2009: Une année glorieuse ? From the Front Lines

This entry introduces Christophe Cerniou, a compassionate and active participant in the French political and economic scene via his blog JOURNALISTE EN RESISTANCE (le clavier remplace la STEN) [JOURNALIST IN RESISTANCE (the keyboard replaces the STEN)]. To quickly learn of his commitment and passion see his posting Je Refuse.

His posting here reflects upon the background to the January 29th nationwide protest against French President Nicolas Sarkozy's government's economic policies. The protest drew more than one million demonstrators into the streets of France, described by the International Herald Tribune as "the biggest popular challenge to the president since he took office in 2007."

I'm a novice in the area of French politics, and have read quite a bit lately in order to learn more, yet French economic and political history is wide and deep, and their political parties quite a bit more subtle and, therefore, more complex than ours. I can only make some general comments by way of introduction, but to me it appears that President Sarkozy is quite boldly trying to implement in France a system of deregulated market-based economics that is presently being severely questioned nearly everywhere else. The French have fought hard to build a society that provides basic protections of nationalized health care, job security, and social security; everywhere Sarkozy and his supporters seek to reduce and deflate, to lessen the tax burden on the wealthy, and to thereby lessen basic protections for the mass of society.

The January 29th strike seems to have brought little visible change in Sarkozy's policies. Like George W. Bush, he appears bound to earlier ideologies despite the worsening economic situation in France and the general questioning of unregulated markets worldwide. Over here he'd be considered almost wingnutty in that stubbornness. Yesterday, in the blog French Politics,* Arthur Goldhammer wrote, "This is Sarkozy's error. He seems to be saying, 'I have the solution, and it is the same solution I have had all along' -- as if the detaxation of overtime, which may have made some sense in 2007, still makes sense in 2009, with offers of employment plummeting." Indeed, "French unemployment soared by 90,200 to 2.2 million in January, marking the highest one-month leap since records began, the employment ministry said Wednesday." Mr. Sarkozy's offers of assistance to the French economy track nicely with our GOP's - little for the poor, much for the wealthy.

Christophe's words below combine the passion of his presence with the history of his country. He recalls the storied Conseil National de la Résistance (CNR) [National Counsel of Resistance] and the "Trentes Glorieuses" ["The Glorius Thirty"], those years from around 1946 - 1976 when France eventually emerged from WWII as an economic power. Hopes for the Programme du Conseil National de la Résistance [in English] were never truly fulfilled, and today's struggle against the loss of those social benefit services resembles those of other times in France's history. Again, the French descendent dans la rue to march in protest to protect their gains. It's time for the The Call of Calls [Charte des l'Appel des appels]. . .

Below is Christophe's posting. (I've provided my very basic translation, but invite anyone to suggest changes; my French is deeply encased in rust . . .) Thank you, Christophe!

"En France, nous n’avons jamais vraiment retrouvé l’époque des «Trentes Glorieuses » ; le chômage à son début n’a pas assez alarmé les politiques, du moins pas assez vite ; dans les années qui ont suivi, s’est installé un dilemme, qui ressurgit aujourd’hui que se dressent nos résistants de 1939-45 pour défendre le système dont ils sont les fondateurs, du moins les ouvriers, le "Conseil National de la Résistance". Ce programme inclut la sécurité sociale, le code du travail, etc…

Les français ne peuvent pas renoncer à ce programme, alors que déjà nous avons des gens dans nos rues ; ce serait alors bien pire… comment est-il, notre système social, de travail et de santé ? archaïque, diront certains ? parce que les autres pays ne font pas pareil, nous devons forcément les suivre ? a-t-on le choix, alors que l’on n’exporte plus ? oui, nous l’avons, mais il faut pour cela que nous ayons un dirigeant en qui nous puissions avoir confiance, ce qui ne veut pas dire que nous ne devions pas l’aider ; la plaie qui ronge constamment le budget de la France, ce sont les dépenses inconsidérées du protocole et du majestueux, l’argent jeté de toutes manières par les fenêtres, comment un dirigeant peut-il demander à un français de se serrer la ceinture, alors qu’il s’augmente lui-même 2,5 fois son salaire ? le climat politique en France est devenu délétère, le peuple n’a plus confiance ; les votes ne sont plus des votes de conviction, mais des votes-sanctions ; sans compter le taux d’abstention.

Cela peut s’arranger ; la grande grève du 29 janvier a montré que les syndicats étaient bien sûr d’accord pour relancer l’économie, mais qu'en aucun cas, cela ne doit se faire en fragilisant encore plus de personnes ! les plus fragiles doivent êtres protégés, et on doit donner un peu moins de cadeaux aux boursicoteurs du libéralisme sauvage."

***************************

And here, with apologies for mistakes, my very basic translation.

In France, we never really achieved the epoch of "Trentes Glorieuses"; at its beginning unemployment did not alarm policies enough, at least not quickly enough. In the years that followed, a dilemma became established which re-emerges today - that our resistance fighters of 1939-45 of the "National Council of the Resistance” stand to defend the system they founded or worked for. This program includes French national health and pension organizations, labor laws, etc.

The French cannot abandon this program; already we have people on our streets; it would then be much worse. . . Is our social system of jobs and health care archaic? Some will say so. Because other countries are not similar, must we follow them out of necessity? Is there a choice, while they do not export more?

Yes, we have our social system, but for it it is necessary that we have a leader we can trust. This does not mean we need not help. The wound that always gnaws at the French budget are the inconsiderate expenses of custom (“du protocole”) and the hierarchy, money thrown out the windows. How can a leader ask the French to tighten while it augments its salary 2.5 times? The political climate in France has become noxious, the people do not trust anymore; votes are not votes of conviction anymore, but votes of censure; not to mention the rate of abstention from voting.

This can improve. The big strike of January 29th showed that labor unions of course agreed to restart the economy, but that under no circumstances should this be done by weakening even more people! The most fragile must be protected, and one must give fewer rewards to traders in the unregulated capitalism (“du libéralisme sauvage”).

* French Politics is an excellent blog to follow for novices, like me, who have interest in the topic.

