Health Care

The Mark-Up, 07-24-2009

Brian Beutler | July 24, 2009, 6:08PM

TPMDC's update on the biggest initiatives on Capitol Hill.

• Health Care: After a tumultuous day (and week) it seems as if the Energy and Commerce Committee will continue marking up health care legislation next week. Latest word is that chairman Henry Waxman says he expects to proceed Monday or Tuesday at the latest.
• Appropriations: The House passed appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Education, and Health and Human Services. It will lift the ban on federal funding of needle exchange programs.
• Defense Spending: By a vote of 87-7 the Senate passed the 2010 National Defense Authorization Act. Sens. Russel Feingold (D-WI) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) voted with five conservatives against passage.

Health Care

The Mark-Up, 07-23-2009

Brian Beutler | July 23, 2009, 6:00PM

TPMDC's update on the biggest initiatives on Capitol Hill.

• Health Care: Negotiations continue behind closed doors in both the House Energy and Commerce Committee and Senate Finance Committee--though the sense of urgency must be dissipating. Harry Reid announced today that there would not be a vote on legislation before the Senate adjourned and President Obama has come to terms with it. Republicans are already rejoicing. The House could still vote on its bill next week--but the Senate will have to come a long way before then. And given the pace in the upper chamber to this point...
• Gun Control: Yesterday, Democrats filibustered a Republican amendment to the 2010 Defense Authorization Act that would've allowed gun-owners with concealed weapons permits to bring carry their concealed weapons across state lines and into regions with prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons.
• Defense Spending: The day before yesterday, the Senate adopted, as an amendment to the same defense bill, a measure to strike $1.75 billion in procurement funding for the F-22--a major victory for defense spending reformers. Of course, if it had been filibustered, it would've failed.

Defense Spending

Lieberman: We Have A Responsibility To Our Troops...Unless My Amendment Gets Stripped

Brian Beutler | June 10, 2009, 9:02AM

I noted last night that Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) are threatening to grind Senate business to a halt--and even filibuster the war spending bill--if the amendment they authored (which would allow the White House to suppress detainee abuse photos) doesn't become law post haste.

Whatever you think about the photos, or the wars, or the emergency supplemental bills, though, you've got to marvel at Joe Lieberman circa 2007:

We in this chamber have a responsibility to make certain that-no matter what our disagreements and differences here in Washington-our men and women in uniform in Iraq and Afghanistan are not caught in the political crossfire.

Defense Spending

Fate Of War Funding Bill Still Up In The Air

Brian Beutler | June 9, 2009, 7:23PM

I noted earlier that an amendment authored by Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC)--which would allow the White House to withhold all photographs of detainee abuse--will not appear in the supplemental war funding bill, currently stuck as it awaits a conference between House and Senate negotiators.

But the funding legislation still has a long way to go--or will have to be changed again--before it achieves final passage. That has nothing to do with the war spending itself, which has overwhelming support. The problem for the White House and Democratic leaders is that progressive Democrats, Blue Dogs, and the entire House GOP each oppose different aspects of the bill--enough that there may not be enough votes for the supplemental itself to pass.

To understand everything, you need to go back to May 14, when an earlier version of this same spending bill passed the House by an overwhelming margin of 368-60. It had the support of almost all Republicans and all-but 51 Democrats--progressives, by and large, opposed to the nature of the funding process and the wars that process lengthens.

Then that bill went over to the Senate, where two controversial amendments were added, and the game changed dramatically.

Read more »

Defense Spending

Torture Photo Suppression Amendment Stripped From War Spending Bill

Brian Beutler | June 9, 2009, 9:30AM

Late last week, I noted that the supplemental war spending bill had hit a significant snag on its way to conference committee after the Senate tacked on two controversial amendments. One amendment--with a price tag of about $5 billion--would open up a $100+ billion line of credit for the International Monetary Fund. The other--an amendment to the Freedom of Information Act authored by Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham--would have allowed the White House to suppress any photo related to detainee abuse taken after September 11, 2001.

