Friday News Roundup - Domestic
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-01-06/friday-news-roundup-domestic
The unemployment rate dropped to 8.5 percent – the lowest level in nearly three years; President Obama bypassed Congress and appointed Richard Cordray as consumer protection chief; plans for cuts to the Pentagon were unveiled; the Fed urged Congress to take more aggressive action on housing; the official Republican campaign for 2012 got underway; Mitt Romney got an unexpected win in Iowa and an endorsement from John McCain; Michele Bachmann announced an end to her campaign; and Rick Perry said he’s not giving up yet. The domestic hour of the Friday News Roundup.
Guests
Jeanne Cummings
deputy government editor, Bloomberg News.
Jim VandeHei
executive editor, "Politico."
Jackie Calmes
national correspondent, The New York Times.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
johnandre wrote: "Senate Republicans object to the President's choice. That's their right under the Constitution."
Sorry, john, but in the case of Richard Cordray, this statement is totally incorrect. Very few Rethuglicans objected to him. They would not allow ANYONE to fill that slot. Rather, they wanted to prevent him from being installed as a way to defang the whole agency which WAS passed by congress and signed into law by the president (I don't care who gets credit for "creating" it - it's the LAW that it was created!) The CONS don't like the idea of a someone really looking out for the consumers rather than their rich pals in the banking and non-industries. The recess appointments are totally constitutional as was pointed out even by lawyers from the Bush administration:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/14/AR201010...
Treas_Sh wrote:
"They would not allow ANYONE to fill that slot. "
I repeat -
You credit Congress with creating the position, but then argue that they won't fill it?! That's nonsense.
In part, you are right, but not because they want to "defang the whole agency". The reason is they want to force the White House to agree to subject the bureau to congressional budgeting. Considering the current state of the budget (or non-budget), not a bad idea, I would posit.
But the idea that Senate Republicans "don't like the idea of a someone really looking out for the consumers rather than their rich pals in the banking and non-industries" is nothing but partisan claptrap. If that were the case, the legislation would never have passed.
Also, your use of the term CONS is offensive.
Also, again, I would ask you to read my previous post with respect to original intent of the recess appointment.
And again, I would say, this is an end-run around the Constitution, NO MATTER WHO DOES IT. Your reference to the Bush Administration is nothing but an attempt to justify bad behavior with other bad behavior - a dead-end for any argument.
johnandere wrote,"Your reference to the Bush Administration is nothing but an attempt to justify bad behavior with other bad behavior - a dead-end for any argument."
Well said!
The use of the term "Rethuglicans" is pretty childish as well.
I fear a war in Iran because all the dark stars line up there. It would serve the oil companies because all oil wars actually to keep the price of oil up by limiting the supply. Right wing politicians in Israel, the US and Iran benefit by a war there.
Diane, Please ask your guest if they listened to the president's speech on that cold January day. when he told us that the economy was in much worse shape than we thought.
johnandre:
Sorry you're offended by "CONS"... Glad I didn't call you "johnny!"
You keep harping on this silly argument that Congress created the position, then won't fill it. Did you sleep through the last mid-term election? It's the extreme right wing TP and TP-wanna be's that gained positions in the Senate. They don't like what the Democratic majority did legally before that, so now they've been blocking a vote on many of Obama's nominees. They just want to whine and complain until Obama agrees to change the rules. Sorry, it's a law! They need to do their jobs and fill the positions.
Anyway, on Recess appointiments, the Constitution says: "The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session. "
The question is "How is a recess defined?" Sorry, but I don't think quoting Wikipedia is a greatest authority on that. Congress IS in recess. That's a fact. The ridiculous "pro-forma" sessions of less than a minute every three days do not change that fact. No one is there to do the Senate's business they don't have a quorom.
I agree that recess appointments are not the best way to get a person installed into a position, but if the Senate Republicans would have just allowed an up or down vote, then at least we could say they fullfilled their consitutional role of "advise and consent." Good day.
Teece @ 9:01 am: But ain't we still the richest Mocktocracy, with the biggest Cadillac military in history? Since we are so "exceptional" maybe the UN should put us in a "special class."
Wow, look at all the dark patches on the DRShow January calendar! Are you adopting the covert secrecy of Homeland Security? I just wanna plan my listening time.
Are bookings becoming difficult? Or might it be that wrong wing extremists will object voraciously if you show your cards? What happened to Greg Palast anyway?
Ludicrous objections to Presidential business as usual may portend another coup such as that reported by Smedley Butler, news so well suppressed since.
Next they'll be censoring "Schoolhouse Rock" as terrorism. Rights reserved only to Elites who can afford them: Now that would fit the definition of exceptional.
I just realized: The old "Electric Company" now qualifies as "degenerate art."
Congratulations you guys!
Treas_Sh wrote:
"The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session. "
Right. That means you do what it takes to fill the position. You don't wait around for a recess. Again, see my post on original intent (I'm begging you). The position was created this term - in July in fact. Did you sleep through this past Congressional term?
Here is the crux of the problem. Republicans were able to successfully use the filibuster that Democrats made famous to try to gain budgetary concessions (as in control of the spending) and save the people some money. Since this is a newly-established agency, its financial structure is important. Instead of working with Republicans to get control of this new agency's finances, Obama insisted on getting his way; as he did with the stimulus, as he did with ACA. These together cost him the election in 2010 - whereas a little compromise from Dems could have solidified their power for a generation. Honestly, the short-sightedness of the progressive is astounding.
It's all moot, though. Once ol' One-Term is gone and Dodd-Frank is repealed, Cordray, Warren, or Jiminy Cricket in that slot won't matter.
On the 1/6/12 program I believe Jeanne Cummings erred in her statement that the unemployment rate in the last three years was the highest since the 1930s and the Great Depression. The monthly unemployment rates for 1982 and 1983 were higher than those in the past few years. And from September '82 to June '83 the rate never fell below 10%--significantly higher than recent rates.