Obama Pal Sees 'Collectivism'

From Peggy Noonan in the Wall Street Journal:
From Bloomberg News this week: "The U.S. government and the Federal Reserve have spent or lent or committed $12.8 trillion" in new pledges. This they note is almost the value of everything the United States produced last year. The price tag comes to $42,105 for every man, woman and child in the U.S.
I happened to be rereading the economics section of Mr. Obama's second book, "The Audacity of Hope," when I read the Bloomberg story. Mr. Obama scores President Bush for contributing to a national debt that amounted to a $30,000 bill for each American. Those were the days!
The tagging was done, definitively, by an increasingly impressive (because unusually serious and sincere) member of the U.S. Senate, who happens also to be Mr. Obama's friend. Tom Coburn, an Oklahoma Republican, has been close with the Illinois Democrat since their Senate orientation in 2004; he's the man the president hugged after his big joint sessions speech last month. Thursday, in a column on RealClearPolitics.com, Mr. Coburn wrote, "I believe President Obama has proposed the most significant shift toward collectivism and away from capitalism in the history of our republic. I believe his budget aspires to not merely promote economic recovery but to lay the groundwork for sweeping expansions of government authority in areas like health care, energy and even daily commerce. If handled poorly, I'm concerned this budget could turn our government into the world's largest health care provider, mortgage bank or car dealership, among other things."
To be defined in this way is not just a negative for Mr. Obama in terms of its criticism, it amounts to being robbed, by a friend, of the vagueness that was part of his power. Mr. Coburn was all the more deadly for being fair-minded: he was tough on both parties as operating in a crisis from "scripts," with Democrats saying everything is Bush's fault and Republicans decrying high spending and taxing while failing to abjure earmarks and admit what must be cut.

Should Alaska Senator Resign?

From Erika Bolstad in the Anchorage Daily News:
The head of the Alaska Republican Party today called on Sen. Mark Begich to step down from the U.S. Senate, saying that the state's voters would have re-elected former Sen. Ted Stevens had they known the U.S Department of Justice would abandon its prosecution of him.
The party chairman, Randy Ruedrich, said that the only reason Begich won his race was because "a few thousand Alaskans thought that Senator Stevens was guilty of seven felonies."
He added that he thought Begich should step down "so Alaskans may have the chance to vote for a senator without the improper influence of the corrupt Department of Justice."
Gov. Sarah Palin concurs with Ruedrich and believes a special election is appropriate, said a spokeswoman for Palin's political action committee, Meg Stapleton. "I absolutely agree," Palin said in a statement.

Sen. Stevens Charges Dropped

From Nina Totenberg at NPR:
The Justice Department on Wednesday asked a federal judge to drop all charges against former Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska.
A jury convicted Stevens last fall of seven counts of lying on his Senate disclosure form in order to conceal $250,000 in gifts from an oil industry executive and other friends. Stevens was the longest-serving Republican in the Senate. However, he lost his bid for an eighth full term in office just days after he was convicted. Since then, charges of prosecutorial misconduct have delayed his sentencing and prompted defense motions for a new trial.
In a move first reported by NPR, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said he has decided to drop the case against Stevens rather than continue to defend the conviction in the face of persistent problems stemming from the actions of prosecutors.
"After careful review, I have concluded that certain information should have been provided to the defense for use at trial," Holder said in a statement Wednesday. "In light of this conclusion, and in consideration of the totality of the circumstances of this particular case, I have determined that it is in the interest of justice to dismiss the indictment and not proceed with a new trial." . . . Stevens said, "I always knew that there would be a day when the cloud that surrounded me would be removed. That day has finally come. It is unfortunate that an election was affected by proceedings now recognized as unfair. It was my great honor to serve the State of Alaska in the United States Senate for 40 years." . . .
"The Department of Justice must always ensure that any case in which it is involved is handled fairly and consistent with its commitment to justice," Holder said in his statement.