**** There is no "Read more" ****

Snooper's Top #6: Legal Webcasts for the Masses (that's us)!

Here's a quick and easy Snooper's Tip -- a way to keep up with legal topics that's as simple as two words: "tele" and "vision" or "Web" and "cast." It's offered through an authoritative source (which we're always on the lookout for here), the Law Library of Congress. established in 1832. The Law Library is now the world’s largest law library, with a collection of over three million volumes covering virtually every jurisdiction in the world.

The Law Library says about itself that it "serves a wide range of functions, some better known than others. The Law Library provides research and reference assistance, oversees the preeminent legal collection available, and houses an international staff of foreign law attorneys. . . The Law Library of Congress provides foreign and comparative legal and legislative information services to national and global researchers through its Foreign Law Specialists."

Most of its collection is unreachable via the Internet but one way to get some of its expertise is through its webcasts. Presently, there's about a dozen webcasts available for viewing, and here's a some of the topics (thoughtful as ever, I've hyperlinked a couple for you to sample directly):

-- No Greater Challenge: Assessing Legal Responses to Terrorism

-- Separate Branches, Balanced Powers: Madison’s Legacy

-- Perspectives on Childhood and the Law

-- Extraordinary Rendition: Constitutional Issues

-- Indian Religious Freedom: To Litigate or Legislate?

So, put your feet up, prepare a quart of gin and tonics, make some liver & onion flavored popcorn, and get you some legal . . . on teevee!

(By the way, you can subscribe to the webcasts RSS feed at the URL above. Snooper's Tips will be looking for more sites having authoritative law and legislative webcasts, so, heh heh, stay tuned.)

**** There is no "Read more" ****

Snoopers Tip 5: A Useful Congressional Research Service Report on How to Find Federal Laws

Tax Money Well Spent. Do you have some government-related research papers due? Are you just plain interested in what Congress is doing about the economic downturn or Iraq or Medicaid or . . . whatever?

Although thinking is rarely used in the same sentence as "Congress," the Congressional Research Service (CRS) of the Library of Congress is known as the research and policy analysis “think tank” for the U.S. Congress. CRS is literally a part of the Legislative Branch, and exists ONLY to serve the needs of Congress. Their reports are among the more authoritative and actively sought policy documents. CRS reports are renowned for their nonpartisan treatment of even the more controversial issues. If you want to get all sides of an issue, CRS publications are an excellent source. Officially, however, their publications are available to constituents (i.e. "us") through Congressional offices, but if you request one today by phone or email from your Congressperson's or Senator's D.C. or district office, it'll likely be weeks before you receive it. And, candidly, some never arrive at all.

But here's the good news not known by many and not appreciated by the management of CRS: many CRS reports are available online, for free, to be downloaded and printed. Where? There are a few out there,* but my favorite is a site called "Open CRS: Congressional Research Service Reports for the People," and although it has a surprisingly basic search engine, it's FREE, has a collection of CRS reports that is large, and is updated regularly.

Also note - and this is a good idea - on its homepage you'll see that you can subscribe to an RSS Feed, so you can keep up with the newly added reports on a regular basis. The feeds come out about every 10 days and it's the best way to see the new issues that Congress is dealing with, and many are among the hottest topics of the day. (Lately via Pirate Bay Torrents you may also download an enormous number of reports via the torrents system.)

Finding Federal Laws. I subscribe to OpenCRS's feed, and receive a regular listing of newly released reports. Today, I learned of a report that you'll find useful. It's titled "Federal Statutes: What They Are and Where to Find Them" (January 30, 2009), written by an old colleague, Cassandra Foley. This short eight pager is full of excellent info, and very practical in its focus. It'll be a valuable piece of your Snoopers Tips binder and/or bookmark folder. The best part of it, I think, is its discussion of Internet access to federal laws.Ms. Foley provides a number of Internet sites that are authoritative, and provides suggestions as to how to avoid the misleading ones.

Note that Ms. Foley's phone number is provided, but also note that CRS does not accept calls or any other kind of inquiries directly from the public. As I mentioned, Congress is their sole client. All inquiries to CRS must come via your Congressional/Senatorial office, either in D.C. or from district offices. It's an understandable policy.

To easily keep up with new CRS Reports, especially for students who have classes in political science/government or are members of campus political organizations, I'd suggest subscribing to OpenCRS's feed. You'll be amazed at how many interesting topics are presented for access in each feed (about every 10 days). It'll really come in handy for those pesky research papers and presentations. Here's the OpenCRS site, and you'll find the feeds hyperlinks at the bottom of the page.

Finally, for those who'd like more information about CRS, here's their 2007 Annual Report.

More Snoopers Tips coming soon!! Happy hunting . . . for federal statutes, that is! (We really need to get out more often, don't we?)

* University of North Texas Libraries (Free, permits you to browse by subject);
The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) (Free, for national security, foreign policy and related topics);
Franklin Pierce Law Center IP Mall (Free, for CRS intellectual property, cyberlaw and electronic commerce publications)
Avoid Penny Hill Press, it's a fee-for-service site, and doesn't offer anything that justifies its cost.

I haz a bug . . .

Sorry to have been absent for the last day or two. I haz a bug and it was keeping me asleep for vast hours per day - energy has been zero. But today I'm feeling much improved, and I'll be posting again soon, perhaps even tonight.

I've been applying my rudimentary French skills to provide a translation of a Guest Post by my French friend Christophe Cerniou, a keen, compassionate, and active observer of the French political and economic situation from his blog "JOURNALISTE EN RESISTANCE (le clavier remplace la STEN)"/A JOURNALIST IN RESISTANCE (the keyboard replaces the STEN). His blog is here, in French, and here, in a Yahoo Babelfish quasi-translation to English.

See you again later or tomorrow with Christophe's report from France about the January 29th strike! In the meantime, don't abandon me . . . I'm needy.

