Category Archives: political news

Hey Dems, don’t be obstructionists, too!

I’ve spent a lot of emotional energy with this blog bashing congressional Republicans for what I believe has been their obstructionist habits as they dealt with a Democratic president, Barack H. Obama.

My sense of fairness compels me to instruct congressional Democrats to avoid following their GOP colleagues’ lead as they now must deal with a Republican in the White House, Donald J. Trump.

I understand that the roles aren’t entirely parallel.

For much of Obama’s time as president, Republicans controlled at least one congressional chamber. They took control of the entire Capitol Building after the 2014 elections. I remember, too, when Sen. Mitch McConnell, then the minority leader, declared his No. 1 priority was to make Obama a “one-term president.”

The GOP fought the president along every step. Republicans opposed the president’s economic stimulus package right out of the chute in 2009; they opposed the Affordable Care Act; they — along with a handful of Democrats — resisted calls for new laws on guns even after the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre of 20 first- and second-graders.

The GOP now controls Congress and the White House.

What’s left for Democrats? They’re angry (a) over the way Republicans treated Barack Obama and (b) that they lost the 2016 election that every pundit in the country seemed to think was in the bag for them.

Is obstructionism the way to go? No. For one thing, Democrats are operating from a much weaker position this time than Republicans had when Barack Obama took office.

Still, some congressional Democrats are insisting that they intend to block the president and his fellow Republicans in Congress. They don’t intend to work with their “friends” on the other side. Some Democratic lawmakers have declared their intention is to ensure that Trump gets impeached.

Government isn’t supposed to be an ideological battleground. It’s supposed to serve the people whose votes put politicians in office. There surely ought to be ways for Democrats can look for common ground with Republicans. Need they surrender their principles? Not any more than Republicans should surrender theirs.

I feel as though I should remind Democrats — just as I reminded Republicans during the Obama years — that many of us out here want government to be a functioning body. We want government to enact smart legislation. We insist that members of the House and Senate hue to the principle of good government.

And good government, by definition, means that it works on behalf of those of us who pay for it.

Gadflies have their place … but not always

I’ve known my share of gadflies in the communities where I have lived and worked.

You know what a gadfly is, yes? My trusty desk dictionary describes them as “persistent, irritating critics” and “one who provokes or goads”; the third definition describes a bug that bites livestock … which I guess is about as productive as the first two definitions.

Politics has its share of gadflies. Amarillo City Hall has had one among its City Council members for the past two years, but Randy Burkett has decided against seeking a second two-year term on the council.

Most of the candidates seeking spots on the new council are serious about public service. They are thoughtful and constructive in their approach to governance. I don’t claim to know all of them personally. I’ve met some of the candidates and I have a tiny bit of history with a couple of them.

But the city doesn’t need any gadflies sitting on the council, which is why I continue to support a particular slate of candidates and hope they get elected one week from today. Thus, I am hoping for a council that comprises Ginger Nelson as mayor, Elaine Hayes in Place 1, Freda Powell in Place 2, Eddy Sauer in Place 3 and Howard Smith in Place 4.

Political gadflies do perform a useful function in communities. They help officeholders stay focused on the issues. The tactic they employ is to gripe about what they consider to be wrong about certain public policy. Governing at every level — from City Hall, to the county courthouse, state capitol, the nation’s capitol and, yes, the presidency — require solutions. They require constructive — as well as critical — thinking.

That’s my hope for the next City Council. I want it to comprise individuals who are far more interested in pushing forward solutions than in looking exclusively for the things they believe need repair.

I want the council to comprise individuals with a demonstrated record of civic involvement.

Amarillo voters in 2015 experimented with significant “change” in city governing policy by electing three new guys to the council. One of them, Elisha Demerson, came to the job with prior governing experience, with service on the Potter County Commissioners Court. The other two were government novices.

But the council had a gadfly in its group. That would be Burkett. His presence on the council didn’t always work out. At least one of the challengers running this year qualifies as a gadfly. James Schenck, running for Place 2, keeps saying he knows what’s wrong with city government. I haven’t heard any solutions from him.

There need not be any more gadflies taking the oath of office after the ballots are counted next week. We need forward-thinking individuals who know how to govern as a unit.

I remain cautiously hopeful, moreover, in the collective wisdom of the city’s voters.

Stand tall, David Frum

David Frum has emerged as my newest favorite conservative thinker/writer/pundit/analyst.

I actually have become enamored over the years with a number of such folks: William F. Buckley, William Safire, Peggy Noonan, George F. Will, David Brooks, Kathleen Parker, Jennifer Rubin all come to mind. They are great thinkers, solid in their beliefs, but not crazy.