Coleman To Fight On

From Manu Rahu at Politico:
After seven weeks of reviewing a hand recount, millions spent on legal fees and a tough legal ruling Tuesday afternoon, Norm Coleman still looks like the loser in the Minnesota Senate race.
But even as Democrat Al Franken’s campaign celebrated a three-judge panel’s decision to put at most 400 ballots back in play, the Coleman camp is still promising to take its case to the Minnesota Supreme Court. And it’s not ruling out an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court or filing a new lawsuit in federal district court.
Ben Ginsberg, a central player for George W. Bush during the 2000 Florida recount and Coleman’s lawyer, said, “If the court does not reverse its decision, it will give us no choice but to appeal that order to the Minnesota Supreme Court.” And Ginsberg said it was “an open legal question” on whether the candidate leading after the Minnesota Supreme Court rules should be certified the winner and thus be seated in the Senate. In its ruling Tuesday, the three-judge panel ordered absentee ballots to be turned over to the Minnesota secretary of state’s office by April 6. The ballots would then be counted in open court by April 7.
Once the ballots are counted on April 7, the court will very likely issue a final opinion, which can be appealed to the state Supreme Court within 10 days.
That means Minnesota will most likely be without a second senator for at least the rest of April, a boon to the GOP, which is trying to prevent Democrats from getting their 59th seat in a chamber where 60 is king.

Dodd Put Squeeze On AIG

From Jennifer Haberkorn at the Washington Times:

As Democrats prepared to take control of Congress after the 2006 elections, a top boss at the insurance giant American International Group Inc. told colleagues that Sen. Christopher J. Dodd was seeking re-election donations and he implored company executives and their spouses to give.
Getty Images Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, has lost some political standing heading into re-election because of his ties to American International Group Inc.
The message in the Nov. 17, 2006, e-mail from Joseph Cassano, AIG Financial Products chief executive, was unmistakable: Mr. Dodd was "next in line" to be chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, which oversees the insurance industry, and he would "have the opportunity to set the committee's agenda on issues critical to the financial services industry.
"Given his seniority in the Senate, he will also play a key role in the Democratic Majority's leadership," Mr. Cassano wrote in the message, obtained by The Washington Times.
Mr. Dodd's campaign quickly hit pay dirt, collecting more than $160,000 from employees and their spouses at the AIG Financial Products division (AIG-FP) in Wilton, Conn., in the days before he took over as the committee chairman in January 2007. Months later, the senator transferred the donations to jump-start his 2008 presidential bid, which later failed.
Now, two years later, Mr. Dodd has emerged as a central figure in the government's decision to let executives at the now-failing AIG collect more than $218 million in bonuses, according to the Connecticut attorney general - even as the company was receiving billions of dollars in assistance from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). He acknowledged that he slipped a provision into legislation in February that authorized the bonuses, but said the Treasury Department asked him to do it.
The decision has generated national outrage and put the Obama administration into the position of trying to collect the bonuses after they were distributed. It also endangers Mr. Dodd's re-election chances in 2010 as his popularity tumbles in his home state.
Despite all the claims that Washington has changed, the tale of Mr. Dodd's lucrative political ties to AIG is a fresh reminder that special interests continue to use donations and fundraising to sow good will with powerful lawmakers like Mr. Dodd.

McConnell Blasts Big Gov't.

From Walter Alarkon at The Hill:
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said he fears that President Obama's policies will lead to an "explosion of government" that the country didn't expect when they voted for him last fall.
"I mean they were angry with President Bush. They were not happy with the economy," McConnell said. "All of that we understand. Whether they intended to see America kind of turned into a western European country as a result of an explosion of spending and debt and regulation is another matter."
McConnell and other Republicans have repeatedly tried to portray Obama as a figure radically transforming the government. On Sunday, he also blasted the Democrats' budgets, saying that they'll lead to higher taxes.
Much of the criticism has centered on bailouts the government has provided to banks and other financial institutions, insurer AIG and two of the big three automakers. Much of the funds for these bailout came from the $700 billion package approved by the last Congress and signed into law by President Bush. Obama supported that package.
McConnell also criticized Democrats for suggesting new energy taxes could pay for healthcare legislation. That could be included in budget blueprints the House and Senate will take up this week.McConnell said he fears that the country won't be able to afford what Democrats want to do. He said lawmakers should focus on fixing the country's financial and housing systems."What we ought not to be doing is passing the budget that they propose we pass in the Senate and House next week that doubles the national debt the next five years and triples it in the next 10," he said. A massive tax increase, an energy tax of up to $3,100 per person. An effort we believe the nationalized health care, that has nothing to do with the economic dilemma which we confront at the moment."
McConnell said that he didn't think any Senate Republicans would vote for the Democrats' budget proposal. He suggested it's more likely to see Democrats vote against the budget plan.
"I think they have serious concerns on their side about this budget which is completely disconnected to and unrelated to the current economic crisis in which we're facing," McConnell said.