**** There is no "Read More" ****

Revealed! Secret Senate GOP Fiscal Stimulus Debate Practice Video

Special Report, February 13, 2009. Today, mid morning, at the charmingly inexpensive but very suave Capitol Rotunda restaurant, the Disgruntled Toad, this reporter met with another annoyingly disgruntled Senate-Aid-In-Waiting and was shocked by what he heard and saw. The Aid-In-Waiting is literally awaiting the outcome of the Minnesota Senate election contest between Democrat Al Franken and incumbent Republican Senator whose name your reporter will hopefully remember prior to filing this story. In any event, your correspondent was collared by Mr. J*ck Willi*ms (who, fearing deadly retribution, asked that his name be withheld) at the daily Disgruntled Toad cocktail hour which is accompanied by low-priced breakfast fare for early risers like your journalist. If you are ever in the area for a secret meeting and seek out a hearty plate of ham and eggs and all the beer you can drink for the Happy Hour price of $4.95 per pitcher, the "Toad" is the place to be.

Mr. WIlli*m's, an imposingly bald person of approximately six and a half feet tall with the girth of an Oscar Meyer Weinermobile (see his disguised picture accompanying this article), explained his reluctance to go public, but also asserted that he had grown weary of waiting for the Minnesota senate race to be decided. "I need to know at some point which guy I'll be working for so I can learn the appropriate talking points." He explained he'd learn GOP lingo one day and then, if Franken seemed to pull ahead, he'd have to learn the Dems' secret handshakes, rituals, and reluctance to admit they are in the majority.

"I've had it," he said, and between bites of a marvelously prepared "Senate Oinker Combo" ($9.95 during breakfast Happy Hour), your writer heard more and more of his background and his situation, but failed to copy much of it down. As I recall it, Mr. Willi*ms had somehow come into possession of a secret GOP Central Party Authority video that recorded one of their practice sessions for the upcoming debate on the fiscal stimulus bill compromise reached party leaders on Wednesday. Willi*ms went on to the usual crabby complaints about his treatment, etc. etc., the some more about his dissatisfaction with his parents "jib," and finally something about the rather demented things that actually go on in closed door caucus meetings. Frankly, I had stopped listening and was by now engaged in lively repartee with the always accommodating owner of the fabulous "Disgruntled Toad" restaurant. "Restaurant," Hah! That would be like calling the Taj Mahal a nifty little fixer upper. The "Toad" is a gem, and so reasonably priced, as I may have mentioned.

To summarize. Mr. WIlli*ams talked and talked. I finally had enough beers to - sweet redemption! - fall face forward onto the table sound asleep until awakened by the always attentive "Toad" staff for lunch. In my lap I found the video tape I have provided for you below. It reveals one of the late night GOP Debate Practice sessions, and discloses much of their, now, not-so-secret strategy. This scribe sometimes believes that the ghost of Edward Murrow lurks nearby when revealing these secretive Congressional doings, and perhaps he might be shaking his head ruefully at my arrogance, but then I think, "Mr. Murrow, you would have enjoyed the luncheon fare as much as I at the Disgruntled Toad in the Capitol Rotunda, and it would have changed your mind, too."

The Senate GOP Fiscal Stimulus Debate Practice Session, 2-11-09

This is not actually the Senate GOP practicing their debate techniques.
It is the classic Finnish Shouting Men Choir.
The video is directed by Sami Kuokkanen and Petri Sirviö in 1995.
More at foresto's YouTube Channel.

**** There is no "read more" ****

Snoopers Tip 4: WaPo's Vote and Committee Schedule Feeds

Here's a quick Snoopers Tip: The Washington Post has a fine feature that you can add to your feeds or bookmarks in your Snoopers Tips folder. Here's the basic information. They provide a very quick and easy way to update yourself each day, right after reading They Will Say ANYTHING!, of course:

Here's the feeds they offer:

RSS feeds:

1. Member-specific feeds - This offers an RSS feed for every current member of Congress, so you can get notified each time your elected officials vote. Each member-specific feed includes the member's position in the latest 10 votes.

2. Recent votes - A feed of recent votes in Congress.

3. Committee events - A feed of upcoming committee events in Congress.

This is another way to easily keep an eye on 'em!

**** There is no "read more" ****

Snoopers Tip 3: Your Daily Dose: The Congressional Record's Daily Digest

Here's a quick Snoopers Tip that makes it easy to keep up with the daily doings - or undoings - of both the House and the Senate. We've not talked about the Congressional Record yet in our Snoopers Tips, but we've all heard of the Record or used it from time to time. The Government Printing Office (GPO) describes it:

"The Congressional Record is the official record of the proceedings and debates of the United States Congress. It is published daily when Congress is in session. . . At the back of each daily issue is the 'Daily Digest,' which summarizes the day's floor and committee activities."

This quick Snoopers Tip relates to the Daily Digest summary, online daily with a delay of one legislative day. For instance, today (2-11-09), the Tuesday, February 10th Daily Digest is online (sample page pictured at left). It briefly describes the House and Senate bills ("measures") considered, committee meetings, and other information like bills introduced, executive branch communications to Congress, and other items included in Tuesday's Congressional business. The entries in the Daily Digest are quite short, and often are only references to the pages of the Congressional Record where the full text appears. So, you're thinking, “I'm going to have to run all over the net to find the Congressional Record pages I'm interest in! Dammit, Mike,” you're thinking, “you are a useless bag of wind!” In most cases, yes, I might agree, but on this point I'm pretty solid.

Here's the really useful part: The Daily Digest online LINKS DIRECTLY via hyperlinks to the ACTUAL Congressional Record pages referenced in the Daily Digest! And, yes, that does deserve an exclamation point!

So, here's how to use a bookmark that you can look at each morning to see what's up in Congress:

(1) Here's the primary link for your Snoopers Tips bookmarks folder.

(2) That link will take you to the HTML version of the Digest for the previous day, Feb. 11. You can work directly from the HTML version, BUT I STRONGLY advise using the .pdf version.

(3) Here's how: On the HTML page you'll find a link : "GPO's PDF." Go ahead and click on that link. It'll take you to the digitized Congressional Record Daily Digest. Once there, first have a look around and you'll note that the Digest is about 5 pages long (usually) and includes House and Senate proceedings separately.

(4) Now, go ahead and pick some topic of interest, perhaps the bill about nanotechnology research that was approved on Feb. 11th in the House. You'll see that the text includes (in bold type) a reference to Congressional Record pages. It'll look something like "H1132-1135."

