advertisement
Thursday, November 12, 2009
advertisement
The first hours of the new Congress are receiving very positive media coverage. In particular, Nancy Pelosi's ascension to the speakership is being greeted with marked enthusiasm, with reports universally emphasizing the "historic" nature of the California Democrat's election. As McClatchy notes, Pelosi herself referred to the "historic moment for the Congress and for the women of this country" and "a moment for which we have waited more than 200 years." Another AP dispatch reports she also "marveled aloud at her long journey 'from the kitchen to the Congress.'"
The Washington Post, in a story titled "Women Bask in New Speaker's Shining Moment," says this morning that when Pelosi "made American history yesterday and was formally elected speaker, the raucous cheers that rang through the House chamber came from young girls in Mary Janes, working women in business suits, elderly ladies carrying canes and more than a few men." In a glowing profile, ABC World News noted the "symbolic" picture of "the new Speaker...on the floor...holding her 6-year-old grandson," and "all the while, giving directions on how events were to proceed. It seemed the ultimate in multitasking -- taking care of the children and the country." The CBS Evening News said it was "a big day for women, and not just Nancy Pelosi," and later added, "We can't let this historic day pass without mentioning Susan B. Anthony, who fought so hard for the right of women to vote but didn't live to see us get it."
Even Republicans, says the New York Times, "grudgingly acknowledged the unprecedented nature of the day on which a woman ascended to power on Capitol Hill by rising as one to applaud her." And USA Today notes "the 33 new or re-elected senators who took their oaths included seven women, bringing the total number of women in Congress' upper chamber to a record 16. There are a record 74 women in the House, including three non-voting delegates."
The CBS Evening News led its broadcast saying, "Americans voted for a change in the last election and today we got it. ... A CBS News poll out tonight finds 68% of Americans are optimistic about this new Congress. That includes 84% of the Democrats we polled but less than half of the Republicans." The New York Times noted the atmosphere of "bipartisanship," and says that "maybe this time really will be different. Like 63-degree weather in January (and cherry blossoms out of season), Washington seemed to have flipped on its head, power-wise, karma-wise, at least for a few hours."
In the midst of the "historic" House session, the Senate transfer of power is receiving much less attention. The AP reports that "across the Capitol, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky took over as leader of minority Republicans, and said it was time to put an end to 'a culture of partisanship over principle.'" Majority Leader Harry Reid "said he was eager for cooperation, and he arranged for a rare closed-door meeting of all senators before the Senate convened to help set a more cordial tone." In his "Washington Sketch" column for the Washington Post, Dana Milbank discusses Reid and Pelosi's differing styles.
Republicans appear to be trying to make the best of the situation. The Washington Post says "GOP leaders signaled that they won't quietly fade into the background, and they pledged to promote innovative policies and stay true to conservative ideals." However, "they say they won't resort to guerrilla-style tactics or harsh rhetoric." The Los Angeles Times says that Republican "bows to bipartisanship are signs that the swearing in of the new Congress is not just a fresh start for Democrats; it is the end of an era" for President Bush and the GOP.
"Historic Day" Ends In Fundraiser The more things change, they more they remain the same. The Washington Post reports that "despite the promised 'new direction for America,' getting the money out of politics and all of that, some facts of Washington life appear immutable and eternal." The Democrats ended their "history-making day" with Pelosi "presiding over a glitzy fundraiser open to anyone with $1,000 for a ticket. ... Organizers expected 1,000 to 1,500 guests."
Some press reports this morning point to potential pitfalls for Democrats as they endeavor to enact their "100-Hour" agenda. The AP reports that upon her election as speaker, Pelosi "immediately set the rank-and-file to work passing tougher ethics rules." The Chicago Tribune says the House measure "bans lobbyists from giving gifts, meals and tickets to members and their staffs. The rules would also prohibit lobbyists from paying for a lawmaker's travel or providing flights on corporate jets. The measure passed 235-195, largely along partisan lines." But the New York Times notes the Senate ethics reform bill is much more limited in scope, a point also explored by the Financial Times, which could lead to friction between the two chambers. Moreover, says the Washington Post, even in the House, "Democrats are already having trouble reconciling their promises even for the initial hundred-hour blitz. Senior House Democratic aides said a promise to cut student-loan interest rates in half will have to be phased in over five years to comply with a pledge to offset any additional deficit spending with equal spending cuts or tax hikes." The Wall Street Journal runs a similar story, focusing on the student loan item.