Now we have David Frum, a former speechwriter for President George W. Bush. He’s also a persistent critic of Donald J. Trump, who’s come along to become president of the United States. He has been astonished — along with many of his fellow Americans — at how wholly unprepared Trump is to serve as president and commander in chief.

The president said in an interview with Reuters that the office to which was elected is tougher than he thought it would be.

Who knew?

Frum’s response — delivered in a series of tweets — is utterly classic.

Here it is. http://occupydemocrats.com/2017/04/28/trump-just-whined-hard-job-bushs-speechwriters-response-epic/

 

President still in campaign mode … get over it, you won!

Donald J. Trump jetted off today to the National Rifle Association annual convention and then commenced to boast about something that is patently obvious.

He won the 2016 presidential election!

Yes, the president won. He captured more Electoral College votes than his opponent, Hillary Rodham Clinton. He won more than the majority he needed to become president. The president won those formerly Democratic-leaning states — Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Iowa. We get it, Mr. President. Honest, we do.

Indeed, your audience in Atlanta damn sure knew you won. Most of those in the room voted for you, more than likely.

When is this guy going to cast his gaze exclusively forward? When will he stop reliving, in the words of the Bruce Springsteen song, the “glory days”?

We’re about to welcome the 100th day of the Trump administration. We haven’t yet seen a major legislative triumph logged by the president. He’s signed a mountain of executive orders, which he is entitled to do.

It’s time nevertheless to look ahead, perhaps to the next 100 days and beyond.

But today, he spent a lot of time telling the NRA audience what it already knew.

Perhaps, though, the NRA crowd forgot — if only for a moment — that the president promised to do a lot of things in those first 100 days. He said he would make a lot of things happen: NAFTA repeal, Affordable Care Act repeal and replacement, tax reform, final approval to build that “big, beautiful wall.” How’d he do? Not well.

If the president is going to look back on his election victory, then perhaps he ought to tell us some of the rest of the recent past, which isn’t quite so glorious.

So, enough of restating the obvious, Mr. President. Where do we go from here?

‘I thought it would be easier’

If anyone wondered whether Donald J. Trump was equipped to assume the role of president of the United States, an interview just published has removed all doubt.

The president told Reuters News Agency that he thought being the head of state and government of the world’s greatest nation would be “easier” than what he did beforehand.

Really, Mr. President? You believed that presiding over the multi-headed monster called the federal government would be easier than snapping your fingers while running a company?

The president’s 100th day in office is at hand and we’ve gotten a most revealing look at how little this person knew about the office he sought. It’s been reported — and repeated — that the presidency was the first public office to which Trump ever aspired. His whole life has been centered on one thing: self-enrichment. Public service is an entirely different critter.

“I loved my previous life. I had so many things going,” Trump told Reuters. “This is more work than in my previous life. I thought it would be easier.”

Well, Mr. President, get used to it. The work won’t get any easier.

Trump laments difficulty

One of Trump’s predecessors, John F. Kennedy, once reportedly complained about the difficulty of getting things done. JFK thought he could just pick up the phone, issue an order and then he would get the desired result immediately and without question.

President Kennedy, who entered public life in Congress also as the son of immense privilege, learned quite rapidly that government doesn’t function that way.

Donald Trump must learn that lesson, too, if he has a prayer of succeeding at the job he now occupies.

I’ve said often that 400 grand — which is the salary the president earns — isn’t enough. For the current president, that salary is walking-around money; he isn’t taking a salary and is pledging it to charity. Good for him.

That doesn’t minimize the enormous difficulty of transitioning from a life of glitz and glamor to one dedicated to serving other human beings. Yes, Mr. President, you have laid claim to the toughest job on Planet Earth.

This is something that — in a still-imperfect world — you should have understood the moment you declared your intention to seek it.

Why the Ivanka criticism? Because she’s a player

Howard Kurtz, Fox News’s media critic and analyst, asks a perfectly valid question: Why are the media beating up on first daughter Ivanka Trump?

I believe I have an answer. Not the answer, mind you.

It’s because Ivanka has become part of her father’s key advisory team, along with husband Jared Kushner. She’s no longer just a charming, poised entrepreneur who stood by Dad while he campaigned for the presidency. She’s now part of the team, part of the inner circle, one of the president’s key advisers.

Kurtz seems a bit alarmed at the apparently sudden turn by the political media. Hmm. Why should it surprise him?

The media have done this many times in the past — and for reasons that have nothing to do with presidential children’s role in shaping public policy.

George W. Bush’s twins — Barbara and Jenna — became media fodder after they got into some trouble in college; conservative critics of Bill and Hillary Clinton turned their guns on Chelsea during their time in the White House over the teen’s awkward appearance; Malia Obama got her share of snark from media critics, too, after she enrolled at Harvard.

By the way, is it me or do the media take special aim at presidential daughters while looking the other way when presidents are the fathers of sons?

