Reunion

August 1st, 2011 by John Feehery

As we were driving back from the airport, my 5-year old son Jack asked me, “Daddy, what’s the debt limit?”

We had just flown in from Chicago. I had dropped off my son at grandma’s house, and drove up to Milwaukee for my 25 year college reunion.

The debt limit wasn’t just on the mind of my 5-year old. It was also on the mind of many of my friends and some other folks who I didn’t even know.

In the hotel coffee shop Sunday morning, the topic of conversation between two 50-year reunion participants was whether they had a deal on the debt limit or not.

They weren’t asking me. They were talking (loudly) among themselves. Their mood was more than a bit grim and frustrated.

At the reunion, my old classmates mostly traded old war stories and tried to remember who did what crazy thing when. It is amazing we all survived our college years (well, most of us survived at least).

When I first arrived on campus close to 30 years ago, Ronald Reagan was in his first term and the economy wasn’t doing very well. Reagan had an abiding sense of optimism and a hatred of communism, neither of which played particularly well with many of my college professors.

The Limits of Libertarianism

July 29th, 2011 by John Feehery

I like to call myself a Libertarian, but I am really not.

I don’t really want government to disappear.  While I read The Fountainhead in college, and I admit I have found it to be influential in my life, I think Ayn Rand was a little kooky and her objectivism philosophy is unworkable in the real world.

My brother, the Tea Partier is a Libertarian.  He wants government to shrink dramatically.  He wants police forces to be shrunk, he wants teacher’s pensions cut, he wants most regulatory bodies eliminated.  He finds government to be oppressive and he wants it to be gone.

He also believes that for the last forty-five years, America has been living a lie.   He hates the military industrial complex, he hates the Federal Reserve, he wants to go back to a Gold Standard.   He thinks we should never
have gone into Iraq and believes that the Soviet Union would have fallen without the Reagan buildup, and he believes that the banking system in this country is essentially corrupt.

He also finds Michele Bachmann to be appealing and he appreciates what Joe Walsh is doing in stopping the debt limit extension.

The Limits of the Bully Pulpit

July 26th, 2011 by John Feehery

President Obama has not been shy lately in trying to use the power of the bully pulpit to get his way on Capitol Hill.

It is not clear that his bully pulpit approach is working.

I listened to the President’s address last night on the radio (yes, I went old school), and predictably, I found his comments to be unconvincing. He talked about his balanced approach (which, to be clear, is different than a balanced budget; which is a pipe dream in his vision of the future), he blamed Republicans for being stubborn, he talked about raising taxes on the wealthy (which nobody in Congress includes in their plan), and then he used the same rhetoric he has used time and again.

I doubt the speech worked well for the President. He has been pounding on these message points for weeks, and if anything, his poll numbers have grown worse. Both Gallup and Rasmussen have found that the President has hit historically high disapproval ratings.

CLASS Act

July 22nd, 2011 by John Feehery

In these days of intense partisanship and over-the-top rhetoric, it is somehow appropriate that the one thing that Congress would agree to repeal is the CLASS Act.

It goes without saying that our society has slipped more than a few notches when it comes to class. You go to a baseball game today, you have more of chance of seeing somebody’s buttocks hanging out of their pants then seeing somebody dressed up in a suit and a tie. When Babe Ruth was playing baseball, folks took care to look nice.

It used to be that the middle class wanted to look like it belonged to the upper class. These days, the upper class wants to disguise itself in ghetto garb.

It used to be that the airwaves were strictly regulated in what people could say. George Carlin made fun of the seven deadly words. Now, flatulence jokes are passé and our cable networks compete to shock parents and children alike.

So, for the Congress to repeal the Class Act seems entirely appropriate given the kind of society we live, although you could make the case that what America needs is more class and not less.

Bad Reason, Good Reason

July 21st, 2011 by John Feehery

Bad reason: Opposing the grand bargain because you think a grand bargain would help President Obama get re-elected.

Good reason: Opposing the grand bargain because you think raising taxes will hurt the economy.

Bad reason: You strongly support a tax increase because you want to stick it to Republicans.

Good reason: You want to get rid of tax breaks and loopholes because you think it will help create jobs and make the economy stronger.

Bad reason: Taking a pledge to not raise taxes because you want to get Grover Norquist off your back.

Good reason: Deciding to take only one pledge – the pledge to defend and protect the Constitution, because you think that a politician who can’t think for himself and use his best judgment shouldn’t be elected in the first place.

Bad reason: You want to cut spending because you want to stick it to poor people who should be working hard just like you do.

Good reason: You want to cut back on spending because you believe that in the long run, if we don’t scale back our government spending, our nation could face financial ruin.

Shared Sacrifice

July 11th, 2011 by John Feehery

In the context of the debt limit, Democrats have been pushing for tax increases because they want to punish the rich. They believe that because the so-called rich pay only 80 percent of the tax burden that they should be forced to pay more.

