Tag Archives: government shutdown

Sen. Cornyn touts GOP ‘family’

U.S. Sen. John Cornyn has launched his re-election campaign with a pledge to seek unity within the Republican Party “family.”

Good luck with that one, senator.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/11/15/cornyn-touts-big-tent-gop-perry/

Cornyn’s bid for another term in the Senate is likely to succeed next fall. It well might occur with some bumps and bruises along the way.

He spoke at a campaign rally this week of his disagreement with fellow Republican Sen. Ted Cruz over Cruz’s effort to derail the Affordable Care Act; that effort, which included the fake filibuster on the Senate floor, helped produce the 16-day partial government shutdown.

“We had a minor disagreement in the family” over the government shutdown debate, Cornyn said. But, by golly, he intends to work to ensure that Texas doesn’t elect a “Nancy Pelosi clone” as governor, meaning Democratic state Sen. Wendy Davis.

Cornyn and other Republicans, though, keep talking about the so-called “big tent” philosophy they say describes the Republican Party. The big tent, they say, has produced the disagreements within the party. The tea party wing of the GOP, however, hardly seems inclusive of folks Republicans will need to win national elections in the future. I refer, of course, to immigrants, racial minorities, gays, pro-choice women and those who rely on government assistance to help them put food on their tables and clothes on their children’s backs.

Having said all these negative things about Cornyn’s party, allow me to say that I happen to like the senator. I’ve met with him many times over many years, dating back to when he ran for the Texas Supreme Court, state attorney general and then during his time as U.S. senator. We always got along well.

I fear, though, that he’s going to tack too far to the right to protect his flank against those might attack him from the extreme fringes of his party. They’re out there, waiting for the chance to draw blood.

All this unity talk, therefore, is just that. Talk.

Stay in the Senate, John McCain

The idea that John McCain might not run next year for another term as a U.S. senator leaves me with decidedly mixed feelings.

The Arizona Republican is one of the few GOP wise men left in that august body. My sense is that the Senate needs him to slap some sense into the upstarts who have taken over much of the agenda on Capitol Hill.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/31/john-mccain-spying_n_4184036.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037

He says the government shutdown was a huge mistake, although he sounds as though he means it as a partisan strategy. No kidding, senator. He doesn’t think much of at least one of the tea party firebrands in the Senate, fellow Republican Ted Cruz of Texas, whom he’s dressed down already for questioning the ethics and integrity of another Republican, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel.

My concern isn’t about the future of the Republican Party. I am rather concerned about whether government can keep working the way it’s supposed to work. Whether the GOP is heading down some sort of path of self-destruction really doesn’t matter to me, although I would prefer to see a healthy — and reasonable — Republican Party perform its role in crafting meaningful legislation.

If John McCain is able to try to talk some sense into his party and continue working with colleagues who call themselves Democrats, then he ought to stay.

Yes, he ticks off many on the far right who consider him one of those dreaded RINOs — Republican In Name Only. He’s no such thing. His voting record is solidly conservative and has consistent with historic GOP values for many years.

He just happens to be willing and able to talk sense to those who need to hear it.

Pay attention.

Letter displays astonishing degree of ignorance

I am astounded at the level of ignorance and narrow-mindedness that exists in some people.

Yes, I know it’s not an uncommon trait. Ignorance has existed since the beginning of time. It becomes everyone’s business, though, when the media distribute people’s alleged “thoughts” for the rest of us to read.

I present to you one Eddie McMurray, an Amarillo resident and occasional contributor to the local newspaper in Amarillo. I’ve had a casual acquaintance with McMurray for many years, during my time as editorial page editor of the paper.

The newspaper published this letter today:

http://amarillo.com/opinion/letters-editor/2013-10-27/letter-columnist-should-stay-dc

Where do I start? McMurray disputes a column from Washington Post columnist Colbert King, whose column ran in the paper on Oct. 19. Seems that McMurray doesn’t much like Colbert’s liberal thinking. Then he hangs an exceedingly nasty label on him. “King is either a traitor or influenced by ignorance of this country,” McMurray writes. “I vote both.”

