DOCSLIB.ORG

August 15, 2010 Transcript

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
August 15, 2010 Transcript © 2010, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. PLEASE CREDIT ANY QUOTES OR EXCERPTS FROM THIS CBS TELEVISION PROGRAM TO "CBS NEWS' FACE THE NATION." August 15, 2010 Transcript GUESTS: Tim Kaine Chairman, Democratic National Committee Gov. Ed Rendell D-Pennsylvania Ed Gillespie Former Chairman, Republican National Committee Resurgent Republic Ed Rollins Republican Strategist TRANSCRIPT SCHIEFFER: Today on "Face the Nation," let's talk politics, and there's plenty to talk about. The president made good on his pledge to demonstrate the Gulf Coast is still a great vacation destination. But in a year of political irony, he's also up to his neck in political trouble with his liberal base, while the Republican establishment tries to figure out what to do about its conservative wing and the Tea Party. And now a whole new controversy over building that mosque near Ground Zero. We'll bring in four of the best from the two sides, Democratic Governor Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania, Democratic Party Chair Tim Kaine, former Republican Party Chair Ed Gillespie, and legendary Republican strategist Ed Rollins. We'll get analysis from John Harris of Politico and Karen Tumulty of the Washington Post. Then I'll have some final thoughts on Melvin Laird, the long-ago secretary of defense who's worried about the all-volunteer army he created and where we are in Afghanistan. But first, American politics on "Face the Nation." ANNOUNCER: "Face the Nation," with CBS News chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer. And now from Washington, Bob Schieffer. SCHIEFFER: And good morning again. Well, it is not often that a president pleases people on both sides of the political spectrum, but it is fair to say, when President Obama said Muslims have a right to build a mosque near Ground Zero where the Twin Towers fell, it pleased many on the liberal left. And it is also fair to say that it just delighted many on the Republican right, because they feel it is an issue that they can use against him, not only in the coming elections, but all the way into 2012. So I want to start there, and I'm just going to poll the delegation this morning. Governor Rendell, did the president say the right thing? And was it good politics? RENDELL: Well, I don't know if it's good or bad politics, but I can't imagine that any American -- given the challenges facing this country -- is going to vote based on what he said about the mosque. The mosque is an unfortunate situation, but we do have a right to practice our religion freely wherever we choose. Rights are not subject to the popular vote or majority vote. SCHIEFFER: Ed Gillespie? GILLESPIE: Bob, it was an incredibly revealing comment by the president. You know, he basically said that the 70 percent of Americans who are opposed to this controversial imam building this controversial mosque at Ground Zero are seeking to deny the religious freedom of Muslims in this country. That's how he cast it. And it was said in the -- in the reporting this morning that he made a conscious decision to weigh in on it in that regard. I think it -- it tells you that he has a very disdainful view of the American people, and I think that's one of the reasons his favorability ratings have come down, not just his job approval ratings. People see that in him. There's kind of a condescension toward Americans that they don't like. SCHIEFFER: Tim Kaine? KAINE: Well, I'm going to go with my Virginians, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, on this one, Bob. They put the religious freedom to worship in the religion of your choosing as the First Amendment to the Constitution for a reason. This wouldn't be a controversy if it was a proposal to build a synagogue or a church. We don't prefer people and we don't punish people based on their religion. I'm not the New York zoning commissioner, don't know the reason for the siting decision, but we can't stop people from doing something that others could do because of the religion they practice. SCHIEFFER: But what about the politics of it? KAINE: Well, look, you know, again, as Ed said, the Constitution is the Constitution. You know, we see an awful lot of Republicans going out and saying we've got to respect the Constitution, and that means we have to respect it. We can't tarnish people's First Amendment rights. We shouldn't be going around raising wacky ideas, like redrafting or withdrawing the 14th Amendment. We've got to honor the Constitution, and the president is reminding us of that, and that's very important. SCHIEFFER: Ed Rollins, you're up there in New York. You know a lot about New York politics. What's your view? ROLLINS: First, it was, Bob, probably the dumbest thing that any president has said or candidate has said since Michael Dukakis said it was OK to burn the flag. And it was very similar. This is an emotional issue. Intellectually, the president may be right, but this is an emotional