(5) Now the best part: Look at the bottom of the page and find the button "Go to Page" Simply enter the first page of the pages you want to review, in this case, about the nanotechnology proposal. SOME ADVICE: Right click on the "Go to Page" and open it in a new window or tab. That way you won't leave the Daily Digest main page over and over again and have to go back, go back, go back . . .

Going to the actual Congressional Record pages puts you right in the House and Senate chambers where you can read the actual debate. At first, the text “thickness” looks mind-numbing, but you can simply scan it for the main points, and after a short while you'll get accustomed to it. (Remember too, you can always enlarge the type with browser controls.)

(6) Finally - and we discussed this in another Snoopers Tip (#1) about the House Clerk - for House proceedings you can get an advance view of the next day's Daily Digest topics on the actual day of the House proceedings. In the evening, just go to the House Clerk's Office homepage and click on - in this example - the "11" (for Feb. 11th) on the calendar in the middle of the homepage. There you are, the House Clerk's official chronicle of the day's activities. The Senate doesn't have a comparable feature.

(7) One final tip: Here's where you can get and print (if you're wonky enough) the "Days in Session Calendars" for the House and Senate. That way you can plan your vacations around when the Congress will not be in session. You wouldn't want to be away for even a single day of the 111th Congress. Would you?

**** Note: There is no "read more" ****

GOP: Actively Courting a Depression.

I've often hinted, but seldom written of my belief that the GOP ideological strategy that remains within what's left of the Reagan GOP is now devoted to literally courting an economic depression. This is presently being demonstrated by the almost universal Republican obstruction of the fiscal stimulus plan (H.R. 1). In both Congressional bodies, for example, the GOP offered amendments that literally would have stripped the economic plan of any spending whatever and replaced direct spending with tax cuts and other tax-related provisions. Both measures garnered a vast majority of GOP votes, and no Democratic votes, not even Blue Dog fiscal conservatives. Their substitute, remember, would have provided the following amounts for


-- increased unemployment coverage . . . . . . . . . . . . . $0

-- aid to states . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . $0

-- infrastructure construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .$0

-- school maintenance and construction . . . . . . . . . . . . $0

-- flood and storm damage reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$0

and more and more zeroes for more and more vital programs. Additionally, via its complete reliance on tax cuts, the GOP alternative would cause a massive shortfall in tax revenues that would starve essential government services and responsibilities (like the Armed Forces, payments on the national debt, the NIH, CDC, etc.). In addition, since most Americans actually desire the services that government offers, constricted tax revenues would cause the near future federal deficit and national debt to take off like a wingnut from a gay pride march.

Admittedly, these amendments were offered with no chance of passage, but that they were offered at all speaks volumes about the mental status of much of the House and Senate Republican caucus. You can see which Republicans are completely unmoored from Spaceship Reality by perusing their votes here and here on the Senate and House all-tax-cut "stimulus" plans. As Lawrence Summers and President Obama and many others have observed in the last few days, the supply side economic theory (never accepted as anything more than what The-Other-President-Bush labeled "Voodoo economics") has been tried and found - about $3 trillion - wanting. The American people, it turns out, actually want a federal government, and, by the way, state and local governments as well. Grover Norquist's dream of shrinking the federal government to a size where it can be "drowned in a bath tub," is simply not the truest American impulse, although the image does provide a delightful view inside Mr. Norquist's compassionate conservative mind. Most Americans simply want government that works. Defining "works" is, of course, the great game of our times, and the business classes, represented by the remaining GOP, simply operates best, it believes, when it controls and provides nearly all services presently offered by governments. It especially prefers deciding which services will be provided to which constituencies at what cost.

Courting Depression. Simply put, I believe the remaining GOP - at least the portion that supported the tax-cuts-only amendments to H.R. 1 - does not wish to see the country recover from this Lesser Depression, at least not on Obama's fiscal stimulus "watch." The GOP courts, I believe, through cagey and disengenuous obstructionism, and the inevitable delay it entails, a massive depression, 1930's style. Their anti-tax and deregulation agenda have for many years been directed at this seminal moment. As Naomi Klein might say, they invite a crisis whereby they can then go to the country and proclaim that governmental intervention "doesn't work," and that the federal government has, therefore, ceased to justify its existence.

Then would quickly follow the application of GOP shock therapy, bluntly applied via putting in place a form of outright laissez faire economics never before attempted in the United States. Government services that once provided the essentials of a nation, gone. Taxes. Gone. Services for the poor. Gone. Unions. Gone. Reasonable wages. Gone. Unemployment insurance. Gone. Public health. Gone. Disability rights. Gone. Employee rights. Gone. Middle class. Gone. Social Security. Gone. Pension security. Gone. Medicare. Gone. Medicaid. Gone.

Hidden in Plain View. As I say, they've courted this for years, not, I hasten to add, through back room "conspiracies." There's nothing secretive about it. They've slyly hid it in the open. The underlying ethic they've supported since the New Deal and, eventually, via their standard bearer in Ronald Reagan, has been designed to whittle away at the care and feeding of government, and people, at all levels but the wealthiest, whom they've fed extravagantly. Each successive GOP administration or Congressional majority has sought to "govern" badly, either by undercutting executive agencies' budgets, agendas, or ethics; by staffing them with incompetents, political plants, or individuals downright inimical to the agencies' missions; or by privatizing them into nonexistence for their own profit alone.

On the tax side they've sought to reduce taxes at every turn in order to starve government functions, and to run government through deficit spending, thereby intentionally creating the resultant massive national debt, now held in great amounts by foreign governments. It should be no surprise that in the last 20 years the GOP "discovered" that "deficits don't matter." Ron Suskind reported, for example, that Dick Cheney, once a deficit hawk, told then Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill:

"Reagan proved deficits don't matter."

O'Neill shook his head, hardly believing that Cheney - whom he and Greenspan had known since Dick was a kid - would say such a thing.