There, he did it. He hurled the traitor accusation at someone who simply has a different world view than his own.

This, I submit, is precisely what is wrong with the nature of what used to be called political debate in this country. Our fellow Americans on the far right fringe have taken to challenging the patriotism of those who disagree with them.

It is reprehensible on its face.

McMurray wonders why the paper is seeking “to find liberal media in an attempt to change thinking in the Panhandle. I would not trade the ground in my tomato garden for any liberal state in the country.”

Good for him. He is entitled to stand by what passes for his principles. But the media don’t seek to “change thinking” of a region. It’s not true of conservative media nestled in liberal bastions. It surely isn’t true of liberal media doing business in conservative enclaves.

What responsible media always should do is search for wide-ranging opinion to share with its readers. Let the readers be the judge. Readers can determine for themselves whether someone from the “other side” has a reasonable argument in defense of his or her position. Then we can argue the point intelligently — and with a civil tongue.

Calling someone a traitor merely because he or she is one of them stinkin’ liberals nullifies whatever point the name-caller is trying to make.

Jobs numbers ‘bad’? Not really

I was preparing myself this morning for a terrible jobs report from the U.S. Department of Labor.

It didn’t arrive. What we got instead was a tally of 148,000 jobs created in September, with unemployment falling to 7.2 percent, the lowest it’s been since November 2008.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/10/22/news/economy/september-jobs-report/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Are those figures great? No. Are they dismal? No.

I don’t quite know how to describe them. The political hounds on either side will spin it in their direction. Democrats will say the fight over whether to shut down the government hampered hiring. Republicans will say the shutdown didn’t have that much of an effect. Democrats will say 148,000 jobs added means more Americans are working than the previous month. Republicans will say the economy is still too sluggish to be described as being in “recovery” mode.

Hanging over all this is that 16-day shutdown, which delayed the release of the government figures. Maybe we need to wait for the October jobs report to determine what impact the shutdown had, if any.

I’m getting the sense that the mood in Washington is casting a pall over everything these days. Americans are angry at Congress and the White House. Although polling — the scientific kind, not those instant media polls that tell us nothing — tells us Republicans are taking the major body blows as a result of the shutdown and the debt ceiling “crisis.”

That’s the bad news. You want worse news?

The 2014 midterm elections are just around the corner. Get ready for even more politicization.

Watch these jobs numbers carefully

The U.S. Labor Department is going to release some jobs numbers Tuesday, a bit later than planned.

Here’s my thinking on what we might see and what might be the reaction. The economy likely will not have added as many jobs as it has in recent months and the White House spin machine is going to kick into high gear to blame the slowdown on congressional Republicans.

The Labor Department was scheduled to send out those jobs numbers — along with the latest unemployment rate — on Oct. 4. It got delayed because part of the federal government had shut down three days earlier. That must have included those “non-essential” Labor Department analysts who crunch those numbers and release them to the public.

And why did the government shut down? It was largely because congressional Republicans kept insisting on a defunding of the Affordable Care Act. It didn’t happen. The government remained partially shuttered until just this past week, when the Senate leadership from both parties cobbled a plan together to reopen the government and lift the nation’s debt ceiling.

The impact of the shutdown, however, reportedly did have an adverse impact on the economy. Employers suspended their hiring; businesses stopped their buying, as did consumers; manufacturers slowed their output.

Some estimates put the net loss to the economy at something around $24 billion — although I haven’t yet heard anyone translate how the bean counters compute that dollar loss.

So, the latest jobs report might not be as rosy as recent reports. Republicans might try to blame it all on President Obama’s “failed economic policy,” even though the nation has added something like 8 million jobs — mostly in the private sector — during the past four years.

Democrats, meanwhile, will be able to play to citizens’ fresh memories about the government shutdown. It hurt the economy and the Labor Department numbers we get Tuesday might give Democrats more ammo to fire at their adversaries across the aisle.

