Congress sees spike in approval rating … what gives?

 

Given my occasional fascination with public opinion polls, I want to share an observation about RealClearPolitics’ average of polls.

It is that public approval of Congress has spiked up about 10 percentage points since Donald J. Trump became president.

Why is that? I think it’s a legitimate question. I might have the answer, although I could be coming at this from deep left field.

It well might be that the public sees the president of the United States as the greater threat to the nation’s stability. RCP’s average of polls puts Congress’s approval rating at more than 22 percent. During the eight years that Barack Obama was president, the RCP poll average usually pegged Congress’s approval in the low teens, occasionally dipping into single digits.

Might it be that the public saw Congress less favorably during President Obama’s time because respondents were concerned about the continual obstruction orchestrated by the Republican Party leadership?

Moreover, might it now be that the RCP polling reflects a public view that Congress can act as a check against the current president’s reckless rhetoric and fickle policy pronouncements?

Just thinking out loud, dear reader.

Your thoughts?

Toad Hall goes on the block

I became a bit wistful this morning when I saw the story in the newspaper about Toad Hall going on the market.

What is Toad Hall? It’s the estate of the late Stanley Marsh 3 and his wife, Wendy, that sits just off West Amarillo Boulevard.

I’ve never been there. I don’t expect I will, either. I certainly know plenty about Stanley — which is how I’ll refer to the late eccentric businessman/artisan in this blog post. If you mention the name “Stanley” to virtually any longtime resident of Amarillo, there’s a good bet they would know about whom you are referring.

His estate is going on the market for a hefty seven-figure amount.

Why the wistfulness? I guess it has to do with Stanley’s reputation, the good and bad parts of it, and whether this sale spells the end of the legacy that Stanley left us after he died in 2014.

He founded the art endeavor that produced some curious exhibits on our landscape. The “Floating Mesa” along Boys Ranch Road is one of them.

Stanley was proud of his quirkiness. He seemed to relish the notion that many of his fellow Panhandle residents considered him to be bordering on insane.

The last time I saw him he was leading a counter protest in 2006 in front of Amarillo City Hall; he marched at the head of a procession banging cymbals that sought to drown out some message being delivered by Ku Klux Klansman at the steps of City Hall.

I guess my major question now is this: What is going to happen to Cadillac Ranch, the goofy roadside attraction west of Amarillo on the south side of Interstate 40? Given the trouble Stanley found when he was indicted on several counts of sexual abuse involving young men and boys, some folks around the Panhandle have said out loud that the Cadillacs should go. They don’t want any vestige of Stanley’s art staining our countryside.

I hope the Ranch stays put. I am not privy to how that decision will be made. My preference would be to just enjoy the Caddies’ presence. Time well might temper some of the hard feelings many folks harbor toward Stanley and his memory.

Toad Hall as many of us remember it might soon be history. Just leave Cadillac Ranch alone.

Get ready for more impeachment talk

Impeaching a president of the United States isn’t for the faint of heart. It requires a stout gut among those who bring it, not to mention the target of such a drastic action.

The bar must be high. It must have a solid basis on which to make such a move.

Where am I going with this? I have this sinking feeling that the current president well might find himself in the crosshairs of those who want to bring such an action against him.

We’re hearing a growing — but still muted — rumbling in D.C. about the prospect of Donald J. Trump facing impeachment by the U.S. House of Representatives. I’m attaching an item from The Hill in which former Labor Secretary Robert Reich — an acknowledged political liberal — has lined out at least four impeachable offense already committed by the president.

Here it is.

Reich says that Trump’s accusation that Barack Obama ordered a wiretap of Trump Tower offices constitutes an impeachable offense, saying the president has recklessly accused his predecessor of committing a felony. He notes that the Constitution prohibits president from taking money from foreign governments; Trump, Reich alleges, has done so by “steering foreign delegations” to hotels he owns. Reich contends that Trump violates the First Amendment’s provision against establishing a state religion by banning travelers from Muslim countries into the United States. Reich also says the First Amendment bans any abridgment of a free press, but Trump has labeled the media the “enemy of the people.”