Ivanka Trump is treading down uncharted paths as a presidential child who’s been handed a portfolio that enables her to speak publicly about policy matters. She and Jared aren’t getting paid for their presidential posts, but they still have a big influence on Daddy Donald.

I respect Howard Kurtz and his role as a media critic. He’s done it for some time at the Washington Post, the Daily Beast, CNN and now at Fox.

I’m betting Ivanka Trump knows what’s coming as she exerts greater influence on the policies that emanate from her father’s administration.

I do agree with one element of Kurtz’s questioning of the media. Challenging the advice that Ivanka gives her father is one thing. The insults and innuendo are quite another.

As a brief aside, I’ll note that one of Kurtz’s colleagues at Fox, Jesse Watters, has just announced he is going on “vacation” after he made some ghastly, sexually charged remarks about Ivanka after her appearance in Berlin with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and International Monetary Fund chair Christine LeGard.

The president was dialed in to life in the public eye as a successful businessman. Ivanka and her brothers Don and Eric had managed to stay pretty much out of the media glare. Then dear ol’ Dad had to run for — and get himself elected — president of the United States.

That’s when it all changed.

Hoping for smooth City Council transition

We’ve all suffered from motion sickness while watching the new president of the United States take command of the federal government.

Will there be a similarly rough ride at Amarillo City Hall when the new City Council takes over after the May 6 election? Oh, I don’t expect it. Then again, I didn’t expect the outcome we got after the 2015 municipal election … let alone the outcome we witnessed just this past November when Donald J. Trump got elected president!

However, my hope springs eternal at many levels.

We’re going to get a new majority on the council. One of the incumbents who’s not seeking re-election, Place 3 Councilman Randy Burkett, has been a key player in the rocky ride we’ve been through at City Hall. That he’s leaving office after just one term bodes well for calmer times. He’s been a disappointment to many Amarillo residents, although I acknowledge that many others view him as a champion for their point of view — whatever it is.

With a new chief administrator on the job, City Manager Jared Miller, it also is my sincere hope that the new council will let him do the job he was hired to do.

It is to run the city, to ensure that each department functions well, to hold department heads accountable and to make sure the public’s money is being spent prudently and efficiently.

I look forward eventually to meeting the new manager. Since I’m now a former full-time journalist, I’m likely to have to pursue that opportunity myself. I pledge to do so.

As for the council, I am hoping for a more tranquil atmosphere than what we’ve witnessed for much of the past two years.

Voters got angry two years ago. The source of that anger continues to baffle me, given the city’s economic vitality and the tangible progress that has occurred on many fronts. But they were steamed enough to oust two incumbents; a third incumbent didn’t seek a new term, so voters selected a new majority two years ago.

One of the new guys, Mark Nair, then decided to ask for Jarret Atkinson’s resignation as city manager. It took Atkinson a few weeks, but he bailed.

The city then brought in an interim manager, Terry Childers, who took no time at all to demonstrate his ability to turn a simple mistake into a full-blown controversy; I refer to the episode in which Childers misplaced his briefcase, called the emergency dispatch center and bullied a dispatcher over the phone. It didn’t get any better for Childers, who eventually quit after muttering into a hot mic that a constituent is a “stupid son of a b****.”

There was open bickering between council members. There were instances of a council member — Burkett — speaking out of turn regarding negotiations to lure a baseball franchise to Amarillo. Mayor Paul Harpole walked out of an executive session because of a supposed lack of trust in council members.

We’re getting a new bunch this time around. May the new majority offer a semblance of tranquility for a municipal government that likely has exhausted its motion-sickness remedies.

What has the president learned in 100 days?

Let’s turn away for a moment from what Donald Trump might have accomplished during his first 100 days as president to what he might have learned during that time.

The president’s list of accomplishments is pretty damn skimpy.

His learning curve, though, has been steep. I hope it’s beginning to flatten out.

What’s the most glaring eye-opener for the president? It’s that you cannot run the federal government the way you run a business.

At virtually every turn along the way since taking office, the president has been forced to swallow that bitter pill. A man who became used to getting his way because he demands it has learned that the federal government is structured — on purpose — to function on an entirely different set of dynamics.

The nation’s founders crafted a brilliant governing document. When you think about it, while the U.S. Constitution grants the president significant executive authority, it does not imbue the office with ultimate governing authority. The founders divvied up power among three branches of government: executive, legislative and judicial.

It’s that darn legislative branch — the U.S. Congress — that has a say in what becomes law. Donald Trump’s business experience doesn’t mean squat to many of the 535 men and women who comprise both chambers of Congress. They, too, have their constituencies to which they must answer. Yes, the president represents the nation, but Congress — as a body — also represents the very same nation.

Can you govern the nation like a business? No. Never. Not a zillion years.