Even ‘our SOBs’ may need to get tossed

I’ve been thinking the past few days about my former congressman, the late Jack Brooks, a crusty Democrat who served Southeast Texas for more than four decades before getting beat in that landmark 1994 Republican sweep of Congress.

Jack used to refer to himself as Sweet Old Brooks, which translates into the initials SOB. He was proud of his irascible nature. In fact, Brooks embodied the saying of members of Congress that so-and-so “may be an SOB, but he’s our SOB.”

Some polling has come out in recent days that suggests American voters may be more likely than at any time in memory to throw out their congressman or woman in the next election, largely because of the trumped-up drama that took us once more to the brink of defaulting on our financial obligations.

The faux drama ended late Wednesday when the Senate leadership cobbled together a deal to reopen part of the federal government and lift the debt ceiling so we can pay our bills.

The consequences of defaulting are quite chilling to consider. The financial markets would have collapsed, taking millions of Americans’ retirement accounts into the crapper.

Still, with that prospect hanging over Americans’ heads, a number of senators and House members voted against the deal to prevent the default. Who voted no? Among them were Texas’s two GOP senators, John Cornyn and Ted Cruz and my current Republican member of Congress, Mac Thornberry.

Thornberry said on TV tonight that he voted “no” because the deal didn’t solve any problems; it only postponed for a few months a situation that he thinks will repeat itself when the debt ceiling is set to expire once more.

I guess my question for the dissenters is this: How would you propose to solve all those problems at the last minute?

I’ll concede that the political system is badly broken. However, Thornberry, Cornyn and Cruz all are part of what ails it. They, of course, blame the other party — just as the other party blames them.

So, to fix the problem they proposed letting the government default on its debts, allowing the economy to crash, keeping federal employees furloughed and maintaining maximum dysfunction in our federal government. Reminds me of the old Vietnam War axiom of “destroying the village in order to save it.”

To think that some folks still wonder why Congress’s approval rating is in the sewer.

Cruz making more enemies daily

Sen. Ted Cruz cannot possibly understand what he’s doing.

The Texas Republican seems to be doing everything possible, all within his power, to alienate the leadership of his party, not to mention the elders of the U.S. Senate where he has served all of nine months.

As Dana Milbank notes in his Washington Post column, Cruz has done what was thought to be virtually impossible, which is create a massive amount of wreckage in record time.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-in-debt-limit-and-shutdown-defeat-ted-cruz-is-one-sore-loser/2013/10/16/d896d180-36b4-11e3-ae46-e4248e75c8ea_story.html?hpid=z7

McConnell brokered a deal with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that reopened the government and staved off a default of our national debt obligations. That wasn’t acceptable to Sen. Cruz, who said the Washington “establishment” caved in. To whom he wasn’t entirely clear.

Cruz then stormed in front of a bank of TV cameras at the very time McConnell was making his own statement about the deal. I am quite certain the Senate’s chief Republican is not going to forget what Cruz said and did any time soon. As McConnell was trying to put some kind of positive spin on what he and Reid accomplished, Cruz was turning the spin in precisely the opposite direction.

Team player? All for one and one for all? Neither of those notions has a place in Ted Cruz’s vocabulary.

Cruz said the Senate should have “listened to the American people.” My hunch is that the 81 senators who voted for the McConnell-Reid deal were listening to the people — who were telling them to end this madness, to get the government operating fully and to avoid plunging this nation into default.

It’s Ted Cruz who needs to have his hearing checked.

Self-awareness has gone AWOL in Senate

The Huffington Post has taken note of a patently hilarious reaction to the deal struck by the Senate to end the government shutdown, which also increases the national debt limit.

It is that the U.S. Senate comprises 100 individuals who have next to zero self-awareness.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/16/senate-budget-crisis_n_4112253.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

There they were, applauding themselves for all the hard they did in getting the deal done. The applause seems to ignore the reality of what brought us to the brink of fiscal calamity — which was the senators’ role, along with the House of Representatives, in creating the problem in the first place.