The New York Times says there are "signs of division among Democrats over how hard to push to undo the fruits of years of Republican rule. Many Democrats say those years moved the nation too far right, but others argue that the big tax cuts and regulatory relaxations are part of the permanent legislative framework that should be accepted." A second New York Times story analyzes that "division," and recounts that "on a meeting with the Congressional Black Caucus earlier in the day, Mrs. Pelosi made her own allusions to the competing tugs on Democrats, noting the party was rooted in its traditions but not hostage to the past."
Also weighing in on the Democratic agenda, The New York Times editorializes, "As the minimum wage moves to the top of the new Congress's agenda, some politicians -- mainly President Bush and Senate Republicans -- seem incapable of viewing the issue as anything other than a pretext for more tax cuts. ... It's that sort of idiocy the new Congress was elected to stop."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
With Democrats now in charge of Congress, they're widely expected to make a major push against President Bush's Iraq policies. The Los Angeles Times reports that the President "confronts a wary and distrustful new Congress eager for solutions but unconvinced the administration can chart a successful exit from the war." Congressional Democrats "are reluctant to assume responsibility for the war, leaving unclear Congress' willingness to block any troop escalation or to compel Bush to change strategy." While Bush's expected call for a troop "surge" has "been endorsed by a few lawmakers" such as Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.), "such a proposal is certain to be fiercely opposed by most Democrats."
In fact, E.J. Dionne says in his Washington Post column that Democrats "are quietly but urgently seeking ways of pressuring the president to change course, including the possibility of having Congress reconsider its original authorization of force, passed in October 2002." Underscoring Dionne's point, the New York Times reports that Speaker Pelosi "delivered the obligatory promise of partnership with Republicans. But she immediately added a blunt warning to Mr. Bush on the war in Iraq. 'The American people rejected an open-ended obligation to a war without end,' she said, bringing Democrats to their feet." The Atlanta Journal-Constitution says Pelosi's comments foreshadowed "a possible clash with the Bush administration." Stories in the Wall Street Journal and Washington Times, meanwhile, note Democrats are also under strong pressure from anti-war activists to begin drawing down troop levels.
On ABC World News last night, three newly-elected Democrats, Reps. Heath Shuler, Nancy Boyda, and Patrick Murphy, expressed skepticism about boosting troop levels in Iraq, but suggested they "are inclined to go along with" with a surge. But not even Republicans appear convinced that that's the right course. The Hartford Courant reports that GOP Rep. Christopher Shays said "it would be a 'huge mistake' to send more American troops to Iraq if that country's government 'doesn't do the heavy lifting it has to do.'" And on MSNBC's Hardball, host Chris Matthews asked Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, "Is there a chance you'll say no to the surge?" Lott replied, "There is."
Even conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer, a strong defender of the war, writes in the Washington Post this morning, "We should not be surging American troops in defense" of Iraq's "governing coalition -- Maliki's Dawa, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim's Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq and Sadr's Mahdi Army," which "seems intent on crushing the Sunnis at all costs. Maliki should be made to know that if he insists on having this sectarian war, he can well have it without us."
Bush Plan Calls For More Iraq Aid, Troops Bush next week will announce a new strategy for Iraq that the Wall Street Journal reports will "include a big boost in spending to fund reconstruction, economic growth and job creation, as part of a broader effort to help embattled Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki." Bush will "detail his request for billions of dollars in new aid for Iraq next week in an eagerly awaited speech on his strategy to contain sectarian violence there and clear the way for an eventual US military withdrawal." Bush "will also call for the deployment of as many as 20,000 additional American combat troops to Iraq as part of a controversial 'surge' designed to stabilize Baghdad and other violent regions of the country." The Washington Post says "deep divisions remain between the White House on one side and the Joint Chiefs and congressional leaders on the other about whether a surge of up to 20,000 troops will turn around the deteriorating situation."