O'Neill is described as leaving Cheney's office in a "mild state of shock." Well, he shouldn't have been. The ideological core that energized the long slog from Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush crafted the deficits, and increased the national debt. This was the blunt instrument that would cause, they hoped, the demise of government; and as those famous words from Casablanca, it was a long term project, "Maybe not today. Maybe not tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of your life." Yes, they often spoke with what appeared to be conviction about the evils of deficit spending, but did they follow through? Of course not. Deficits were demanded by an ideology set against government. Deficits were consciously matched with and supported the starvation and interference with agency work, and, of course, the mantra of deregulation. You think Michael Brown at FEMA was a mistake? With all their tools, the GOP went on to carve out a deficit creation record that would have left Reagan breathless, and, perhaps, shocked by their overreaching.

J'Accuse! Should they succeed in booby-trapping the fiscal stimulus plan and thereby plunge the nation into its Second Great Depression, the GOP will then turn on a dime, and slyly in full hoodwink turn to the American public and say, "See, government doesn't work! Its meddling caused the depression!" and other self-fulfilled prophecies pulled from their Voodoo Economics Textbook and ideology of greed and craven selfishness. "Self-fulfilled" because their policies of starving agency talent and budgets resulted directly in agencies that, indeed, do not work as well as they could. "Self-fulfilled" because it's been GOP policies of radical deregulation that fueled the collapse that they already try to blame on Democratic policies dating back to, of course, FDR.

This is their moment, and they believe the truly wealthy will ride out a depression quite well; indeed, they'll profit from it buying up distressed real estate, company stock, and low cost inflation adjusted bonds. The rest of the country, the 90% who will suffer, will thus be understandably primed for the GOP laissez faire message; no one, GOP ideologues think, will want to talk "socialism" anymore. It's the GOP plan. And Americans have been quite literally robbed of effective government for many years because of it. And now we're being driven to a massive depression if we do not stand up to them and say simply, loudly, and repeatedly,

"Enough. We're on to you!"

**** Note: There is no "read more" ****

Wily Senator DeMint (R-SC) Leads GOP Senate to the Cliff!

Road Runner, Wily Coyote, or Blue Dog? Yesterday, economist Paul Krugman put it well, "A not-so-funny thing happened on the way to economic recovery. Over the last two weeks, what should have been a deadly serious debate about how to save an economy in desperate straits turned, instead, into hackneyed political theater, with Republicans spouting all the old clichés about wasteful government spending and the wonders of tax cuts."

"Not so funny" is an understatement, of course. For more than a year now, we've been mired in a national recession that I've been calling the Lesser Depression, and the signs are that it is continually worsening. Recent reports on retail sales, inventories, credit availability, and yesterday's unemployment report underscore the need for quick economic stimulus. Federal Reserve ammunition - interest rates - has been depleted; the fed funds rate hovers near zero, so monetary policy is of little use now. We may already be in a liquidity trap, and the signs of wholesale deflation are rising with every day. Fiscal policy is one weapon that has some "legs" - and the Obama administration and Democrats have offered both tax cuts and fiscal measures. The bill being debated this evening is, apparently, 40% tax measures and 60% fiscal (spending) measures. But, Yogi Berra style, let's throw in an additional 60% for luck that it all actually "works" given my belief that once the fiscal stimulus bucks reach consumers we'll find ourselves enmeshed in the "paradox of thrift." That's a story for another blog, another day . . .

Once again, the Democratic party, at least in the Senate, appears to be split asunder by the Blue Dogs like Evan Bayh (D-IN) and Ben Nelson (D-NB). The majority-party-that-never-was is now fighting for the middle ground against tax cutting insanity rampant among Senate Republicans, and now, the Blue Dogs. Surely, the fiscal package ought to combine spending and tax measures, and President Obama initially obliged GOP requests for tax measures. Yet, as is always the case with the GOP as now constituted, once you give them that proverbial inch . . . watch out. And, also, as soon as the door is opened in that direction expect the Blue Dogs to push back against the party discipline that is so important in a Senate where 60 votes now seems essential for anything other than bills naming post offices or commemorating the famous. Both House and Senate Blue Dogs have now thrown down the gauntlet to President Obama, and the fiscal stimulus package is in jeopardy. Not jeopardy of passage, but jeopardy of weakness to the task. When we need a Superboy a-bornin' we're likely to get a Barney Fife. Krugman explains:

. . . most economic forecasts warn that in the absence of government action we’re headed for a deep, prolonged slump. Some private analysts predict double-digit unemployment. The Congressional Budget Office is slightly more sanguine, but its director, nonetheless, recently warned that “absent a change in fiscal policy ... the shortfall in the nation’s output relative to potential levels will be the largest — in duration and depth — since the Depression of the 1930s.”

The Blue Dogs are not simply a mild distraction in a huge Democratic majority either. The House counts 47 Blue dogs, and a handful of them already voted against H.R. 1, the stimulus package, joining the entire GOP caucus last week. Watching the mosh pit called the Senate this week, they now hint that they may become even more difficult. All this internecine Democratic warfare emboldens the GOP lunatic fringe, and they are a group that needs little emboldening. Already, this week they have introduced numerous amendments to H.R. 1, most of them designed to discard spending (i.e. fiscal stimulus) and add in their usual bromide: tax cuts and breaks that would continue to erode our tax base and further balloon the deficit, and do so permanently, systemically.

Of course, it's always been my contention that the ultimate goal of today's government hating GOP - the subconscious categorical imperative of their logic - is to ultimately starve the federal government so that it eventually withers away completely, except, perhaps, for a foreign policy arm, border guards, and a military (although they seem content to privatize even those functions). They must know, however, somewhere in their heads,

**** Read More by, Amazingly, Clicking on "Read More" below right. ****

**** Start reading more below this line ****

that tax cuts alone will not revive this economy. That's been tried by Dubya. What happened there? Our deficit grew nearly exponentially, we acquired debt that obliterated the Clinton surplus, and we had an eight year period of stagnation, or worse, for middle class wages. So that approach has been tried, and found lacking. But the GOP returns to just that no-regulation-whatever methodology. It's so divorced from reality that it almost seems like a plan, like they may actually know what they're doing. It almost seems sorta . . . wily.