In their view, the only way to really inflict shared sacrifice is through the tax code.

The problem with that assumption is that it isn’t true. There are plenty of ways to include rich people in the shared sacrifice without raising taxes one dime.

And in fact, Republicans have already made proposals that would make the rich bear more of the burden.

By calling for the means testing of both Social Security and Medicare, Republicans have taken the lead in calling for shared sacrifice. Of course, when it comes to spending, there is more that could happen.

For example, rich people shouldn’t qualify for agriculture subsidies. They shouldn’t qualify for Pell Grants and they shouldn’t get preferential treatment for college admissions (that is aimed at rich minorities, of which there are more than a few).

Rich corporations shouldn’t get subsidies of any kind – not marketing subsidies, not tax subsidies, not pension subsidies.

DeMint The Moderate

July 8th, 2011 by John Feehery

Is Jim DeMint becoming a moderate?

I ask that question because his insistence that a balanced budget amendment be included in any extension of the debt limit is not really that conservative.

Indeed, if you look at it clearly, attaching a balanced budget amendment to the debt limit will not cut a dime of spending.

Here’s why: it is highly unlikely that the states will pass such an amendment, and if they do, it won’t be for at least five years.

Every state, other than Vermont, has to statutorily balance their budget every year. It is often said that if a state has to balance its budget then why shouldn’t the federal government balance its budget?

Well, the big reason that states are able to balance their budgets is because of money that comes in from the feds. Now, governors will say with that money comes too many unfunded mandates. That may be true, but money is money, and the states would rather get the money than not get the money.

If the Federal government is forced to balance its budget, the first place it will look is the money it sends to the states. Programs include Medicare, highway funding, education funding, community block grants, housing funding, homeland security funding, etc. etc. etc.

Reductio Ad Absurdem

July 7th, 2011 by John Feehery

Reduced to the absurd.

Ideologues on both sides of the philosophical divide fall dangerously into this trap.

Conservatives who believe that government does not need to exist are every bit as wrong as liberals who believe that the private market must be completely controlled by the government.

The truth is not somewhere in the middle. It is exactly in the middle.

Government exists because it must. As much as some might wish it away, the world requires that order be achieved by some governmental structure.

We are fortunate here in America because our founding fathers had the presence of mind to create a constitutional system whereby as much as possible, we govern ourselves through our participation in a representative democracy.

Without government, there would be chaos.

Governance has been an evolutionary process. We learned from the Greeks how to do it (Madison, Mason, Jefferson and Hamilton knew their Greek history well), but learned from the English as well, from people like John Locke and Thomas Hobbes.

None of the Founding Fathers thought that we could get away with no government. They just didn’t want oppressive, unfair, unjust and un-representative government.

So what do we need government for?

Taking Himself Out

June 30th, 2011 by John Feehery

The President took himself out of the negotiation game yesterday with his hissy fit of a press conference where he castigated the Congress for not getting its work done when it comes to the debt limit.

The final package will now be negotiated by Senator Reid and Speaker Boehner, with an assist by Mitch McConnell.  The President will sign whatever these guys come up with, and they will jam it down his throat.  You don’t embarrass the Senate right before a July 4th recess and expect to get away with it.

The President will not veto any agreement reached by the Congress.  He doesn’t have the balls.  Nor should he.  But he won’t be in the room when Reid and Boehner reach a deal.  He will be lucky to get a briefing before the press does.

Mr. Obama lamented the fact that he was busy dealing with Afghanistan, Osama Bin Laden and the Greek crisis while the Congress was following its disjointed schedule.  As if.  What exactly has Obama done to help Greeks?  I’m sorry, I thought it was the Navy Seals who killed Bin Laden.

Admittedly, the Congressional schedule is a pain in the ass, but that is the Congress’s problem, not a White House problem.

A Crack in the Windshield

June 29th, 2011 by John Feehery

About a year ago, as I was driving, a small rock that was kicked up by the truck I was following hit my windshield and put a little crack in it.

It wasn’t a big crack. Every morning when I pull out of my garage, I think to myself, “I should fix that crack.” But it just didn’t seem that urgent. The car is working fine, and while the crack has widened here and there, it still doesn’t seem to be that serious.

Every once in a while, I catch the Safe-Lite repair commercial. You know the company. It comes to your garage to fix the cracks in your windshield. Safe-life Repair, Safe-Lite Replace, the jingle goes.

It makes me feel a bit guilty, because I still haven’t gotten the thing repaired. I know that if I don’t take care of this problem soon, it will just get worse. I know that some early action will help make the car safer and will probably save me money in the future.

My inability to fix the crack in my windshield reminds me of the Senate’s inability to fix the Medicare program. Like me, the Senate is doing nothing to fix the problem, and the longer the Senate waits, the more expensive the fix gets.