Meanwhile, the Washington Times notes Bush "spoke with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki for nearly two hours yesterday," saying he had been gauging al-Maliki's will to protect the Iraqi people, and that "he was 'in the process of making up my final decision as to what to recommend' on a way forward in Iraq."
Biden: White House Knows War Is Lost The Washington Post reports that Democratic Sen. Joe Biden "said yesterday that he believes top officials in the Bush administration have privately concluded they have lost Iraq and are simply trying to postpone disaster so the next president will 'be the guy landing helicopters inside the Green Zone, taking people off the roof,' in a chaotic withdrawal reminiscent of Vietnam." Said Biden, "I have reached the tentative conclusion that a significant portion of this administration, maybe even including the vice president, believes Iraq is lost."
In coming days, Bush is expected to announce several changes in top military and diplomatic posts, in what media reports portray as part of a house cleaning tied to his new strategy in Iraq. USA Today /AP says Bush is "shaking up the team responsible for carrying out his military and diplomatic strategies in Iraq." McClatchy says the "overhaul" will "bring new faces" as "the president is putting the finishing touches on a new strategy for Iraq." The Washington Post reports the personnel changes are being made even though "significant policy details" are "left to be worked out this weekend." The Post also says the President will likely reveal his plan during an address Wednesday. The New York Times, New York Times, Los Angeles Times and Washington Times ponder the effects of Bush's changes in analysis pieces this morning.
Military Changes On the military front, USA Today reports Bush will replace Gen. John Abizaid, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East, and Gen. George Casey, the chief general in Iraq, "in the coming weeks." Bush reportedly plans to replace Abizaid "with Adm. William Fallon, the top US commander in the Pacific, and Casey's replacement will be Army Lt. Gen. David Petraeus, who headed the effort to train Iraqi security forces." On its front page, the New York Times reports, "Senior administration officials said that the choice of General Petraeus was part of a broader effort to change almost all of the top American officials in Iraq as Mr. Bush changes his strategy there." The Los Angeles Times runs a similar report.
Diplomatic Changes Meanwhile, on the diplomatic front, ABC World News reported the President "will nominate the US Ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalizad, to be Ambassador to the United Nations. Brian Crocker, the US Ambassador to Pakistan, will be nominated to take his place in Baghdad. And the National Intelligence Director, John Negroponte, is going to become the number two at the State Department, playing a major role in shaping policy in Iraq. While a retired Vice Admiral, Mike McConnell, is the choice to become the new National Intelligence Director." The Financial Times reports Negroponte's "abrupt shift...to number two at the State Department reflects continued troubles in the intelligence community and a further concentration of power around Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice."
In a story that reverberated through the media and among privacy advocates yesterday, the New York Daily News reported yesterday that President Bush "has quietly claimed sweeping new powers to open Americans' mail without a judge's warrant." Bush "asserted his new authority when he signed a postal reform bill into law on Dec. 20" by issuing "a 'signing statement' that declared his right to open people's mail under emergency conditions. That claim is contrary to existing law and contradicted the bill he had just signed, say experts who have reviewed it." The signing came "during the winter congressional recess and a year after his secret domestic electronic eavesdropping program was first revealed. It caught Capitol Hill by surprise."
The White House yesterday responded to the stir created by the Daily News piece. The New York Times reports White House Press Secretary Tony Snow said "Bush had not claimed any 'sweeping new powers' through the statement, as The Daily News article asserted, and the Postal Service issued a statement Thursday echoing that assessment." USA Today reports Snow argued that "the United States needs to have the power to inspect mail in emergencies." Despite White House assurances, the Washington Post notes "some civil liberties and national-security law experts said the statement's language is unduly vague and appears to go beyond long-recognized limits on the ability of the government to open letters and other U.S. mail without approval from a judge."