For example, the other day, the irrepressible right wing tax hating Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) had the cahones to introduce an amendment to the Senate's wholesale amendment of H.R. 1, Senate Amendment 98. DeMint's amendment (S. AMDT. 168) sought to replace the entire fiscal stimulus bill with tax cuts alone, a fiscal-stimulumdectomy in medical terms. Mr. DeMint disguises it not a whit:

This is a complete substitute for the spending plan. We call it the American Option because it helps to develop a free market American economy by leaving money in the hands of people and businesses rather than taking it and then having the Government direct where the money goes. So it basically puts our faith in the American people, in our free market economic system, instead of political decisions here in Washington.

And DeMint's just getting warmed up. The Democratic bill, as he calls it, is a one-way ticket to - Heaven forfend! - Brussels, Belgium!

This bill is not a stimulus; it is a mugging. It is a fraud. Conservatives who fear proponents of this bill want to inch our economy closer to a European style of socialism are kidding themselves. The proponents of this bill want to strap a big rocket on the back of our economy and launch it all the way to Brussels. This massive spending bill is fatally flawed. It will not rescue our economy; it will strangle it.

Eventually, Democratoc Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) rose to speak against the DeMint amendment:

What is the effect of [removing all the fiscal stimulus from the bill]? There are several effects.

First, we are trying to begin to address our health care system, and the DeMint amendment strikes all the health information technology provisions in the bill. We are trying to get health information technology up and running. I think it is a bad idea to strike health information technology. We have to get that started if we are going to begin to lower health care costs in this country.

It strikes the Medicaid provisions through aid to the States. It does not take a rocket scientist to know what effect that would have on the States. The States are in a recession. I think it was the Government Accountability Office that estimated about $230 billion is being cut by States because they are in recession, and that basically comes out of Medicaid and other low-income programs. The DeMint amendment says, oh, sorry, States, you do not get any assistance, which means all of those people getting cut are not going to have health care.

It strikes the changes to TANF. That is the program we put in place years ago to reform the welfare program. It is a great program. It works very well. It gets people off of welfare in a very solid way.

It also strikes provisions that extend unemployment insurance to people who have lost their jobs. I cannot believe it would do something like that, but that is what the DeMint amendment does.

[Snip].

I also say, these are permanent tax cuts in the DeMint amendment. The 1-year deficit effects of this amendment are staggering. They are ugly, because basically this is a huge, big tax cut amendment is what it is.

Later on during the floor debate, Senator Baucus sums it up quite well:

I understand the next amendment is DeMint amendment No. 168, the tax cut substitute. This amendment is very simple. It strikes the entire bill. Then it replaces the entire bill with a $2.5 trillion increase in the national debt, according to the Joint Committee on Tax. With debt service and added tax provisions, it increases the national debt over 10 years by $3 trillion because it is a massive tax cut. Again, it replaces the underlying bill, which means no aid to States, no energy provisions, no infrastructure provisions, nothing that is in the bill, replaced by a tax cut which takes effect in 2011. Joint Tax scores this, adding interest on the debt, about a $3 trillion increase in the national debt over 3 years.

That pretty much nails it, and highlights the solution the GOP offers for every problem. As the saying goes, "if you only own a hammer, everything looks like a nail." Senator Baucus, is few words, provided the clear economic argument against DeMint, and implied the moral arguments as well, which always escape the mainstream GOP.

A Widening Gap. The DeMint amendment was defeated 36 (all GOP) to 62. But, think about it, and think about the divide between the parties this vote implies. Thirty-six Republicans thought this a spiffy idea! Thirty-six, and there's only 41 Republican Senators! So, despite the GOP yammering and whining about "bipartisanship," as Krugman wrote, "There isn’t much room for bipartisanship when 87.8% of the other party is totally irresponsible." And at least the Senate Democrats proved that this was too heady stuff for even the Blue Dogs. WOOF!


The GOP As The Third Rail. Naomi Klein hit upon the mainstream GOP strategy in her discovery of shock doctrine capitalism. In a nutshell, when a catastrophe occurs (as in Hurricane Katrina or the present economic hurricane), shock doctrine capitalists seize upon the moment when most everyone is in a state of shock to push forward their most radical laissez faire corporate-centric, tax averse, selfish, privatizing ideas. And that's what's happening here. The GOP is, I think, actively pushing this stimulus package toward the cliff. They are actively and, I believe, almost consciously courting disaster so as to cause the failure not merely of the Obama administration, but of the national economy as well. Why? So they can then, in a sense, ride to the rescue, Reagan style, and say "See, government spending doesn't work. Government doesn't work. Only unfettered capitalism works. Let's give it a try again!"

Far from being humbled by the last election, they are bolder than ever. They are natural fighters, I'll certainly cede them that. The attainment of wealth in an unregulated manner is their highest principle, and it's obviously worth every ounce of their effort to achieve. This Lesser Depression is their moment. Don't believe for a second that they mourn it. They will use it to, as tax hater Grover Norquist famously said cut government "down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub." They seek the Greater Depression - they think, in their wily ways - to literally set them free.

Snoopers Tip 2: Congressional Hearings Where They Live

This post, the second Snoopers Tip, will help you find Congressional committee hearings quickly and, most importantly, authoritatively from the House and Senate committee net sites themselves. Often you will discover a lot of interest there, and can then supplement the media accounts by accessing the full context of a witness's statements, etc. As today’s Snoopers Tip example, I'm going to use yesterday's (2-4-09) hearing of the House Financial Services Committee, Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises. Congressional committees, of course, have many subcommittees, and the Capital Markets Subcommittee is one of six of the Financial Services Committee, chaired by the irrepressible Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA). Yesterday's hearing has a couple of advantages: (1) it's on a topic that is constantly in the news lately, the Deca-Billion dollar Ponzi scheme of Bernard Madoff, and (2) the hearing itself was utterly bombastic. Fireworks flew, the main witness was out of a 1930's detective movie, the hapless witnesses from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) were everything you'd want in stuffed suits, and you get to see a Congressman go absolutely berserk. It's a hoot. Period. Paragraph.