Trump needs to understand that governance is a team sport. He cannot threaten members of Congress if they resist his legislative proposals. He cannot exclude members of the “other” party from key negotiations. He must abandon the “I, alone” mantra — which he bellowed at the Republican National Convention this past summer — that threatens to haunt him for as long as he is president.

And then there’s the judicial branch. The federal judiciary comprises individuals who hold lifetime appointed jobs. Their mission is to ensure that laws do not violate the Constitution. The founders granted them independence from the executive and legislative government branches.

Those judges have the constitutional authority to knock down executive orders, or to put the brakes on laws enacted by Congress. They aren’t “so-called judges” whose status as “unelected” jurists doesn’t diminish their authority.

I hope the president has learned at least some elements of all this during his first 100 days. If he doesn’t, then we’re all going to be in for an extremely rough ride.

However, we’re all just spectators. The president will need to hold on with both hands if he has any chance of getting anything done during his time in office.

We are witnessing the consequence of electing someone with zero public service experience. Mr. President, the federal government bears no resemblance — none! — to the businesses you built.

Executive authority now becomes OK, yes, Mr. President?

I recall hearing time and again during the 2016 presidential campaign that Barack H. Obama’s use of executive authority was somehow a bad thing.

The president shouldn’t govern by executive fiat, said many of his critics, such as the Republican nominee for president, Donald John Trump.

Hmm. Well, times have changed, haven’t they?

Trump is now the president. He’s assumed the role of chief executive of the federal government. By golly, the man has found that executive authority isn’t such a bad thing after all.

Indeed, as that supposedly “phony” 100-day threshold approaches, the current president is left to proclaim the only victories of his new term have come via executive order.

Oh, and he’s also suffered some embarrassment through this activity as well, such as when the federal judiciary knocked down two of his travel bans for those coming here from Muslim-majority countries.

Through executive authority, Trump is demonstrating his ability to use the power granted to him by virtue of his election. I get that. I respect the authority granted to the president and I won’t condemn him for using it, per se.

What boggles my mind is how he continues to get away with the rhetorical gymnastics he performs routinely and how he manages to bluster his way out of what he said earlier.

He said while campaigning he wouldn’t have time for golf; he said would be at the White House 24/7 working to bring back all those jobs that have gone offshore; he promised to repeal the Affordable Care Act and replace it with something else.

He’s done essentially two things during his first 100 days as president: He nominated a Supreme Court justice, who was confirmed by the U.S. Senate and he ordered a missile strike against Syrian military targets in response to Syrians’ use of chemical weapons against civilians.

Legislative accomplishment? Nothing, man. The president has relied almost exclusively on his executive authority — which he condemned when another president did the same thing.

Tax ‘reform’ unveiled … now let’s see how it affects POTUS

I believe another mega-rich guy, the Texan H. Ross Perot, once said that the “devil is in the details.”

With that, one of the details of Donald John Trump’s tax proposal must include just how this “reform” affects the individual who has pitched it.

Yes, I’m talking about tax returns. Release them, Mr. President.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin says the president will not release those tax returns. There’s been enough information released already, he said. I disagree, quite naturally, with what the secretary suggests.

The major points about the president’s tax plan include a dramatic reduction — from 35 percent to 15 percent — in corporate income taxes for small businesses and a huge increase in the standard deduction for individuals’ tax returns.

As The Hill reported: “The plan would repeal taxes that mostly affect wealthy Americans, such as the alternative minimum tax for individuals and the estate tax. But it would also ‘eliminate targeted tax breaks that mainly benefit the wealthiest taxpayers,’ according to the one-page outline released Wednesday.”

Why is release of the president’s tax returns relevant? He has not divested himself of his huge business interests. Therefore, he stands to be affected in some fashion by what he has pitched. Americans have the right to know just how Donald Trump’s portfolio is affected.

He isn’t likely to release those returns just because many of his fellow Americans want him to do so. Still, it’s worth making the demand yet again. I believe I will keep yammering about the returns during Trump’s time in office.

But here’s another wrinkle.

How does the tax plan affect revenue to pay for at least two major Trump proposals: infrastructure repair and, yep, that dadgum wall.

Trump wants to spend about a trillion bucks to fix highways, bridges and airports. Will these tax cuts reduce cash flow into the Treasury, making it impossible to “pay as you go” on these projects?

Oh, and the wall is going to cost — according to varying estimates — as much as $25 billion. How does the president intend to pay for that project? Do not tell me “Mexico is going to pay for it.” That will not happen. 

As it’s often said: The president proposes, Congress disposes. You can bet your last nickel that congressional progressives will continue to insist that Trump release his tax returns as condition for any tax overhaul.

My gut tells me the disposition of this tax plan — absent the president’s release of his tax returns — continues to be one of the great mysteries in the nation’s capital.