Monday
Feb012010
Straight From The Horse's Mouth…
The president traveled Friday to Baltimore, Md., to deliver a speech and answer questions at the GOP House issues conference. I was quite unsure that this was a good idea if the true interest of the president were to develop a bipartisan relationship. It would seem to me that the best way to make sure there was real discussion and dialogue would have been to engage the GOP in a closed-door session. Evidently, both the Republicans and President Obama wanted their discussion to be open to the American public.
Shining the camera lights on the president's speech and the questions he took gave a rare glimpse into a discussion that is really quite different than one at a standard press conference. Someone even suggested that the questions were so good and detailed that perhaps the press should yield their seats to the president's political opposition and let them ask questions at the daily briefings and press conferences.
The president not only came out swinging, but also showed that he has an in-depth knowledge of the concerns that Republicans have. He also proved that he has read their legislation. President Obama took the jobs program and the stimulus package head on and was able to quote a current CNN poll saying "Americans disapprove of stimulus but like every policy in it." President Obama then said, "If you broke it down into its component parts, 80 percent approved of the tax cuts, 80 percent approved of the infrastructure, 80 percent approved of the assistance to the unemployed." The president also did not let the Republicans paint him with the job loss. He knew the numbers and was able to articulate what happened right before he took office and in the two months after. He defended the stimulus plan by quoting statistics that exposed what numbers would have been like if there had not been a stimulus package.
Always the orator, Obama was also able to poke right back at the Republicans on issues such as what happened with infrastructure money that many of us know as "shovel-ready projects." He ribbed at the Republicans saying, "A lot of you have gone to appear at ribbon cuttings for the same projects you voted against." He did not take the bait when asked if he would consider supporting across-the-board tax relief as President Kennedy did. He offered to take a look at what the Republicans were proposing and said that what they may consider to be a across-the-board tax cuts could be greater tax cuts for people who are making $1 billion. He said he might not agree to a tax cut for Warren Buffett.
The White House press corps was admonished for bringing up the issue of not having coverage of the health-care bill on C-SPAN. The president took down and hit that out of the ballpark by saying that so many of the hearings on the health-care bill were broadcast. He also stated that, as president, he took responsibility for not having structured the discussion in a way that it took place in one setting where it could have been filmed. The performance of the president made me wish he would come out daily and answer questions. Perhaps the questions would be tougher, but the answers would come directly from the horse's mouth.
On the health-care issue, the president was well-versed. He had read H.R.3400 and said it was important to put any bill to the test. Lowering health-care premiums, tort reform and selling insurance across state lines had to really work, not just be boilerplate fixes. He also pointed out that purchasing insurance across state lines might result in cherry-picking, leading to the healthiest being able to purchase insurance and others somehow getting left out of the process.
For policy wonks and average citizens, we were treated to something that you don't see in a presidential press conference, a State of the Union speech or in the spin room afterwards, and you certainly don't see in the daily press briefings at the White House or in the Congress. We ought to ask for more of these, just like the British do during prime minister's questions. That's the time when people making the laws get to ask direct questions of the government. We saw how it worked Friday, and hopefully we'll be fortunate to view much more of this. If at least two of our three branches of government have a lively and honest discussion, then just maybe our great democracy will become richer in the process.
Shining the camera lights on the president's speech and the questions he took gave a rare glimpse into a discussion that is really quite different than one at a standard press conference. Someone even suggested that the questions were so good and detailed that perhaps the press should yield their seats to the president's political opposition and let them ask questions at the daily briefings and press conferences.
The president not only came out swinging, but also showed that he has an in-depth knowledge of the concerns that Republicans have. He also proved that he has read their legislation. President Obama took the jobs program and the stimulus package head on and was able to quote a current CNN poll saying "Americans disapprove of stimulus but like every policy in it." President Obama then said, "If you broke it down into its component parts, 80 percent approved of the tax cuts, 80 percent approved of the infrastructure, 80 percent approved of the assistance to the unemployed." The president also did not let the Republicans paint him with the job loss. He knew the numbers and was able to articulate what happened right before he took office and in the two months after. He defended the stimulus plan by quoting statistics that exposed what numbers would have been like if there had not been a stimulus package.
Always the orator, Obama was also able to poke right back at the Republicans on issues such as what happened with infrastructure money that many of us know as "shovel-ready projects." He ribbed at the Republicans saying, "A lot of you have gone to appear at ribbon cuttings for the same projects you voted against." He did not take the bait when asked if he would consider supporting across-the-board tax relief as President Kennedy did. He offered to take a look at what the Republicans were proposing and said that what they may consider to be a across-the-board tax cuts could be greater tax cuts for people who are making $1 billion. He said he might not agree to a tax cut for Warren Buffett.