The first amendment caused House Republicans to revolt--first because they claimed, misleadingly, that the money might have found its way to the pockets of terrorists; then, when that was rational was laid bare, for other reasons, which I'll get into shortly.

That defection, though, put the entire bill in jeopardy.

Read more »

Health Care

The Mark-Up, 06-05-2009

Brian Beutler | June 5, 2009, 5:19PM

TPMDC's update on the biggest legislative initiatives on the Hill:

• Health Care: House progressives responded to their Blue Dog counterparts today, sending a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (pasted below the fold) stating their strong opposition to measures that will weaken health reform efforts, including a "trigger" that would delay, or possibly eliminate, the public health insurance option.
• War Spending: House Republicans oppose the supplemental war spending bill because, as written, it will increase the spending capacity of the International Monetary Fund. Some liberal Democrats oppose it, too, because it also contains a provision that would allow the Obama administration to suppress any "photograph taken between September 11, 2001 and January 22, 2009 relating to the treatment of individuals engaged, captured, or detained after September 11, 2001, by the Armed Forces of the United States in operations outside of the United States." Taken together, that means the bill might not pass--which leaves Democratic leaders in a bit of a pickle. Either they somehow nix the IMF funding provision, or they nix the FOIA photograph exception, or they nudge their progressive members into voting for it anyhow. Looks like they've picked the latter option.

Late update: Jeffrey Young of The Hill has obtained what appears to be a draft (or a draft of a draft) the HELP committee's as yet unreleased health reform legislation (PDF). If only it were written in parseable English.

Read more »

Defense Spending

Obama Army Secretary Nominee Tussled With Obama, Gates Over Pentagon Budget

Brian Beutler | June 2, 2009, 11:44AM

As Eric Kleefeld reported, President Obama will nominate Rep. John McHugh (R-NY)--ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee--to be the Secretary of the Army later today. If all goes as planned, though, McHugh will be working in a Pentagon he has recently, and dubiously, attacked.

In April, McHugh criticized the administration's Pentagon budget outline, which he inaccurately characterized as a proposed defense spending cut. He suggested, moreover, that Pentagon officials had complained to committee minority that the budget would slash defense spending by $8 billion. That claim couldn't be verified, but Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters, basically, that McHugh was fudging.

"Some of these things we have put in the base budget we elected to put into the base budget to send a signal to the troops that these things were going to be a permanent part of the budget, that we weren't going to be dependent on a supplemental," Gates said. "[W]hat you chose to put into the supplemental and so on, is probably how Mr. McHugh gets to his numbers."

Read more »

Guantanamo Bay

The Mark-Up, 05-20-2009

Brian Beutler | May 20, 2009, 4:40PM

TPMDC's daily update on the biggest legislative initiatives on the Hill:

• Guantanamo: The Senate stripped Guantanamo detention center closing funds from a war funding bill by an overwhelming vote of 90-6.
• Credit Card Reform: The House passed--and the President will soon sign--legislation cracking down on credit card companies. House leaders split the bill in two because of a measure sponsored by Tom Coburn (R-OK) allowing people to take guns into national parks. Both parts of the bill passed, but the move allowed liberal Democrats to go on record against the idea.
• EFCA: Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) tells potential EFCA opponents to get serious about compromise, or they'll have to go on record, one way or another, on the question of the original bill.
• Defense Spending: Defense Secretary Robert Gates isn't backtracking on his decision to cancel the (well over-budget) presidential helicopter program. But he does envision the possibility of a "escape helicopter," to make the President's job seem more awesome.