There’s a fifth potential cause, which Reich has asserted. It involves the possibility that Trump’s campaign colluded with Russian government officials to swing the election in the president’s favor. Reich said such activity, if proven, constitutes “treason.”

Will any of this come to pass? I have no clue.

Think of the politics of it. Trump is a Republican; both congressional chambers are controlled by the GOP. Will the Republican House majority bring articles of impeachment to a vote, no matter how seriousness of whatever charges are considered?

The collusion matter strikes me as the most serious and the most likely to align Republicans along with Democrats in considering whether to impeach the president. I am not suggesting there is, indeed, proof of such collusion.

Remember as well that the GOP-led House managed to impeach a Democratic president, Bill Clinton, in 1998 on three counts relating to his seedy relationship with that White House intern. Conviction in the Senate, though, required a super majority of senators; the GOP fell far short on all three counts. Thus, the president was acquitted.

They based that impeachment on the president’s failure to tell the truth under oath to a federal grand jury that questioned him about the affair. He broke the law, Republicans said. There was your “impeachable offense,” they argued.

My major concern about the Clinton impeachment was whether the president’s offense had a direct impact on his office. It did not. Any of the issues that Secretary Reich lists, however, certainly do have a direct impact on the president’s ability to perform his duties.

The bar for whatever might occur with the current president is set even higher than it was for President Clinton, given that the president and the congressional majorities are of the same party.

You might not believe this, but I do not prefer an impeachment to occur. I do, though, want the unvarnished truth to be revealed about what the president thinks he can do with — and to — the exalted office he occupies.

If the truth is as ugly as some of us fear, then Congress should know how to repair the damage.

Four new tires … check

This is the latest in an occasional series of blog posts commenting on upcoming retirement.

We shelled out a few bucks today getting our pickup more road-worthy for some big adventures we’ve got coming up.

You’ll be apprised of them in due course.

For now, I want to report that the big ol’ Dodge Ram 3/4-ton pickup we nicknamed Big Jake is good to go.

We slapped four new tires on the rig today, getting the big guy ready to haul our fifth wheel to points hither and yon. It’s one of those things we will need to do as we prepare for this next big life adventure that awaits us.

I have told you about our changing life. The full-time retirement gig is approaching at an accelerated pace. We aren’t there just yet, but we are on our way.

Big Jake has been a good truck for us. He’s been dependable, strong, sturdy and durable. I say this at some risk of jinxing us, but we’ve had more difficulty with the fifth wheel than with the truck. Our RV has been reliable, too. We did blow out some wheel bearings while motoring down Interstate 40 between Albuquerque and Santa Rosa, N.M. We sat on the side of the freeway while the wheels was being repaired. There have been a few other minor mishaps along the way with the RV.

The truck? Big Jake is a beastly vehicle, man.

Now he’s got four new “shoes” in the form of tires on which to hit the road. The tread is deep and my hope is that it will remain that way for many miles to come.

The open road awaits.

No pity for Preet Bharara

Preet Bharara doesn’t need any pity.

Indeed, he needs a hand-clap or two for standing up to the president of the United States.

Here’s what he did.

Bharara served as U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, a post to which he was appointed by President Barack Obama. After the 2016 election, Donald J. Trump reportedly asked Bharara to stay on the job. The federal prosecutor agreed.

Trump took the oath of office, then in a stunning reversal, he sought the resignations of all Obama appointees who had stayed on after the former president had left office.

Bharara was one of them. He refused to quit. What did the president do? He fired him today.

This sequence speaks quite directly to the utter aimlessness of the new administration. The president says one thing, does another and then strikes out against those who try to hold him accountable for the statements he makes.

Bharara will land on his feet. He’s a first-rate lawyer. He’ll likely end up in private practice somewhere and will make a handsome living. Or, he might run for public office.

Or, he might go on a speaking tour, where he’ll also make a lot of money telling the nation about the caprice that the current president seems all too willing to demonstrate.