Indeed, watching Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell pat each other — and themselves — on the back for all that work will present late-night comedians plenty of grist for the foreseeable future.

None of this needed to happen. None of the federal employees who were furloughed without pay needed to suffer. The nation did not need to endure this drama. Americans did not need to wonder whether their retirement accounts were going to evaporate because Congress and the White House couldn’t reach a deal sooner.

The deal struck, let us remember, provides only a short-term relief. More drama is just around the corner.

And for this the Senate is congratulating itself?

Give me a break.

Attention now turns to budget panels

Let us now focus our attention on some members of Congress — from both political parties — who have been given the task of working out a long-term federal budget agreement that prevents charades such as the one that just ended.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/17/politics/shutdown-over-main/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Democratic Sen. Patty Murray and Republican Rep. Paul Ryan — who chair the Senate and House budget committees, respectively — are going to begin talking between themselves. They’re both serious politicians (no irony intended, honest) but their task is monumental, given the institutional refusal of both legislative chambers to adopt any kind of strategic approach to these problems.

We came within a few hours this week of defaulting on our nation’s debt obligations. The two-week-long government shutdown sucked an estimated $24 billion from the nation’s economy. It turns out we’ll pay our bills and the government has reopened fully.

President Obama signed the bills into law late Wednesday and said the end of this budget battle removes the “cloud of unease” that had been hovering over the financial world.

I beg to differ, Mr. President.

The unease has just taken a brief respite. It’ll likely return in January and again in February. The money to run the government runs out in January; our borrowing limit expires in February. Many of us out here believe we’ll be right back at it again when those deadlines approach.

Of the two budget panel chairs, Ryan has the more difficult task, given the role the tea party wing of the GOP — of which he is a member — played in prolonging the ridiculous drama that unfolded. The House Republican caucus will continue to fight to eradicate the Affordable Care Act, which only just now has been implemented. They don’t like it and predict all kinds of catastrophe will befall the nation if it is allowed to live on.

Ryan is considered to be a serious and thoughtful young man. I’m withholding my final judgment on him. I’m not sure he’ll be able to resist the enormous pressure he’ll feel from the extreme right wing of his party, although I retain some faith he’ll be able to work constructively with Democrats on his committee and with the likes of Chairwoman Murray in the Senate.

Here’s a bit of advice from out here in the Heartland. Work until you get a deal. You have no need to take extended recesses between now and Christmas. You have much to do and the public — into whose faces you spit when you closed much of the federal government — pay you folks a pretty fair wage to solve these problems.

Finally, Democrats and Republicans can learn from the memories of two presidents — Lyndon Johnson and Ronald Reagan. Both men knew how to work the system. They perfected the art of principled compromise.

Now … let’s get busy.

Debt deal is no ‘victory’ for anyone

President Obama has called the debt deal brokered by the U.S. Senate that reopens the federal government and saves the nation from defaulting on its debts as some kind of victory.

It isn’t.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/328985-obama-hails-debt-deals-passage-as-lifting-cloud-of-unease

It delays the next fight, which is going to occur early in 2014 when the federal government will come up against the next debt ceiling deadline and when the government runs out of money to keep many “non-essential” agencies running.

Sens. Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid struck a deal early Wednesday. The Senate approved it; then the House of Representatives followed suit.

The whole scene produced a disgraceful display of brinkmanship, showmanship, posturing, demagoguery and cheap politicization. In my view, the bad guys continue to be the tea party wing of the House Republican caucus, which fought almost to the very end to defund the Affordable Care Act and pursued that tactic as a method of getting their way.

What now? Well, members of Congress are supposed to begin meeting to hammer out a “permanent” budget solution. Good luck with that. Count me as one American who has no faith — zero, none — that Congress will negotiate any kind of long-term agreement that will prevent this kind of nonsense from recurring in the near future.