Running To Empty?

If I am a loyal Congressional Democrat I am very ticked off at the White House, and especially President Obama right now. Elected with a 7 point majority but behaving as if handed a mandate, the President has left me holding the bucket on health care. Traipsing around the country raising money for other Democrats he has left me holding the credit card on an exploding federal deficit and federal debt approaching $33 trillion. Waffling on any decision concerning Afghanistan he has left me holding the phone, calling constituents whose son has just been killed in the war. Attacking the most watched cable news station he has left me holding the remote control.

On health care Obama has been quick to give speeches about a broken system. Quick to blame insurance companies. Quick to blame Medicare rife with inefficiencies and fraud. Quick to blame Republicans for any opposition to any of the bills in the Senate and House. Missing from the health care reform process has been any formal input or proposals from the White House. Obama's position on health care reform has been "not my job, it is for Congress to present me with a bill." Technically he is correct, it is the job of the Legislative Branch to present to the Executive Branch legislation to be signed into law. Technically this formal process broke down decades ago with President Franklin Roosevelt who pushed his legislative agenda through a willing Congress. Vacant from the health care reform process has been the President stating clearly and succinctly, "This is my proposal."

Through the tumultuous summer of discontent, with the Town Hall meetings, the Tea Parties and the debates in diners and at neighborhood block parties Congressional Democrats were the targets of angry constituents confused over thousands of pages of proposed legislation, upset over trillions of dollars of federal spending, concerned over future deficits and how they would be paid for. Back in Washington, or in Chicago, or in Martha's Vineyard, or in Copenhagen, President Obama was one day saying the "public option" was an option and the next day saying any legislation to be effective must have some form of public option. Depending on who was in the live audience a different version of the health care reform speech was delivered. As long as the speech was delivered well everyone clapped. "We must not wait. We must reform our broken health care system. Those profiting from the ills of others are conspiring to deprive others. Republicans are to blame." Fill in the rest.

The White House has presented no leadership on this issue. As the leader of the Democratic Party, Obama has left Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in charge of health care reform, in charge of legislation to be voted up or down in Congress, in charge of whipping Democrats into supporting legislation. Democrats who have gotten their hats handed to them over the summer and since are shying away from public option votes and the huge deficits currently proposed legislation will incur. Without a legislative proposal from Obama the Democratic leadership has lost the political card of, "you need to support the President on this." Instead it is "you need to support Speaker Pelosi who has an approval rating of 19 on this." With no leadership there is no cohesion. With no cohesion health care reform legislation is not going to pass in this term of Congress.

Right after taking office Obama declared that the federal government needed to spend almost $1 trillion dollars in stimulus funds to prevent unemployment from rising and restart the economy. Despite a majority of economists saying the economic cycle would run its course and correct by the end of 2009, despite over three-quarters of the stimulus funds in the legislation not being spent until well into 2010, the White House and Obama created a do-or-die urgency and pushed legislation through. As a result Obama's most significant legislative success, that he initiated and pushed, is a huge pile of spending and debt that has had an almost insignificant impact on the national economy and provided members of Congress with pork projects they can use as political capital heading into the November 2010 elections. With no evidence of the spending, but daily evidence of a growing deficit and government debt, members of Congress are being pressed more than ever on the spending of the Federal government and how our children and grandchildren will pay for it. Most of them ran for election or re-election in 2008, as did the President, on the massive spending of President Bush. In 280 days of the Obama Administration they have outspent by vast margins any spending in the eight years of the Bush Administration and the debt being charged up is approaching a greater amount than all the debt of the Bush years combined. Coming home to cities on the verge of bankruptcy, states on the verge of bankruptcy and constituents out of work, members of Congress are being asked to explain how they can be spending more and more and endebting future tax revenues to pay back Chinese investment in Treasury bonds.

In March President Obama was on television with a very patriotic setting, standing on a flag filled stage with his Secretary of State and several senior officers in the military and declared he has a policy for Afghanistan. He stated winning the war in Afghanistan and defeating the Taliban was a top priority. This summer the Taliban gained a few toeholds and key routes from bases in Pakistan into Afghanistan and began an offensive against NATO and American troops. Slowly they regained control over parts of the country and its people. Certain factions of the Democratic Party were upset that Obama was keeping troops in Afghanistan instead of pulling them out. As the general leading the fight in Afghanistan called for more troops to achieve the objective of winning the war and destroying the Taliban, Obama went into decision mode. This has entailed several weeks, months, of consideration. During this period of consideration and no decision Obama has taken the time, several times, to blame his predecessor for Afghanistan and he is trying to find the best way to deal with it. Seemingly forgetting his own pronouncement in March that he has enacted his policy and his objective to win the war, with this policy not working it is convenient to skip over March and instead flip back to his go to target: Bush and Republicans.

No leadership on health care reform that is leaving his party fractionalized, a Treasury that is selling hundreds of billions of dollars in debt weekly, his only major piece of legislation that has had none of the intended impact, inability to make a declarative decision--or stick with a previous one--on a war, have left President Obama very open to criticism. How has he dealt with it? Blame a cable news network, blame radio hosts, blame political opponents and go raise money for the party. By putting targets out there for his ardent supporters, targets at Fox News, targets on Rush Limbaugh, targets on Republican members of Congress, targets on Bush, Obama takes focus off of his lack of leadership to achieve goals.