The AP reports Harriet Miers, "President Bush's failed Supreme Court nominee and longtime adviser, on Thursday submitted her resignation as White House counsel." White House press secretary Tony Snow "said the president reluctantly accepted her resignation, which takes effect Jan. 31." The Washington Post, under the headline "Miers Steps Down As White House Gears Up for Battle," says Bush is remaking "his legal team to prepare for what aides expect to be a sustained struggle with a new Democratic Congress eager to investigate various aspects of his administration." Miers "led an office that will oversee legal clashes that could erupt if Democrats aggressively use their new subpoena power. Bush advisers inside and outside the White House concluded that she is not equipped for such a battle and that the president needs someone who can strongly defend his prerogatives." The New York Times also reports the story.
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Top
The State of Columbia, South Carolina, reports that Sen. John McCain (R) "has locked up nearly every major Republican donor" in South Carolina to head up his 2008 finance committee, "including some of the top names of President Bush's 2000 campaign." McCain's South Carolina team "includes Bob Royall, Bush's finance chairman from his 2000 Palmetto State campaign, as well as top Bush fundraisers Florence surgeon Eddie Floyd, Midlands venture capitalist Larry Wilson and Bill Stern, chairman of the State Ports Authority and finance chairman of Gov. Mark Sanford's recent re-election campaign." Analyzing McCain's success, the State writes, "The decision by such high-level Republican donors is significant because it continues the trend of McCain picking up the endorsement of many of Bush's top backers from 2000."
The Wall Street Journal reports in its "Washington Wire" column that former Sen. John Edwards "reaches for feminists' backing while" Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama "ponder options." Abortion-rights activist Kate Michelman, the former head of the National Abortion Rights Action League, is "expected to endorse the former North Carolina senator, who seeks fast new year's start."
Meanwhile, the AP reports that Edwards will spend most of the first quarter of this year looking to bolster a "barren" president campaign fundraising account. Edwards has raised about $2.6 million since his 2004 VP run, but spent the vast majority of it touring the nation backing Democratic candidates.
The Chicago Sun-Times reports that Chicago Mayor Richard Daley (D) said yesterday he was unconcerned about the fact that Illinois Sen. Barack Obama "has openly admitted that he smoked marijuana and dabbled in cocaine while in high school." Daley said, "It should not be an issue at all, whatsoever."
The AP reports that Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd (D) said yesterday that he still needs a week or two to decide on a 2008 presidential bid. Dodd said, "I'm not going to nail down a date for you today, but sometime in the next couple of weeks. ... This is a pretty serious step and you want to make sure you make the right one."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Top
Jay Leno: "Nancy Pelosi said today, 'We waited 200 years for this.' Two hundred years. How many face-lifts has this woman had?"
Jay Leno: "You know, President Bush is expected to announce that he is now sending more troops to Iraq, despite the fact that his generals, the military analysts, members of Congress and most of the American people are against the idea. The reason he's doing this? To give Iraq a government that responds to the will of the people."
Jay Leno: "Hey, did you hear about this? The Iraqi government has ordered an investigation into the abusive behavior toward Saddam Hussein at his execution. The crowd was apparently taunting Hussein. You know, some people just don't know how to behave at a hanging. 'Hey, we're trying to hang a guy here!'"
Conan O'Brien: "Earlier today, Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia was sworn in for another term in Congress at the age of 90. Yeah. Yeah, Byrd said he's excited to be reelected. He's looking forward to working with President Coolidge."
Conan O'Brien: "Little controversy -- President Bush is claiming that a new postal law gives him the authority to read anyone's letters without a warrant. Yeah. If you're upset about the law, you can let Bush know by writing to your sister."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Top
Click image for larger view.
Smart analysis, insightful reporting, in-depth perspective—in a new, digital format.
Log in | Buy Now | See sample
View sample page 2View sample page 3View sample page 4View sample page 5advertisement
Get your POLITICALBULLETIN
Click image for larger view.
Smart analysis, insightful reporting, in-depth perspective—in a new, digital format.
Log in | Buy Now | See sample
View sample page 2View sample page 3View sample page 4View sample page 5Embed exclusive U.S. News headlines, rankings, columns, and blog postings to your Web site, blog, or social network.
advertisement
Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our Terms and Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