Defense Spending

Republicans Complain To Gates About Lack Of Transparency, Harbinger Of Budget Fight Ahead

Brian Beutler | May 15, 2009, 4:56PM

Several weeks ago, when Robert Gates released early details of the Pentagon budget, we noticed a peculiar, but, I suppose, predictable trend. With an assist from the media, conservatives and other stakeholders--seeking to attack the administration, and protect their parochial interests--began to portray the proposal as a soft-on-defense spending cut, when, in fact, the bottom line represented a modest defense spending increase.

You don't hear too much of that meme anymore. But you do hear quite a bit these days, from Congressional Republicans, and others, that the budget process has been maddeningly opaque--that, for instance officials have been barred via non-disclosure agreement from discussing budget details with anybody outside the Pentagon or relevant government agency while the document was being assembled. John T. Bennett of Defense News first reported the existence of the agreement in February, and he sends along a copy, which you can see for yourself here. The terms of the agreement were rescinded earlier this week.

Still, that didn't please members of Congress who will have ultimate say over the budget itself. At a House Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday, Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA) grilled Gates about the so-called "gag order," and what he described as the general lack of transparency in the budget process as a whole.

Read more »

Defense Spending

TPM Exclusive Interview With Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA)

Brian Beutler | April 15, 2009, 12:11PM

We've spent a lot of time reporting on the emerging defense budget debate, and the rhetoric around it for some time, but eventually that will all give way to Congressional wheeling and dealing, and leaders will emerge on all sides of the issue.

The House member who's most dedicated himself to advancing Defense Secretary Robert Gates' cause is Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA).

Sestak is a retired Rear Admiral, the highest ranking military officer ever to serve in Congress, and a member of the Armed Services Committee. I spoke with him yesterday in detail about how the fight is shaping up, and why he takes the position he does.

Read more »

Defense Spending

Socialists, Kristol Attack Obama Over Defense Budget -- Socialists Right On The Facts

Brian Beutler | April 14, 2009, 2:40PM

The pirate drama of the past several days didn't just trip up USA Today vis-à-vis the defense budget. It also snared Bill Kristol.

In an appearance on Bill Bennett's radio show yesterday, Kristol affirmed Bennett's portrayal of the administration's plans to reform (and enlarge) the defense budget as "budget cuts."

Read more »

Defense Spending

USA Today: Obama Thwarts Pirates While Trying To 'Trim The Pentagon Budget'

Brian Beutler | April 13, 2009, 6:27PM

We haven't had much to say about the now-resolved pirate hostage situation off the coast of Somalia. It's not really our bailiwick. But much of the rest of the media has been All Pirates All The Time for the last several days, and since the stand-off was resolved by the Navy at a time when the administration is trying to overhaul the U.S. military, the spending cut meme was destined to rear its ugly head:

At a time when the president is trying to trim the Pentagon budget, the political consequences for Obama could have been dire. Instead, he's presiding over a triumphant rescue.

Defense Spending

Republicans: Government (Defense) Spending Responsible For Thousands Of Jobs

Brian Beutler | April 13, 2009, 3:48PM

Last week, we reported that Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) had experienced an epiphany about the stimulative effects of government spending...when that spending is on weapons.

Over the weekend, Paul Krugman took a shot at Congressional Republicans who fit the Chambliss profile--i.e. the subset of Republicans who voted against the stimulus but are now coming forward to claim that a (fictional) reduction in defense spending will cost jobs.

Since only three of Capitol Hill's 219 Republicans--Sens. Arlen Specter (R-PA), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and Susan Collins (R-ME)--voted for the stimulus bill, it's possible that many scores of them will ultimately fall afoul of this contradiction.

Until then, though, we've poked around a bit, and come up with the names of a few Republicans that have already fallen in to The Chambliss Hypocrisy.

Read more »

Defense Spending

Levin: Gates' Proposal A Step In 'The Right Direction'

Brian Beutler | April 13, 2009, 11:51AM

Politicians in both parties might be reluctant to let Defense Secretary Robert Gates have his way with the Pentagon budget--and they, the rank and file, will ultimately have the final say when a real piece of legislation comes to a vote. But Gates and the administration do have some powerful allies on Capitol Hill, and their efforts will be crucial to the success or failure of the attempted overhaul.