Lack of leadership is not the reason cohesive health care reform has not passed in Congress, lack of leadership is not the reason we have burgeoning deficits and debt, lack of leadership is not why we are stuck in "what now?" in Afghanistan; no these problems exist because Fox News asks hard questions that other media are not, Rush Limbaugh leads the Republican Party, the Republican Party is evil in the pockets of special interests bent on destroying the Administration and Bush is to blame for Afghanistan and everything else.

Evading responsibility, evading major policy pronouncements and supporting them through Congress, evading making difficult decisions that will upset some within his own party have put a leak in Obama's balloon. What is leaking is his political capital as members of his party are seeing how little support they are getting for their policies and objectives. Like foot soldiers in some 17th Century battle, members of Congress are being sent out to face the enemy, being sacrificed so as to protect the King behind the lines of battle. While sitting in the castle making pronouncements and blaming others, the loyal foot soldiers press on into the arrows, spears and swords. Foot soldiers who can be sacrificed as long as the King remains popular. As President Obama's political capital runs to empty, so to does that of his loyal foot soldiers.

If I'm a Congressional Democrat I'm pissed.

Expanding The Size Of Government

In the past two decades Americans have seen all levels of their government expand rapidly. City, county, state and federal government budgets and powers have not just crept higher and stronger but have leaped. As I read, listen and watch the health care debate across the country one of the factors of the current proposal that concerns, in many cases frightens, many people is the huge leap it makes in expanding government.

Presidents Clinton and Bush both contributed to the expansion of the federal government, but their contributions to such expansion combined pale in comparison to what has happened--or is proposed--since January when President Obama took office. Of even greater concern is not just the expansion of the federal government but specifically the expansion of power of the Executive Branch.

With a $787 billion spending package passed in just a few weeks that was to stimulate the economy, and we were told create or save 3 million jobs, Obama quickly showed his power over members of Congress that created the Democratic majority. With over 90% of the stimulus money still not spent the impact of the stimulus package is non-existent as our economy still struggles, but the timing of the money hitting the economy will coincide with the 2010 mid-term Congressional elections . With that money hitting local economies while candidates will be stumping for votes, President Obama will be able to use his charisma and oratory skills to help re-elect any Democrats that may find themselves in trouble following whatever results from the health care reform debates and proposals.

That is normal political power that all past Presidents have typically been able to wield, or try to wield, in their terms of office. Generating even more power for his Administration and the Executive Branch is the ownership of three companies, GM, AIG and Chrylser. Two of the companies, GM and AIG, are the biggest in their industry in the United States. With major ownership stakes in these companies policies and regulations from a multitude of federal departments from the Department of Transportation, to Treasury to the Federal Reserve are all now impacted on how it affects U.S. investment in these companies. Rather than establish independent trustees to run the companies and act as stockholders by voting and controlling the stock as to how it might best benefit the companies and their profitability, the ownership interests are controlled by various "Czars" and members of the Obama Administration. The President of the United States has control of three major U.S. corporations, unprecedented in the history of our country.

Speaking of Czars, the current count in the Obama White House is 32 (list here). The benefit of creating a "Czar" is there is no confirmation from the Senate. The position is filled by appointment from the President and the duties are rather fungible, basically whatever the Administration feels the position needs to be. Advise, policy creation, enforcement, the powers vary from Czar to Czar, but in the end who says "no" when being called by an individual appointed by the President? And should not these positions be under one of the Cabinet positions, whose leaders are confirmed by the Senate?

Now the Obama Administration is proposing to Congress an Independent Medical Advisory Committee that would have very broad powers to set rates and reimbursements for Medicare and Medicaid; basically by-passing the current Medicare Payment Advisory Commission who reports to Congress. The new IMAC would be appointed by the President and once it passes regulations and prices the Congress would have 30 days to pass a joint resolution, currently on the table is with a two-thirds majority according to the California Hospital Association, over turning any IMAC recommendations. If Congress is unable to provide a joint resolution in 30 days the decisions are binding.

One of the pillars of Obama's arguments for paying for the one trillion plus cost of the health care reform is "fixing" Medicare and Medicaid, goodness knows they need some fixing but so far from what I have read and heard his idea of fixing is to reduce reimbursements to providers. Recently doctors across the country received notices their Medicare reimbursements are dropping, over 12% across the board from what I have read and heard from doctors, and up to 40% for cardiologists. This is to "fix" the costs in Medicare. If the purpose of IMAC is to control expenses and there is a take-it-or-leave-it relationship with a divided Congress, the Executive Branch is now in the roll of fixing health care reimbursements for hospitals and doctors across the country.

A $787 billion stimulus package with 90% of the funds not spent and therefore not stimulating, take over of private corporations, cash for clunkers that has proven to bill ill conceived and ill managed, and over 30 top level administrators in office with no Congressional oversight. Now we are being shown a grab for even more power for the Executive Branch to control the payment of those who take care of our nation's health.

Checks and balances? Advise and Consent? Is anyone concerned about the disintegration of the enumeration of powers as defined in our Constitution?

.