Media reports are flying and YouTube even has portions of Congressman Gary Ackerman's (D-NY) magnificent rant. But, our Snoopers Tips look for more than just movie clips and journalists' opinions of events. So we need to go to what we’ll always call the "primary sources." It's particularly important if you're writing a term paper, a blog entry, trying to size up a reporter's opinion, or just want to "fact check" Bill O'Reilly's latest rave-out.

Fortunately, Congressional hearings of both chambers are rather easily found, and pretty well organized. Each committee has its own net site, and provides links to all its activities, including hearings, of course, but also links to committee markups of bills, committee reports, and other official publications. Let's now go to the House Financial Services Committee site. Once there, have a look around at the various features and links. You'll find what you need to learn about what the committee is all about by visiting the "Who We Are" tab. There, you'll learn the jurisdiction of the Financial Services Committee, as a whole. “Jurisdiction” drives the initial decision about which committee will get to consider a newly introduced bill. Once at the committee, another decision is then made regarding a subcommittee assignment. For the jurisdictions of the Financial Services subcommittees, go here and note the text regarding the Capital Markets Subcommittee. That's where we'll find the Madoff hearing and the fireworks display! (Note that a newly introduced bill may be "referred" to more than one committee, and sometimes committees fight for jurisdiction over certain legislation. For more on the process of committee assignment see this Library of Congress information.)

**** Begin reading more below this line ****

Now that you've had a little house tour of the House Financial Services Committee site, perhaps you've already found the link to the Feb. 4th Madoff hearing? If not, here's how. Just go to the committee homepage again and click on the tab "Hearings & Legislation." There, you'll see a bunch of hyperlinks, all of them worth exploring, but first, let's stay on the Madman Madoff’s trail. Click on "Hearings of the 111th Congress (2009-2010)." That will take you to a listing of the hearings that have been held by the full committee and the subcommittees thus far in the 111th Congress. Now, we're closing in on the Madoff gang . . .

Click on "2/4/2009 Assessing the Madoff Ponzi Scheme and Regulatory Failures," and there we are:

Assessing the Madoff Ponzi Scheme and Regulatory Failures Wednesday, February 4, 2009, 9:30 a.m., 2128 Rayburn House Office Building

And it's here where the real snooper gets some kicks! Look at what we have here!

(1) A link to the webcast of the entire hearing. The absolute "star" witness is an incredibly intense and downright memorable independent financial fraud investigator, Harry Markopolos, who told the subcommittee chairman, Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-PA), that he thinks Mike Chicklis would be a good pick to play him in the movie that is sure to follow.

-- Mr. Markopolos has been investigating Madoff since 1999, and had alerted the SEC a multitude of times about his Ponzi scheme. His testimony begins at the 12:30 mark and ends about two hours later at 2:30:00.

-- The SEC panel then arrives, at about 2:40:00, sort of like those poor French folks who arrived on carts at the guillotines in 1789 . . . Then, like the French nobility, the read their final statements, er, I mean, their prepared statements.

-- Then, from about 3:10:00 to 3:25:00 the committee goes out on recess to the playground

-- At the 3:25:00 mark the questioning begins. The SEC folks sit and blather and stonewall and stonewall and blather and sit. They finally manage to bring down the thunder and the rain in the tiny personage of Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY), at the 4:00:00 mark. Give a listen! It’s going to make you actually like a Congressman!

Now, I know that no one has the time to listen to 5 hours of a committee hearing, nor are most of us unhinged enough to want to do so. But these Snoopers Tips are about knowing how to go further when needed . . . that if you HAD TO, you COULD monitor these hearings very closely. If there were a topic you were very interested in, or needed to do advanced research about, you could do so without intermediaries like CNN, Chris Matthews, or Rush Limbaugh. THAT'S what Snoopers Tips are for: doing our own government snooping/research from primary, official sources.

(2) After having a look at the webcast, go back to the main Madoff hearing page. Now notice the text "Witness List & Prepared Testimony." Have a look at the list of witnesses and if you click on the hyperlinks you'll open up .pdf's of each witnesses' prepared statement. It's a cornucopia for snoopers because these contain their official statements to the committee, and by extension, to Congress. For snoopers who need - or want - to go beyond the news reports, this is the gold mine. This is where you can pick out the things you feel are important. This is where the rubber of original research meets the road of . . . well, I've shot THAT metaphor, but I think you know what I mean. (Yes, I AM a wonk.)

So, remember that each House and Senate Committee's net site is pretty much set up like the House Financial Services Committee's. Webcasts and good links to quickly updated information. And here's two links you'll want in your "Government Snooping" bookmarks folder:

(1) All House committee net sites, and

(2) all Senate committee net sites.

So go ahead and have a look around. You'll be amazed at what has already happened in just the first month of the 111th Congress. And then have a look at the schedules of your favorite committees; you can put hearings of interest on your Google or MSN calendars. Here's one last link to further your knowledge of committee workings.

Hope this was interesting and helpful and even, thanks to Mr. Ackerman, some fun! I'll have Snoopers Tip 3 soon, probably this weekend. As always, if you have a question you'd like taken up, just drop me a line or post a comment.

New Snoopers Topic Tomorrow: Madoff and the Disappearing $$$$$

I'll offer the second Snoopers Tip tomorrow about Congressional committee hearings and how to find them quickly, in text and on video, at the committee sites, etc. etc. You can often find witnesses complete written testimony and other submissions there as well. Good snooping info.

I'll be concentrating on Wednesday's House Financial Services Committee's hearings about Bernie Madoff and "Where the Hell Did the Money Go?" We'll find the wild and woolly questioning of Securities and Exchange Commission suits by Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY). Talk about a "grilling"! He grilled, fried, barbecued, boiled, and torched 'em. WOW! Wait till you see it. Here's a preview of Ackerman's Emmy worthy performance, courtesy of TPM, and it's a very tame Gary Ackerman in this look-see. Wait till you see some more tomorrow!

So, see ya' here Thursday. I'll have the posting here Thursday, around 6:00 p.m. EST.

**** There is no "read more" for this posting. ****

ONE MORE TRY: Congress Should Give Back Its 2009 Pay Raise!