We reported a week ago that one of the lone significant voices speaking out in support of the proposed reforms belongs to Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. But while McCain wasted no time getting in front of the issue, the committee's chairman, Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI), remained silent all week.

He broke that silence on Saturday.

Read more »

Stimulus

Krugman: Republican Hypocrisy On Spending Is 'Wonderful' To Watch

Brian Beutler | April 13, 2009, 9:43AM

One of the major themes of last week was the degree to which Republicans in Congress were deceptively referring to Defense Secretary Robert Gates' budget proposal as a weak-on-defense spending cut. The corollary to that claim--articulated by many Republicans, but also some Democrats--is that defense spending "cuts" will cost jobs. The problem is, though, that most of the people making that argument voted against the stimulus bill this past winter.

Last week we caught Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) in just such a contradiction. During the debate over the stimulus, Chambliss lashed out at the specter of government recession spending, calling it a "bloated government giveaway." But then, he called into the NPR program Talk of the Nation and said none of that matters as long as the spending is defense spending.

"[W]hen it comes to stimulating the economy," Chambliss said, there's no better way to do it than to spend it in the defense community."

On Sunday, Paul Krugman appeared on ABC's This Week, and picked up on the same thing, and called out Congressional Republicans for what one might call the "Chambliss hypocrisy". Here's Krugman:

Read more »

Defense Spending

Fox News Anchor: Government Slashing Defense Budget

Brian Beutler | April 10, 2009, 3:57PM

One of the strangest aspects of the misreported defense budget story is that one network seemed to us to be doing better than the rest. That network? Fox News!

Alas, earlier today we had to downgrade them. Because of this:

I'd like to take the opportunity to direct the anchor to this post.

Defense Spending

Not Everyone In The Media Missed The Defense Spending Story

Brian Beutler | April 10, 2009, 3:32PM

You may have noticed some variations on a theme here this week, and we hope you liked it, because we'll surely have more for you next week and the week after and so on all the way until the fight over defense budget has finally ended.

Along the way, we'd like to think that we're having something of an impact. Or, less self-congratulatorily, that not everyone in the media is misportraying the story or letting the misportrayers get a pass.

So, herewith, a montage of the reporters and anchors who got it right:

Read more »

Defense Spending

You Can Lead A Reporter to Water, But You Can't Make Him Call It A Spending Increase

Brian Beutler | April 9, 2009, 3:26PM

They just can't help themselves! In a live Q&A session today, a reader asked Washington Post Congressional reporter Paul Kane a question that's been on our minds for days now. "I keep hearing the term 'budget cuts,' but the defense budget isn't being cut at all," the reader writes. "Money is being redirected to other defense priorities, but the overall budget is increasing by 4%.... So why is it that certain pols are allowed to spout this inane lie with impunity."

Kane didn't respond to that question, but he did explain that Gates is trying to spend money more wisely...albeit amid a four percent budget cut that's not actually happening.

Read more »

Defense Spending

Experts Weigh In On Gates With Metaphors--A Step In The Right Direction? Or Bitter Wine.

Brian Beutler | April 9, 2009, 3:23PM

Here's what we know about the politics of the Pentagon budget proposal so far.

1. Very few politicians have spoken up in support of it.
2. Many of the people speaking out against it are portraying it inaccurately as a "soft-on-defense" spending cut.
3. This meme has found a fairly strong foothold in the media, which has
4. Given me quite a bit of work to do this week.

But what do experts (those people who make the defense budget and other Pentagon arcana their stock and trade) have to say?