GOP Voters Rejecting Specter

From Thomas Fitzgerald at the Philadelphia Inquirer:
Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter trails a lesser-known challenger in the 2010 Republican primary, an indication of the political hit he has taken in his party's base for giving crucial support to the Democratic-drafted $787 billion economic stimulus, according to a new poll.
Former Rep. Pat Toomey, a conservative leader from the Lehigh Valley, leads Specter 41 to 27 percent in a hypothetical matchup in a Quinnipiac University survey released today.
Although Toomey came within 17,000 votes of beating Specter in the 2004 GOP primary, the poll found that 73 percent of Republican voters did not know enough about the likely challenger to form an opinion of him. Seventy-eight percent of all voters had not heard of Toomey.
"Pennsylvania Republicans are so unhappy with Sen. Specter's vote for President Barack Obama's stimulus package and so-called pork barrel spending that they are voting for a former congressman they hardly know," said Clay F. Richards, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. "Toomey came close last time and has strong conservative backing, but his challenge could be fractured if more Republicans crowd into the primary and split the anti-Specter vote."
Specter's support for the stimulus won 87 percent to 6 percent approval among Democrats; and 56 percent to 38 percent support among independents. Republican voters disapprove of that vote by a whopping 70 percent to 25 percent.
Overall, voters approve of the job Specter is doing 52 percent to 33 percent, boosted by strong support from Democrats and independents. That was nearly reversed among Republicans, however, with 36 percent approving Specter's performance and 52 percent disapproving.
Quinnipiac surveyed 1,056 Pennsylvania voters by telephone from March 19 through March 23. Results are subject to a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points; the survey includes 423 Republicans, with a margin of error of plus or minus 4.8 percentage points.

Biden Drops 'F' Bomb

Vice President Joe Biden dropped the 'F' bomb today and he hobnobbed with his old Senate colleagues drumming up support for Amtrak.
At one point Biden was too close to an open mike when he cracked "Gimme a f---ing break!" It is not known exactly what he was referring to at the time but Biden appeared to be upset about people who don't favor subsidies for Amtrak, the passenger rail service.
The Vice President, who is know for his windiness, inappropriate comments, crassness and even plagiarism views himself as a "regular Joe" and he often attempts to take on the cloak of what he thinks are "ordinary guys."
According to Real Clear Politics Biden was in his element as he extolled the virtues of Amtrak and the need to not only continue subsidizing the debt-ridden rail service but to throw even more money onto the rails. One of the projects in the stimulus plan is a $21 million renovation of that station, and another $105 million will be spent on renovating Amtrak facilities nationwide. Also included: $82 million to fix damaged rail cars, $63 million to upgrade the electricity pathways, and $10.5 million for a new station in Sanford, Fla. Rep. Corrine Brown (D-Fla) was among those on hand thanking the veep for his role in securing the funds.
Once again Biden boasted about riding Amtrak to and from Washington almost daily when he served as the Senator from Delaware. And Regular Joe joked to his former colleagues that now they have no choice but to listen to him when he speaks.
To hear the audio of Biden dropping the 'F' bomb, click here.

Obama Budget In Trouble

President Obama’s $410 billion omnibus spending bill has been approved. But his overall proposed budget could still be in trouble.
Here's the report from Walter Alarkon at The Hill:
Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said he has spoken to enough colleagues about several different provisions in the budget to make him think Congress won’t pass it.
Conrad urged White House budget director Peter Orszag not to “draw lines in the sand” with lawmakers, most notably on Obama’s plan for a cap-and-trade system to curb carbon emissions.
“Anybody who thinks it will be easy to get the votes on the budget in the conditions that we face is smoking something,” Conrad said. . . .
Conrad joined Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.), the top Republican on the Budget Committee, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) in criticizing the administration’s cap-and-trade proposal for not doing enough to counterbalance increases in energy costs that will be felt by consumers and companies, especially those in energy states such as North Dakota.
Conrad said that it would be a “distant hope” to expect the climate change plan to pass unless it includes help for industries that would be hit hard by limits on carbon emission production.
The North Dakota Democrat also knocked the Obama administration’s plan to cut subsidies for farmers with incomes of more than $500,000. He noted that Congress just rewrote its agricultural policies last year in a bill that received 81 votes in the Senate. The administration has said that it could save taxpayers nearly $10 billion over the next decade from stopping direct federal payments to wealthy farmers, but Conrad denied that the farm policies were not fiscally responsible.
“The Farm Bill was paid for. We made a lot of tough choices. We raised money. We made spending reductions,” Conrad said. “Those who suggest that not fiscally responsible — I don’t think they’re very aware of the history of how we got a Farm Bill passed.”
Conrad said that he hopes the administration understands that “accomplish[ing] big things takes compromise around here.”

Specter Support Dwindling

From Rasmussen and the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:
Senator Arlen Specter is one of only three Republicans to support the economic stimulus bill in Congress, and the latest Rasmussen Reports survey in Pennsylvania shows that his position is costing him support back home.
Just 31percent of Keystone State voters say are more likely to vote for Specter because of his position on the stimulus package while 40 percent are less likely to do so. A look inside the numbers shows the problem for Specter may be even more significant. Fifty-eight percent of Republican voters in the state are less likely to vote for Specter. Among voters not affiliated with either major party, just 27 percent are more likely to support the long-time incumbent while 48% are less likely to do so.
These numbers are not surprising given the partisan response to the stimulus bill itself. Nationwide, support for the stimulus legislation increased following President Obama’s nationally televised press conference earlier this week. Still, the legislation is perceived as being what Democrats want rather than a bipartisan product.
In Pennsylvania, 69 percent of Republicans oppose the package while 73 percent of Democrats favor it. Those not affiliated with either major party are evenly divided. That partisan divide places Specter in a difficult position. Even though Specter has aligned himself with the president and other Democrats on the stimulus, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has announced that the Pennsylvania Republican is one of their top targets for the 2010 election cycle.
Specter won re-election in 2004 by a 53 percent to 42 percent margin. However, Specter barely survived a conservative primary challenge from then-Congressman Pat Toomey. Even though he had the support of the state’s Republican establishment, Specter was able to defeat Toomey only by two points, 51 percent to 49 percent.
Overall, Pennsylvania voters support the stimulus measure by a 47 percent to 41 percent margin. Still, 52 percent say the legislation is at least somewhat likely to make things worse instead of better.

New Senator In Trouble

It seems the Chicago crowd just can't stay out of hot water.
Now Illinois' new U. S. Senator Roland Burris is in trouble.
Here's the story from Sean Lengell at The Washington Times:
Amid Republican calls for his resignation, Sen. Roland W. Burris of Illinois denied perjuring himself to a state House panel considering the impeachment of then-Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich, saying Sunday afternoon that he never misled anyone.
The freshman Democratic senator was peppered with questions in a frenzied and combative Chicago news conference about a quietly filed affidavit that appears to contradict his testimony in January about the Blagojevich associates with whom he had spoken about Barack Obama's Senate seat.
Mr. Burris admitted in the Feb. 4 affidavit to the Illinois state House, which was only made public Saturday, that Mr. Blagojevich's brother, Robert, asked him for campaign fund-raising help before the former governor appointed Mr. Burris to the Senate in December.
The disclosure reflects a major omission from Mr. Burris' testimony in January, when he was specifically asked whether he had ever spoken to Robert Blagojevich or several other associates of the now-deposed governor about the Senate seat. . . .
But the skepticism of Chicago journalists was manifest at Sunday's press conference, where Mr. Burris frequently got emotional and berated the press. The senator, his lawyer and the reporters also often talked over one another.
"If you all report this story correctly, there's no story," Mr. Burris said, also warning that "Republicans are gonna try to make political hay out of this."
He also accused reporters of "using hindsight and second-guessing" when asked why, if his initial testimony was accurate, he bothered to file the affidavit at all. . . .
Mr. Burris' explanation was also not good enough for Republicans, who called over the weekend for Mr. Burris to resign and for a criminal investigation into whether he committed perjury.
"I can't believe anything that comes out of Mr. Burris at this point," Mr. Durkin, the impeachment committee's ranking Republican, said at a separate news conference Sunday. "I think it would be in the best interest of the state if he resigned, because I don't think the state can stand this any more."