Tag: partisanship

Yellow Dog Republicans

Yellow Dog Republicans

Before I retired I lived in Georgia for 30 years. For part of that time Georgia was a solid democratic state. Of course, this was a long time ago. The state seemed to have an abundance of Yellow Dog Democrats. That is, Democrats who would vote for a yellow dog if nominated by the Democrats over any candidate nominated by the Republicans.

So solid was Democratic Georgia that Republicans quite often didn’t even put-up an opposition candidate for many offices. The real decision was reached in the Democratic primary.

Now it seems we have Yellow Dog Republicans as well. Continue reading “Yellow Dog Republicans”

Crazy, Useless, Shafted

Crazy, Useless, Shafted

I called this book review Crazy, Useless, Shafted. That seems to cover it in a few words. The full title is The Party Is Over: How Republicans Went Crazy, Democrats Became Useless, and the Middle Class Got Shafted but that seemed a bit long for a title.

The book is by Mike Lofgren who spent 28 years has a Republican Congressional staffer. His start was with John Kasich who in the 1980s was on the House Armed Services Committee. Mike switched from national security to the House Budget Committee when Representative Kasich became chairman. He retired from the Senate Budgetary Committee in 2011, frustrated by the ridiculous debt ceiling debate and the lunacy and terrorism of the Republican party.

Why I read this book

Continue reading “Crazy, Useless, Shafted”

Reasonable compromise on budget deal

Reasonable compromise on budget deal

I’ve been writing lately about an unjust increase in Medicare Part B premiums for a subset of those over 65.

I was glad to see that this was addressed in the 2 year budget deal recently worked out by Congress and the administration.

This is not what I considered the ideal solution but it is a reasonable compromise. Continue reading “Reasonable compromise on budget deal”

Cooperation in Congress

Cooperation in Congress

Cooperation in Congress, I hope. Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin was recently elected the Speaker of the House. I hope this brings in a new era of cooperation between the 2 parties and among various groups in the House of Representatives. And perhaps when the Senate sees it, they will be inspired to do likewise.

This is a hope. I am not placing any bets on it.

I hope for cooperation because among the things Rep. Ryan had to say on assuming office was this: Continue reading “Cooperation in Congress”

Fix Congress

Fix Congress

The full title is Restoring the Consent of the Governed: How Americans Can Hold Congress More Accountable for Serving the National Interest by Bill Bridgman. The title and subtitle are a mouthful but it does summarize the book nicely.

The book is neither long nor expensive. I think it is interesting, well done, and important. The problem it addresses is one I think most Americans can agree with. There is wide spread agreement that the U.S Congress is just not doing a very good job. Continue reading “Fix Congress”

Bipartisan cooperation lost

Bipartisan cooperation lost

Is President Obama already missing the Republican cooperation he enjoyed during the first 6 years of his presidency?

After the recent election, some thought bipartisan cooperation was possible. I’m not sure why. There has been little evidence of bipartisan cooperation in recent years on most issues.

The Republicans warned President Obama not to “poison the well” by using his executive authority on immigration. Yet he did. From listening to reaction, I guess the spirit of bipartisan cooperation was lost. I’m wondering if President Obama already missing the Republican cooperation he enjoyed during the first 6 years of his presidency?

Rejecting medicaid expansion and thinking it through

Rejecting medicaid expansion and thinking it through

Did they think it through? About half the states, mostly those with Republican governors and legislatures, rejected the medicaid expansion. They not only rejected a benefit for the low-income folks in their state but it seems they have also hurt many of the hospitals.

Now they might have to bail out these hospitals or watch them close. So the state’s choice is to let them close and hurt the people of the state or bail them out and pay twice. Why do I say pay twice? Continue reading “Rejecting medicaid expansion and thinking it through”

Partisan problem

Partisan problem

I think that that much of the problem in Washington is due to the excessive power we give to our 2 major political parties. This shutdown and the debt ceiling crisis are just examples of that.

Now there appears to be a compromise that may solve these problems but even if the immediate problems are solved (for now anyway), we still need to fix the partisan problem.

It is nice to know that George Washington thought political parties were a problem too.

Wilson by A. Scott Berg

Wilson by A. Scott Berg

Woodrow Wilson was a complicated man and he dealt with complicated issue so it seems fairly obvious that this biography must be complicated. In “Wilson”, A. Scott Berg tells this story well. There are some places where the complications and details slow down the reading but I think Berg gets about as close as you can get to a page-turner given the amount of material and complexity of material in some places.


He piqued my interest with an introduction about President Wilson’s journey to Europe to settle the terms of the peace after World War I. I was interested (otherwise I wouldn’t have even attempted the 800+ pages here) but this made me more interested.

Then Berg gives a more or less chronological account of his life giving you a better understanding of this man who would be President. I’ll not go into detail here but I will say Berg tells this well. You can probably find many short summaries of his life online.

Woodrow Wilson graduated from Princeton (Class of 1879) and would return there after practicing law, earning a Ph.D. from Johns Hopkins University and several faculty positions. He was a respected academic and wrote extensively on government and politics. In 1890 Wilson joined the Princeton faculty and in 1902 became president of Princeton.

In 1910 the political bosses in New Jersey thought he was an electable candidate for Governor and could be easily controlled. He was elected and they were very surprised.

Then with about a year of political experience, he was chosen as the Democratic candidate for President. The bulk of the book describes the next 8 years as president and then his final years. Wilson is often rated among our greatest presidents. Read this book and you’ll learn why.