Read more »

Defense Spending

Retired Admiral And Current House Dem Pushes Back On 'Cuts' Meme

Brian Beutler | April 9, 2009, 12:27PM

You probably haven't seen too many mainstream media reports of politicians arguing convincingly in favor of Gates' defense overhaul, but Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA) did just that on Morning Joe earlier today. Watch:

Read more »

Barack Obama

Price: Only Place President Willing To Cut Spending Is On Armed Forces

Brian Beutler | April 9, 2009, 11:09AM

Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) has latched on to the meme we've been following here. "It seems the only place the President is willing to cut spending is on the armed forces," Price said. "The President's priorities are deeply flawed. We will fight to preserve this important program."

"This decision will not only cost thousands of jobs at a critical time, it is detrimental to the country's national defense capabilities," Price added.

Why all the bile?

Read more »

Defense Spending

Stewart Lampoons Defense Spending Imbroglio

Brian Beutler | April 9, 2009, 10:55AM

One television network that isn't plagued by innumeracy or defense industry capture is Comedy Central. In case you missed it last night, here's Jon Stewart lampooning the strange but predictable fight in Washington over the Pentagon budget.

Budget

The 'Defense Spending Cuts' Meme Grows

Brian Beutler | April 8, 2009, 9:43AM

Politico, again, reports that "Defense Secretary Robert Gates is steeling himself against blowback from Congress over his sweeping defense cuts, but he's also girding for a fight within the Pentagon's five walls."

But while there is some evidence that there is early opposition within the Pentagon to some specific cuts, Gates has, once again, proposed a budget whose bottom line is higher than last year's.

That's not stopping Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee from piling on, though.

Read more »

Budget

House Member: The Pentagon Says This Is A Budget Cut

Brian Beutler | April 7, 2009, 6:54PM

Are senior officials at the Pentagon construing Defense Secretary Robert Gates' budget as a proposed defense spending cut?

Earlier today, I noted that the ranking member on that committee, John McHugh, had told Reuters that the Gates proposal would amount to an $8 billion slash in spending. But the numbers tell a different story: Not counting supplementals, Congress last year appropriated $513 billion to the Pentagon. This year, Gates is asking for $534 billion. If he gets everything he asks for, that's an increase of $21 billion, and Congress could always increase the total beyond that.

I asked McHugh's staff where the notion of an overall spending cut came from, and, when pressed, they had a hard time standing by the idea of a decrease in total dollars.

Read more »

Budget

Let's Talk About Cuts, Baby

Brian Beutler | April 7, 2009, 11:33AM

Reporters aren't the only people mischaracterizing the proposed defense budget overhaul. Members of Congress are doing their part, too. Important members of Congress. Members like Rep. John McHugh (R-NY), the ranking member on the House Armed Services committee, who presumably knows a thing or two about defense budgets.

According to Reuters, "Representative John McHugh...also weighed in, saying the proposals would amount to $8 billion in cuts in defense spending."

Read more »

Budget

Media Reports Major Defense Budget Cuts As Obama Proposes Increase In Defense Budget

Brian Beutler | April 7, 2009, 10:48AM

The big news from yesterday (still settling in across Washington) is that President Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates teamed up to propose a sweeping overhaul of the defense budget--calling for the elimination of unnecessary systems and spending the savings on special forces, intelligence equipment, and other tools of counterinsurgent warfare.

In other words, by retooling the Pentagon, Obama and Gates plan to move a lot of money around, but they also plan to increase the overall defense budget. In the final year of the Bush administration (and excluding the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) the defense budget was $513 billion. In FY 2010, if Gates and Obama get their way, it will be $534 billion--$534 billion that will be spent much differently than last year's outlays were.

But you'd never know that from the news coverage.

Read more »

Barack Obama

TPMDC Morning Roundup

Eric Kleefeld | April 6, 2009, 9:01AM

Obama Tells Turkey: U.S. Not At War With Islam
Speaking to the Turkish Parliament today, President Obama said: "Let me say this as clearly as I can: the United States is not at war with Islam. In fact, our partnership with the Muslim world is critical in rolling back a fringe ideology that people of all faiths reject."