Oh, and it’s interesting too that the president hasn’t denied — via Twitter or any other medium — that he ever asked the prosecutor to stay on the job.

And then came the mist …

I awoke this morning, walked outside and noticed something I am quite certain has been accepted as a major blessing throughout the Texas Panhandle.

The air was full of mist. The humidity was high. It’s been like that all day. The blessing, of course, has been delivered to firefighters, other first responders, farmers and ranchers who’ve been battling their hearts out against fires that have swept across the Panhandle in recent days.

They have destroyed hundreds of thousands of acres of land; I heard these latest blazes are the third worst wildfire event in Texas history.

As the wind calmed down over the past 48 hours or so, firefighters were able to get the fires contained, but not before they did horrific damage to property and livestock and took the precious lives of four individuals who were seeking to stave off the flames.

I thought of them this morning as my day got started. I also am quite certain I was far from alone in sending good thoughts, prayers and perhaps even some positive karma in the direction of those who’ve been battling so valiantly against the sinister forces that brought so much destruction, damage and heartbreak to our region.

The moisture isn’t arriving in huge amounts across the High Plains. It seems to be enough to quell the fire and to give the brave men and women who’ve been battling it a welcome respite.

Is it divine intervention? Absolutely!

SCOTUS pick gets major boost from ABA

As a firm believer in presidential prerogative, I feel compelled to say that the American Bar Association likely has given Donald J. Trump’s pick for the U.S. Supreme Court the boost he needs to take his seat.

The ABA has declared that U.S. District Judge Neil Gorsuch is “well qualified” to take his seat on the nation’s highest court.

Does this guarantee Gorsuch’s confirmation by the U.S. Senate? No, of course not. The Senate Judiciary Committee has to recommend his approval and the entire Senate has to vote to confirm the judge.

Gorsuch’s nomination is important for a couple of reasons.

First, he would take the seat vacated by the death one year ago of conservative judicial icon Antonin Scalia. The president told us he would select a conservative to the court if he were elected; Trump did what he pledged to do.

Is he my favorite judge? Would I have selected Gorsuch? No. But I am not the president. Neither is anyone else. That title belongs to Donald Trump.

He is qualified, though, to become a member of the Supreme Court.

Second, a Justice Gorsuch would not change the ideological balance on the court — presuming he follows through on his reputation as a “conservative jurist.” The court’s slim conservative majority remains intact with Gorsuch’s confirmation.

“The ABA’s ringing endorsement is no surprise given Judge Gorsuch’s sterling credentials and his distinguished decade-long record on the Tenth Circuit,” Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley said. “Former Chairman [Patrick] Leahy and Minority Leader [Chuck] Schumer have called the ABA’s assessment the ‘gold standard’ in evaluating federal judicial nominations. In light of Judge Gorsuch’s impeccable record, it’s hard to imagine any other result from the ABA’s consideration.”

Every reader of this blog knows how much I detest Donald J. Trump. I cannot stand the sound of his voice, nor can I stand to watch him perform the duties of the office for which I continue to believe he is unfit to occupy. High Plains Blogger readers also know that I was enraged at Senate Republicans’ decision to block Barack Obama’s selection of Merrick Garland to fill the vacant Supreme Court seat.

But Donald Trump is the president of the United States. Just as I have argued for decades in favor of presidential prerogative, I also believe he has made a predictable choice to fill the nation’s high court.

Judge Gorsuch also is well-qualified. If the ABA provides such a decision, that’s good enough for me.

Now, as for Senate critics of Gorsuch, my advice would be for them to save their ammo for the fight that is sure to erupt when one of the liberal justices leaves the Supreme Court.

Former life offers humbling reminder

This is the latest in an occasional series of blog posts commenting on upcoming retirement.

I am living a life in two parts.

The first was geared toward crafting a career; the second is developing a life beyond that career.

As I move farther into the second part of life, I find myself intersecting with what I used to do, when I “worked for a living.”