The White House press corps was admonished for bringing up the issue of not having coverage of the health-care bill on C-SPAN. The president took down and hit that out of the ballpark by saying that so many of the hearings on the health-care bill were broadcast. He also stated that, as president, he took responsibility for not having structured the discussion in a way that it took place in one setting where it could have been filmed. The performance of the president made me wish he would come out daily and answer questions. Perhaps the questions would be tougher, but the answers would come directly from the horse's mouth.
On the health-care issue, the president was well-versed. He had read H.R.3400 and said it was important to put any bill to the test. Lowering health-care premiums, tort reform and selling insurance across state lines had to really work, not just be boilerplate fixes. He also pointed out that purchasing insurance across state lines might result in cherry-picking, leading to the healthiest being able to purchase insurance and others somehow getting left out of the process.
For policy wonks and average citizens, we were treated to something that you don't see in a presidential press conference, a State of the Union speech or in the spin room afterwards, and you certainly don't see in the daily press briefings at the White House or in the Congress. We ought to ask for more of these, just like the British do during prime minister's questions. That's the time when people making the laws get to ask direct questions of the government. We saw how it worked Friday, and hopefully we'll be fortunate to view much more of this. If at least two of our three branches of government have a lively and honest discussion, then just maybe our great democracy will become richer in the process.
tagged 
Ellen Ratner, obama, world net daily in Opinion
Ellen Ratner, obama, world net daily in Opinion
An Unsustainable American Lifestyle
Bhutan was a closed community, and until fairly recently the only way to see it was by invitation. It is slowly joining the modern world. In 2000, its government began allowing television to be broadcast in the country. The fourth king of Bhutan abdicated in favor of his son so that the country could transition from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy. Bhutan is a member of the United Nations, but, in an attempt to keep from angering China, it has chosen not to have ambassadorial exchange with any of the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council.
My junior high school geography teacher was way ahead of the author of "Guns, Germs and Steel," as he was a firm believer that geography was destiny. He was certainly right when it comes to India and Bhutan. As our guide led us to a beautiful view of exquisite mountains, he pointed out that the tallest of the mountains was what separated Bhutan from Tibet. Tibet was taken over by China in the late 1940s and the Dalai Lama escaped from Tibet in 1959. One glimpse of the beautiful mountains and it is clear that Bhutan could be overrun in a nanosecond.
Bhutan rests between China and India. It is to India's advantage to protect Bhutan, which is why the Indian army patrols the border between China and Bhutan. America does a ton of business with China, but between its human rights record, its Taiwan issue and its refusal to let the Tibetan people rule their own country, the Chinese are not exactly the most popular people in Bhutan and India.
Most of the folks I spoke with in both countries have the same views as people in the United States. They watch American television on their satellite dishes, and they see the same news we see at the same time we see it. When news broke last week of the shootings at Fort Hood, the people in Bhutan and India got the news as people in the U.S. did. Even the Indian language stations were showing video instantaneously. Same view, same pictures, but very different views on what needs to happen for the world to improve.
Russia's leader, Vladimir Putin, does not concern them. India trades with Russia and has a good relationship with them. China, on the other hand, is a different story. Most people who engaged in conversation with me had dire warnings for the United States, and they all said roughly the same thing:
1) Get your debt down. All were aware that the sizable debt that the United States has taken on has compromised our policy objectives. It is hard to take on China on Tibet or human rights when America is owned by China to the tune of at least $1 trillion. The Federal Reserve chairman's advice for healing the U.S. economy is to make more consumers out of the Chinese. If that is the solution for solving our job crisis, then maybe I should teach economics. It is scary to me that this is what our leadership thinks will pull us out of the current mess. Moreover, it is not going to happen at a fast enough rate to change our balance of trade and reverse our economy.
2) Stop your consumption of oil. India gets hydropower from Bhutan and is looking to solar and other alternatives. Oil makes the U.S. dependent on Middle East countries, and the people I talked to view such dependency as fueling not just Americans' cars, but terrorism in their region of the world. One Indian businessman I spoke with said our reliance on foreign oil was the reason for us getting involved in "silly wars that kill American young people."
3) Conserve your resources. With the burgeoning world population needing food and water as well as energy, America is viewed as being wasteful. With manufacturing jobs leaving the United States for poorer countries, most people I talked with saw the U.S. as a nation of spendthrifts who will use up more than our fair share of the world's resources, in the process going bankrupt.
4) Don't rely on one country to do your manufacturing. China has the United States' head in a vise, but if American companies spread manufacturing to 20 or more countries around the globe, China would not have the power to control currency and the economic future of the United States.
The bottom line, as one businessman said to me, is America is expecting to live the lifestyle we have grown accustomed to by writing IOUs. But, he added, such a lifestyle will prove to be unsustainable.
I couldn't have said it better myself.