Lately, every time we turn around or switch channels or Internet tubes we're hearing from Congresspeople of all stripes, persuasions, and shoe sizes that the spending in the fiscal stimulus proposal needs cutting, slashing, and burning. "This is about spending money that we don't have for things we don't need," Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), said Thursday. He's joined by many Republican Senators, and more importantly, by Senate Democrats. Senator Ben Nelson (D-NB), a so-called Blue Dog fiscal conservative, is allied with Republican Susan Collins (R-ME), and they propose removing, among other items, $75 Million for smoking-cessation funding, and $400 Million for testing and prevention of sexually transmitted diseases.

Putting aside the broader question about the benefits that these programs would provide, one can make a principled argument on purely fiscal grounds that a fiscal "stimulus" plan ought to actually "stimulate" job creation, and quickly. Smoking cessation and HIV testing do meet that test, at least partially, although it's true, not in a way that impacts massive numbers of jobs. Yet, the positive public health benefits of these examples of where some want spending cuts is beyond argument. The price is nearly $500 Million, and that is not insignificant. Are these programs the kinds of programs that can be "put off" for a while until our economic house is back in some semblance of order? The Senate minority of Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats that will eventually control the shape of the bill says "Yes." So, we put off vital health programs.

Congressional Re-Payment . . . Priceless. Now I want to return yet again to something else that

(1) is a spending cut that

(2) can be "put off" until better times, and

(3) can be put off with the massive approval of voters, and

(4) will not cause a single affected person much, if any, hardship, and

(5) would be a forthright gesture by a body that is not held in very high esteem.

What might this be? It's the 2009 Congressional pay raise that went into effect automatically at the beginning of January 2009, bringing each Congressperson's and Senator's salaries to nearly $175,000. Disgorging this, or rescinding it, would cost each of them $4,700.

Until they do this, how much credibility do they have in any debate about cutting spending on programs like HIV testing? How can they stand up straight and ask others to sacrifice? President Obama has already at least partially led the way by freezing White House upper echelon salaries (above $100,000).

I've written a few times on this topic, but here is where I provide the whole story, a long term solution, and how to contact your elected "employees."

The total savings realized by this pay freeze is small, I agree, approximately $2,500,000. But its symbolism . . . priceless.

**** Note: There is no "read more" for this posting.

To see my previous posting on this issue go here. ****

New Snoopers Tips Series

New Regular Feature

On Monday, Feb. 2nd, I started a new twice weekly feature here on "They Will Say ANYTHING!" I'm calling it Snoopers Tips because it's here that you'll learn how to snoop on our government online, legally, of course. We know they snoop on us, so we need to be well-armed to keep up! With Snoopers Tips I'll show you where to find government information in all three branches: Executive, Legislative, and Judicial. Over time, you'll have a set of bookmarks and blogs that will help you find what you need quickly and efficiently, sometimes accessing important aspects of big issues or Congressional votes that are not covered by the media. So, see the "inaugural" posting of Monday, Feb. 2nd. It'll help you keep up with the House of Representatives in an authoritative and quickly updated way. If you have any suggestions for future topics, just drop me a line at my e-mail address or leave a comment!

So go ahead, subscribe in a reader, and learn how to snoop on them for a change!

Daschle Dasch-ed on IRS and Lobbying Rocks

It's too bad, he was a good man for the job, but today Tom Daschle withdrew from consideration as the next HHS Secretary. CNN reported that Mr. Daschle's pragmatic reasoning: "But if 30 years of exposure to the challenges inherent in our system has taught me anything, it has taught me that this work will require a leader who can operate with the full faith of Congress and the American people, and without distraction," he said.

"Right now, I am not that leader, and will not be a distraction. The focus of Congress should be on the urgent business of moving the president's economic agenda forward, including affordable health care for every American." Later, on Anderson Cooper's CNN show, the President explained his disappointment, "Ultimately, I campaigned on changing Washington and bottom-up politics," Obama said. "And I don't want to send a message to the American people that there are two sets of standards -- one for powerful people and one for ordinary folks who are working every day and paying their taxes." He took the blame as well, "I think I screwed up. And, I take responsibility for it and we're going to make sure we fix it so it doesn't happen again."

From Critical to Resting Comfortably to D.E.A.D. After Daschle's collegial meeting yesterday with the Senate Finance Committee, I thought he would survive, but there really is nothing to add to his own words, or to the President's. Daschle was becoming a major distraction, and, given the President's ambitions there, HHS needs - as I wrote last Friday - a "squeaky clean" HHS Secretary, particularly in light of other nominees, like Timothy Geithner, who ran into difficulties. Texas Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) said today that Daschle was “[Treasury Secretary Timothy] Geithner on steroids,” and Senator Jim DeMint, (R-SC), observed that President Obama was “losing credibility” the more he backed Daschle. Wingnut criticism? Yes. But accurate? Yes.'

It's interesting, though. I'm pretty certain it'll be possible to find a highly qualified replacement who is free of tax issues. Yet, I wonder how many people are there who are eminently qualified for the top health care policy position who do not have ongoing

**** Begin reading again below this line ****

personal and business relationships within the health care industry. Daschle's ties were many, indeed, but they appear (right now, anyway) to have been unsullied. But the criticism of his relationships with health care stakeholders was also rising and, in the end, Daschle did the right thing.

Bloomberg.com reported tonight that names "being mentioned by lawmakers and activists to lead the U.S. Health and Human Services Department include Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius; U.S. Representative Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut; Mark McClellan, a doctor and economist who served in two previous administrations; and former Democratic Party chief Howard Dean." None, except Dean, would appear to have Daschle's political clout.

Wingnuts, Shut Up! I will not, however, listen to wingnuts swoon, complain, and wag their fingers. They're now saying in sonorous voices, "See, campaigning is easy; governing is difficult." The party that wrecked our country through a policy of nongovernance wherever they could get away with it is in no position to wag a single digit. The party that aided and abetted the very worst and most dangerous corruption cannot be heard on this one. As you hear them wax prosaic on Daschle, Geithner, and others, don't ever forget that theirs was the party that sought to deconstruct government, to not use government effectively, and, in fact,to actively misuse it.

Remember, if Obama were Dubya, he'd now be calling the Arabian International Horse Association for a replacement HHS Secretarial nominee.