individuals who will continue to use the emergency room as their primary source of care.
As former Bush HHS Secretary Gov. Tommy Thompson (R-WI) told the New York Times this morning about Wisconsin’s expanded Medicaid program, “The program is very popular, and I don’t want the Republicans to do things that will damage them in the future.”
Conservatives would be undermining state Medicaid programs and increasing federal government expenditures on health care — which, ironically, is exactly what they say they’re trying to reduce.

Mike Pence: The President Should Regard The Constitution Like ‘An Obsessed Lover’

November 19, 2010 5:38 PM


ABC News’ Michael Falcone reports:
Indiana Republican Rep. Mike Pence, who has been mentioned as a potential presidential candidate in 2012, delivered a sharp-tongued critique of the American presidency on Friday, saying that the office had become “symbolic of overreaching.”
In a speech in Washington, DC at the annual conference of the Federalist Society, a conservative legal organization, Pence used the remarks of two top Obama administration officials to suggest that the president’s team had been complicit in that overreach.
He cited Obama confidante Valerie Jarrett’s November 2008 statement that “It’s important that President-Elect Obama is prepared to really take power and begin to rule day one” and the more recent comments of Consumer Financial Protection Bureau adviser Elizabeth Warren, who said: “President Obama understands the importance of leveling the playing field.”
“Take power, rule, leveling,” Pence said. “Though these are the terms of the day, this has never been and should never again be the model of the presidency or the character of the American president.”
He added, “No one can say this too strongly, and no one can say it enough until it is remedied. We are not subjects. We are citizens.”
Jarrett used the word “rule” in passing in an appearance on NBC’s “Meet The Press,” shortly after Obama was elected president and Warren’s full quote in a Sept. 17 White House blog post notes that the president wanted to “level the playing field again for families" and create consumer "protections that work not just for the wealthy or connected, but for every American.”
Pence’s speech amounted to a series of presidential guiding rooted strongly in the Constitution.
“The president should regard the Constitution and the Declaration like an obsessed lover,” Pence said. “They should be on his mind all the time.”
The Indiana Republican fit in several more jabs at Obama, including a reference to an incident in November 2009 when the president bowed to Japanese Emperor Akihito during a visit to Tokyo.
“You do not bow to kings. Outside our shores, the President of the United States of America bows to no man,” Pence said. “When in foreign lands, you do not criticize your own country. You do not argue the case against the United States, but the case for it. You do not apologize to the enemies of the United States.”
His comments are not new -- Pence delivered a similar speech in September at Hillsdale College in Michigan -- but they do offer window on how the outgoing chairman of the House Republican Conference, who is considering a presidential run, views the nation’s highest office.
Pence told ABC News on Thursday that he would make up his mind about his next political move “sometime early next year.”
“Our decision is going to be wholly dependent on taking the time to prayerfully consider where we can make the most difference on the conservative values that brought us to Washington to begin with,” he said.
November 19, 2010 in 2012Michael FalconeRepublican Party 

The Federalist Society Convention

2010 National Lawyers Convention - "Controlling Government: The Framers, the Tea Parties and the Constitution"


Address by Senator-Elect Michael S. Lee - Event Audio/Video

2010 National Lawyers Convention
November 19, 2010
Michael S. Lee, Leonard A. Leo
The following audio was recorded on November 19, 2010.
Address by Senator-Elect Michael S. Lee 11-19-10Running Time:
[audio Full Audio - coming soon!]
[video Video on YouTube]
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 19
Address
2:00 p.m. – 2:30 p.m.
  • Hon. Michael S. Lee, United States Senator-Elect, Utah
  • Introduction: Mr. Leonard A. Leo, Executive Vice President, The Federalist Society
The Mayflower Hotel
Washington, DC


Address by Congressman Michael R. Pence - Event Audio/Video
2010 National Lawyers Convention
November 19, 2010
Michael R. PenceDavid M. McIntosh
The following audio was recorded on November 19, 2010.



Address by Congressman Michael R. Pence 11-19-10Running Time:
[audio Full Audio - coming soon!]
[video Video on YouTube]
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 19
Address
2:30 p.m. – 3:00 p.m.
  • Hon. Michael R. Pence, United States House of Representatives, Indiana
  • Introduction: Hon. David M. McIntosh, Partner, Mayer Brown Row & Maw, LLP and Vice-Chairman, The Federalist Society
The Mayflower Hotel
Washington, DC


Our Purpose  

  • Law schools and the legal profession are currently strongly dominated by a form of orthodox liberal ideology which advocates a centralized and uniform society.  While some members of the academic community have dissented from these views, by and large they are taught simultaneously with (and indeed as if they were) the law.
  • The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order.  It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be.  The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities.
  • This entails reordering priorities within the legal system to place a premium on individual liberty, traditional values, and the rule of law.  It also requires restoring the recognition of the importance of these norms among lawyers, judges, law students and professors.  In working to achieve these goals, the Society has created a conservative and libertarian intellectual network that extends to all levels of the legal community.

This  video was originally presented during the 25th Anniversary Gala on Thursday, November 15, 2007.  The Gala was part of the 2007 National Lawyers Convention.

The Liberal Noise Machine

— By Kevin Drum

| Sat Nov. 20, 2010 11:12 AM PST
Back in August, Stan Collender said that for cynical electoral reasons Republicans were likely to oppose any action to improve the economy:
It’s not at all clear [] whether Bernanke realizes that the same political pressure that has brought fiscal policy to a standstill in Washington is very likely to be applied to the Fed if it decides to move forward. With Republican policymakers seeing economic hardship as the path to election glory this November, there is every reason to expect that the GOP will be equally as opposed to any actions taken by the Federal Reserve that would make the economy better.
On Monday, Matt Yglesias chimed in, suggesting that the White House needed to be prepared for "deliberate economic sabotage" from Republicans. On Friday, after taking note of recent Republican attacks on the Fed's quantitative easing program, Paul Krugman agreed:
The core reason for the attack on the Fed is self-interest, pure and simple. China and Germany want America to stay uncompetitive; Republicans want the economy to stay weak as long as there’s a Democrat in the White House.
Steve Benen collected these quotes today and added his concurrence: "We're talking about a major political party," he said, "possibly undermining the strength of the country — on purpose, in public, without apology or shame — for no other reason than to give themselves a campaign advantage in 2012."
Strong statements! But here's what's really remarkable: virtually no one in any position of authority has picked up on this since Collender first suggested it. On the Republican side, practically everyone from the party leaders on down is thoroughly convinced that Barack Obama is one or more of: a socialist, an appeaser, a Chicago thug, a racist, a would-be killer of grandmas, and a president who wants to undermine everything that makes America great because he's ashamed of his country. This is just standard rhetoric from Fox News pundits, radio show hosts, rank-and-file members of Congress, and party poobahs. It's hardly even noteworthy anymore.
But the mirror image of that — Democrats saying that Republicans are deliberately sabotaging economic recovery — is virtually invisible. Krugman finally said it yesterday, but that's it among high-profile liberal leaders. For the most part they're just not willing to go there. This, in a nutshell, is the difference between the conservative noise machine and the liberal noise machine. One is noisy, the other is....restrained. We'll see if that changes now that Krugman has brought his cannons to bear.
POSTSCRIPT: For what it's worth, my own view isn't that Republicans are consciously trying to sabotage the economy. Rather, I think it's really easy to convince yourself of things that are in your own self-interest, and that's mostly what they've done. A bad economy is in their self-interest, so they've convinced themselves that every possible policy to improve things is a bad idea.
Of course, excuses like that from mushballs like me are the reason the liberal noise machine is sort of anemic in the first place.