I work part-time for an auto dealership in Amarillo. My job is to work with customers as a service department “concierge.” I wear a name badge. Customers walk into our service waiting area and some of them spot my name tag and will say something like, “Hey, aren’t you the guy who worked at the newspaper?” I tell them yes.

We engage in some small talk that involves my former job, which I left more than four years ago.

Why mention all of this? I guess it is to acknowledge publicly how humbling it is to realize that what I used to do — which was write editorials and columns while editing the Opinion page of the local newspaper — had some measure of impact on people’s lives.

I find that gratifying and — as I think about it — a bit unnerving.

The gratification comes as people still recognize my name all these years after I resigned my post at the Amarillo Globe-News. It gives me no small level of satisfaction to believe I had some impact on those who see a name they recognize from the newspaper.

I don’t presume that the impact was always a positive one. I occasionally hear from those I meet who tell me “I didn’t usually agree with your point of view, but I read it.”

They read it. That’s all that matters. I am not kidding about that. I always knew that people’s minds don’t change because of something they read. I also know that most of us have our own world view and I never should expect to change anyone’s mind any more than my own mind would change if I read something with which I disagree.

To be sure I get a bit unnerved about these meetings, too. I don’t freeze. I like to think I can engage most perfect strangers in collegial conversation. The unnerving comes when I try to cope with these perfect strangers recognizing my name in the first place.

I joke with some of them that the ethnic sound to my name is what sticks in their memory. Oh, no, they respond. That’s not it. OK. I’ll accept your answer.

The second part of the life I intend to pursue with my wife awaits. It’s just difficult at times to shake that first part loose. I enjoy reliving that prior life.

The first part is likely to disappear when we move on down the road.

We are getting ready for that moment.

Trump takes premature credit for job growth?

Donald J. Trump will be able eventually to take credit for job growth.

Just not yet.

It’s interesting to me that some of the chatter today regarding the Labor Department jobs report deals with whether the president should deserve any credit for the big spike in employment.

He doesn’t deserve it. Not this early.

The United States added 235,000 non-farm jobs to payrolls in February. Unemployment ticked downward to 4.7 percent. How did Trump’s economic policies contribute to this trend? They didn’t.

You’ll recall that when Barack Obama took office in 2009, job numbers were plummeting. It took a bit of time for the president’s economic stimulus package to take effect. The former president didn’t deserve blame for falling jobs figures at the beginning of his term.

I also should say he didn’t deserve all the credit for the spectacular job growth that ensued. He deserved some of it.

Eight years later, the nation’s job growth has continued. Joblessness has been cut in half. The annual federal budget deficit has been pared by two-thirds.

Obama handed this economic growth off to Trump. The new president eventually will be able to take some of the credit if the job growth continues well into the first year of his presidency and beyond. I am willing to give him the credit he deserves.

This silly discussion, though, about whether he should crow about job growth during his first full month in office succeeds only in one thing: It rivets attention directly onto the president of the United States, which is all part of the way this guy rolls.

‘Phony’ jobs numbers now become ‘real’

Donald John Trump is demonstrating yet again just why he makes me sick to my stomach.

The U.S. Labor Department today announced that 235,000 non-farm jobs were added to payrolls in February, the first full month of Trump’s presidency; the jobless rate declined to 4.7 percent.

Those are impressive figures. What does the president say?

He declares those numbers are “real” even though he said multiple times during his campaign for the presidency that the Labor Department was cooking the books during Barack Obama’s presidency. He called the job growth registered during President Obama’s time in office “fake”;  he said the numbers were phony; he said the “real jobless rate” was much greater than what the Labor Department was reporting.

As White House press secretary Sean Spicer said today, quoting the president: “They may have been phony in the past but they’re real now.”

Now they’re real?

Trump sickens me for many reasons. At many levels. You name it.

He lies, slings innuendo around, insults his foes, boasts openly about his own prowess.

The Trumpkins lap this crap up, giving this clown license to keep making patently, demonstrably untrue statements.

The job figures are impressive. The president should simply have acknowledged them as progress toward the nation’s continuing economic recovery.

But no-o-o-o! He had to remind millions of us why we detest him.

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience