Kucinich testifies at divisive hearing on Bush administration

Republicans told the House Judiciary Committee that political disagreements, no matter how large, are not grounds for impeachment proceedings at a hearing discussing appropriate Congressional responses to Bush abuses of power. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said the hearing served no purpose other than anger management, stating that no evidence exists which supports grounds for impeachment and that the hearing’s lack of bipartisanship affected Congress’s already low credibility.

Rep. Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) said the Bush White House is unprecedented in its distortion of executive privilege, noting Bush’s alleged falsification of pre-Iraq war intelligence and approval of certain interrogation techniques. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) stated that the committee was attempting to solve an institutional problem,acting in a deliberative manner, not an accusatory manner. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) earlier had called Bush “the worst President our country has ever seen.”

In his testimony before the committee, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) said pre-war justifications provided to Congress were untrue and that Congress had relied on the White House’s false statements while authorizing the Iraq war. Kucinich also said that Iraq posed no security threat to the United States and, since Iraq lacked a weapons program, Saddam Hussein was unable to harm the United States or arm terrorists. Congress’s decision now, Kucinich said, is whether it should defend the Constitution and prevent abuses of power in the Executive and Judiciary Branches.

Rep Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.) said the White House has been dominated by corruption and incompetence, stating that the Bush administration ignored numerous warnings prior to the Sept. 11 attacks. He said the former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s decision to scale back troop levels in Afghanistan aided Osama bin Laden’s escape into the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan. Hinchey suggested that it would have been more difficult to justify an attack against Iraq if bin Laden had been apprehended by the US military. Recognizing that impeachment had been referenced by many, Hinchey said the Bush administration, through the ways it violated the law, is “probably the most impeachable administration in the history of America.”

Gas rose $0.40 under Clinton, $2.60 under Bush

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D- MD) focused on the rising price of gas in his weekly sit-down with reporters. He showed a series of charts that indicated the rise in the price of gas over the last 16 years. Under the Clinton administration, Hoyer said, the price of gasoline went from $1.06 to $1.46 in the course of Clinton's eight years. A separate chart demonstrated that under the Bush administration gas has gone from $1.46 to $4.06, which is the current national average. This is the House Democrat response to the campaign against the "Pelosi Premium" pointing out the price rise under Bush instead of under Democratic majority in Congress. All of Hoyer's data came from the Energy Information Administration at the Department of Energy.

Hoyer admitted that across Congress all the energy plans being offered are mostly designed at long term relief. He said that Democrats have done their part to reduce prices by passing anti-gouging legislation and working toward regulation of speculators, but that there are very few things that Congress can do to reduce prices in the short term. In response to the Republican measures that call for more drilling and more refining capacity, Hoyer pointed out statistics that suggested that drilling in ANWR would only lead to a 1.8 cent drop in gas prices by 2030.

Hoyer also mentioned Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) introducing articles of impeachment against President George Bush, taking up a total of four and a half hours of floor time. Hoyer said that he expect this to be referred to committing with out a second read-through, effectively tabling the bill.

Chairman Ackerman and Chairman Delahunt Angry at the Administration's Lack of Cooperation

The Foreign Affairs Committee held a joint hearing today on discussing the U.S. commitments to Iraq. The subcommittees organizing the hearing were the Middle East and the South Asia, led by Chairman Gary L. Ackerman (D-NY), and International Organizations, Human Rights and Oversight, led by William D. Delahunt (D-MA).

The hearing was scheduled to have two different panels. First with the Honorable David Satterfield, senior advisor to the Secretary and Coordinator to Iraq, U.S. State Department, and the Honorable Mary Beth Long, assistant Secretary of Defense on International Security Affairs, U.S. Department of Defense. Professor Oona A. Hathaway from Yale Law School and senior fellow at the Center for American Progress Lawrence Korb were the witnesses of the second panel.

Senior adviser David Satterfield presented the “progress towards developing a basic framework for normalized relations with the Iraqi government, which will include what is known as a Status of Forces Agreement”. This agreement raised couple of concerns amongst the members of the committee. They were upset of the ongoing lack of consultation of the current administration with Congress. The issue of starting a war without the authorization of Congress was also brought up by Chairman Ackerman, leaving both representatives of the departments with no direct answers. The chairman also questioned the administration’s ability to understand and act upon the Constitution

Senate Budget Committee Critiques President's Budget Proposal

In a heated exchange, the Senate Budget Committee heard testimony from OMB director Jim Nussle regarding President Bush’s FY2009 Budget Proposal. Chariman Kent Conrad (D-ND) opened the hearing with a poster reading “the debt is the threat” and continued this theme, saying the “debt is going up like a scalded cat,” described the three D’s of President Bush’s legacy as “debt, deficit, and decline,” and called the budget “a debt bomb on the next president.” He made sure to emphasize the difference between the deficit, which is the year-to-year difference between spending and revenue, and the debt, which includes all money owed to Social Security and other lenders.

The consensus was apparent that this budget is unrealistic on a number of levels. A number of social programs would face spending cuts of up to 100%, the DOD would receive less than half of the $193 billion it spent this year in Iraq and Afghanistan.

While each side of the aisle presented different complaints, they were united in opposition to the projected economic outlook if this plan is put into action. The $9 trillion debt is expected to reach $10 trillion; if the stimulus package is enacted, the 2008 deficit is expected to reach $400 billion. Ranking member Judd Gregg (R-NH) criticized the Democrats regarding Pay-Go rules and SCHIP, but gave Nussle the same treatment, criticizing the long-run usefulness of this plan.

Chairman Conrad and Senator Bernard Sanders (I-VT) were some of the most vocal and aggressive when demanding justifications for unrealistically low war spending estimates ($70 billion for 2009) and severe cuts to social programs like LIHEAP which helps low-income families heat their homes. Nussle responded with a question, asking when Congress would pay the war bills for this year.

Medicare and Medicaid was also a topic of long discussion. Nussle claimed the budget aims to limit uncontrolled growth in spending in these areas. The Committee discussed the need for reform in these areas, rather than simple spending cuts.

Senator Lautenberg (D-NJ) focused on the cuts that Amtrak would receive under the President’s plan, remarking on traffic problems across the country.

Senator Menedez (D-NJ) seemed to sum it all up when he declared the proposal “dead on arrival.”