Obama's Day In Turkey
President Obama is in Ankara, Turkey, today. At 3:50 a.m. ET, he laid a wreath at Ataturk's Tomb. At 4:55 a.m. ET he met with President Gul, and the two made a statement to the press at 6:56 a.m. ET. At 8:30 a.m. ET he addressed the Turkish Grand National Assembly. At 9:25 a.m. ET he will meet with Prime Minister Erdogan. At 11:10 a.m. ET he will leave Ankara for Istanbul, arriving at 12:10 p.m. ET.

Read more »

Budget

Progressive Caucus Goes Where Senate GOP Won't

Elana Schor | March 31, 2009, 5:10PM

As TPMDC has previously noted, Senate Republicans don't see the need to offer an alternative budget of their own this week -- even as they blast the priorities President Obama has outlined.

But the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) is taking that leap, presenting an alternative budget that includes cuts to outdated weapons projects and defense procurement initiatives as well as a new 0.25% tax on all stock trades that would offset the staggering cost of the financial bailout.

The details of the progressives' budget are available after the jump -- and worth cheering, given the recent news that the CPC is struggling to get a literal foot in the door at the White House.

Read more »

Budget

GOPers Criticize Obama for Doing What Worked For Bush 41

Elana Schor | March 6, 2009, 6:12PM

The budget debate has yet to reach critical mass on Capitol Hill, but here's one Republican talking point to watch out for in the coming days: criticism of President Obama's choice to put the cost of the Iraq war in the annual budget, rather than relying on "emergency supplemental" war funding that doesn't impact the deficit (as George W. Bush did).

Rep. Paul Ryan (WI), the senior GOPer on the House Budget Committee, was the first to raise this point during a hearing with White House budget chief Peter Orszag on Tuesday. Ryan derided as a "budget gimmick" the Obama team's decision to assume savings from a gradual end to the war in Iraq. As the AP put it, Ryan

told Orszag that administration claims of deficit-cutting are mostly bogus since the deficit would fall anyway as the war in Iraq winds down.

Orszag offered a rebuttal to this claim on his blog this afternoon, pointing out that former President George H.W. Bush assumed a similar savings from the gradual winding-down of the Cold War -- which ultimately panned out.

As Orszag's numbers show, assuming that defense spending would fall below the budget "baseline" (which Obama bases on 2008 previous war costs) ended up paying dividends for Bush 41.

The Senate Budget Committee's Republicans go into more detail in their critique of the president's budget, available for download here (second link from the top). The Senate GOPers argue that "the budget claims 'silly' savings by imagining new baselines," asserting that the real model for 2010 war spending is what was spent so far in 2009, or $70 billion.

Now, at the risk of attempting to analyze a budget debate that's far in the weeds, should the budget baseline assume a full year of war spending or a partial one? The former is a far more honest method.

pentagon

Right-Wing Talking Point Watch: Will Obama "Cut" Defense Spending?

Elana Schor | February 4, 2009, 11:03AM

The short answer is no. But conservative columnist Tony Blankley still does his part today to flog an already tired line of faux-skepticism about the Obama administration's alleged plans to "cut" defense spending in the upcoming budget.

Blankley claims that while total Pentagon spending for next year is in line for an 8% increase, the wild card of continuing Iraq and Afghanistan expenses raises the specter of a defense cut under Obama. It's almost as if he hasn't been keeping up with TPM alum Spencer Ackerman, who demolished this talking point as hogwash two days ago.

(Robert Kagan was the first right-leaning pundit out of the gate on this one.)

The tale is a simple one: Pentagon officials, aiming to start budget negotiations from a wildly advantageous point, submitted a spending estimate that wasn't completely vetted by the departing Bush administration. The Obama folks knocked the number down to a more realistic number -- that still reflects a higher military budget.

If only the truth could prevent conservatives from hyperventilating with fantasies of Obama cutting defense spending.