I enjoyed the book. It is a commitment to read book of this length but it is certainly worth it.

So called leaders lead us into Shutdown

So called leaders lead us into Shutdown

The intransigence of the leaders of Congress brought us into a government shutdown and now prevents us from re-opening the government.

The House tries to open things piecemeal but that in unsuccessful. In most cases, the leader of the Senate won’t let his Senate vote on these proposals.

Even when there is some success, there are are unintentional omissions. Yes, pass a bill to pay the soldiers. Oops, they forgot to include death benefits. Pass another bill and hope Harry Reed will consider it and hope we don’t leave out anything that turns out to be important.

The government does lots of things and in most cases we don’t know what will be important in the near future. So we have essential personnel man agencies that lose much of their strength in a shutdown. And then watch the CDC have to make a skeleton staff a little less skeletal to deal with a disease outbreak.

Why not just open it all? Well, the leader of the House won’t let his members vote on that.

John Boehner, are you listening ?

Government Shutdown and congressional leadership

Government Shutdown and congressional leadership

As we go into the 8th date of Government shutdown 2013 and have an even more serious issue in the national debt ceiling to deal with in about a week, I thought I would start by quoting myself. Last week I wrote that I thought giving the major parties excessive power is one of the root causes of the current stand-off on funding the government in Shutdown is failure and a result of giving parties too much power.

The leader of the dominant party in each part of Congress sets the agenda in his part of Congress and the 2 parts of Congress are controlled by different political parties now. Therefore each part of Congress does not always get to vote on what the other part has passed. …

Should each part of Congress have a nonpartisan officer who sets the agenda, perhaps with a set of rules and oversight of some sort. Both the Senate and the House already have some nonpartisan officers but should we consider adding one who sets the agenda for votes? Or maybe we could keep the existing leadership structure but limit the discretion of the leader?

Another option is suggested by No Labels. In their plan to address this issue is that a bipartisan majority would be able to override the leadership refusal to bring a bill to the floor for a vote.

They have also other ideas to make Congress function better. Have a look and if you agree, please sign their petition and consider supporting the organization in some other way.

When politics worked

When politics worked

When this Retired Guy was a bit younger, politics used to work. It wasn’t that long ago. Politicians knew how to compromise and seemed to talk to each other rather than just at each other. They could disagree, yet still respect the other side.


There is a new book out which discusses those days. The book is called “Tip and the Gipper: When Politics Worked” and it is by Chris Matthews. I first became acquainted with this book via a column by Michael Smerconish in our Sunday newspaper.

For those too young to remember (after all this was about 30 years back), Tip was the Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill and the Gipper was President Ronald Reagan. They disagreed greatly but had great respect for each other and were friendly. Needless to say, today’s President and Speaker are not at all like that.

Tip and the Gipper seemed to work out their differences, were able to compromise, solved some pretty big problems, and did a good job runing the country. The current batch of politicians seem to have trouble doing that.

I haven’t read the book yet but plan to so this isn’t a review. Just commenting on how politics has changed in my lifetime

Shutdown is failure and a result of giving parties too much power

Shutdown is failure and a result of giving parties too much power

About a year ago, I wrote here about Political parties and government dysfunction.

I have been a believer that much of the problem in Washington Continue reading “Shutdown is failure and a result of giving parties too much power”

Fixing the ACA or Obamacare makes more sense than repeal

Fixing the ACA or Obamacare makes more sense than repeal

It seems that ever since the Affordable Care Act (aka ACA or Obamacare) was passed and then passed muster in court, nearly all Republicans have wanted it repealed. The latest efforts involve shutting down the government as we enter a new fiscal year and refusing to raise the debt ceiling so the government defaults on its debts.

Both efforts seem foolish and I have discussed them recently.

I live in Pennsylvania and get emails from Senator Toomey. He discussed his desire to compromise on the government shut-down stand-off by adding 3 amendments to the Senate bill. These amendments did not make it into the Senate bill. I do not think the debate on Obamacare should be part of the government shut-down or debt ceiling debates but these are good discussion points on the law.

The first would repeal the medical device tax that is costing Pennsylvania jobs; the second would provide relief from the infringement on religious liberty in Obamacare; the third would delay the individual mandate for one year.

I probably would back the repeal of the medical device tax. It seems to me the best way to do this would be a a separate bill but now seems a bit rushed. I don’t see much benefit to this tax since I would assume the tax would just be passed along as part of the cost of health care. So there is really no benefit since the users of heath care pay the tax and there well could be a job loss associated with this. But on the other hand with more people insured and using health care there may not be a job loss. I’d like to see more discussion on this point.

Regarding the second suggestion (infringement on religious liberty), I think this is inevitable as long as we insist on standards in health insurance. I think the employer mandate is problematic. The religious objection of an employer may or may not seem reasonable to others. One person may object to contraception and another may object to this or that aspect of health care. A public option would be much simpler here but I don’t think that is what the Senator had in mind.

As to the third point (a 1 year delay), there may be a problem. I assume the insurance companies took the widened risk-pool provided by the mandate into account when setting the rates for 2014. If this is not the case and we do not have additional delays such as a 1 year delay every year, it might be worth discussing this.

The ACA is a complex law with many parts. There are things I like and things I don’t. There seem to be things we could fix now and problems that would not be apparent until parts of the law are implemented. And we certainly could use a reasonable discussion of the pros and cons of parts of this law.

Rather than have a series of political stand-offs to attempt to repeal the law, maybe Congress could work to improve the law.