issue, and people who lost kids, brothers, sisters, fathers, what have you, do not want that mosque in New York, and it's going to be a big, big issue for Democrats across this country. SCHIEFFER: So you see it as an issue that's going to continue? ROLLINS: Absolutely. No question about it. Every candidate -- every candidate who's in the challenge districts are going to be asked, how do you feel about building the mosque on the Ground Zero sites? SCHIEFFER: All right. You know, we're going into this election in a year that is really, really fraught with irony. You have Democrats on the one hand saddled with a very bad economy, high unemployment among many on the Democratic base, the -- the core of this president's base, unemployment among African-Americans is now 12.5 percent, to the -- to the point that some people are even saying unemployed -- the unemployed may be the swing vote in this coming election. Republicans, on the other hand, have -- find themselves suddenly with some very, well, how would I say it, unusual candidates, people who have taken very extreme views on things. And one thing that comes to mind is the Senate race up there in Connecticut, where you have Linda McMahon, who is formally -- or maybe she still is part of the World Wrestling Federation, formerly an executive to that. She winds up as the Republican candidate up there. And I have to say one thing, she really packs a lot of kick. I mean, just -- just watch this video here. Ed Gillespie, I expect Republicans are going to be seeing that video a lot this year, and they're going to have to defend it. Is this somebody who's going to be good for the Republican Party? Is this a good image for Republicans to have? I mean, if the president's going to -- every candidate is going to have to defend what the president did on the mosque down there, isn't this going to be kind of a tough one for you guys? GILLESPIE: Well, a couple of things, Bob. You could also show the footage of President Obama when he was running for president appearing on WWE, calling out to voters there, watching and saying, "Can you smell what Barack is cooking?" A takeoff of the Rock. So, clearly, not so long ago, President Obama and the Democrats thought the WWE was a great place to go to talk to voters. Linda McMahon, like a lot of other Republicans around the country, is not an establishment politician, not someone who's a career Washington figure, not someone who is a conventional candidate. And this is a good year, by the way, for that, you know, to run against -- and her race has tightened since she got the nomination -- to run against a career politician in -- in Connecticut with a problematic record. On the issues of spending and taxes and deficit and debt and the fact that we need to put a check on President Obama and the Democratic Congress, not hand them a blank check, those are the issues that are going to matter in this election. SCHIEFFER: So you're comfortable with her? And you think on balance she helps or hurts Republicans overall? GILLESPIE: Oh, I think she's got a great chance to win in -- in the Connecticut Senate race because the voters are making a decision based on which of these two candidates is going to go to Washington to try to change what's going on, in terms of record deficits, $1.5 trillion deficit this year. President Obama and this White House have created more debt in 20 months than President Bush in eight years. Unemployment at 9.5 percent, with 1.4 million Americans already out of the workforce, not even calculated into that, when they said it was -- was not going to go above 8 percent as a result of a $1 trillion stimulus package. So, yes, I feel very good about it. SCHIEFFER: Well, I mean, she does have a good kick. I mean, there's no question. Governor Kaine, you're head of the DNC. What -- what -- what do you think about some of these candidates? KAINE: Two things, Bob. You know, it's not just Linda McMahon. It's Rand Paul, who says the Civil Rights Act shouldn't have been passed.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Future War and the War Powers Resolution
    Emory International Law Review Volume 29 Issue 3 2015 Future War and the War Powers Resolution Eric Talbot Jensen Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/eilr Recommended Citation Eric T. Jensen, Future War and the War Powers Resolution, 29 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 499 (2015). Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/eilr/vol29/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Emory Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Emory International Law Review by an authorized editor of Emory Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. JENSEN GALLEYSPROOFS2 1/22/2015 11:37 AM FUTURE WAR AND THE WAR POWERS RESOLUTION ∗ Eric Talbot Jensen ABSTRACT Since its passage in 1973 over the veto of then-President Nixon, the War Powers Resolution (WPR) has been laden with controversy. Labeled as everything from ineffective to unconstitutional, the WPR has generally failed in its design to require notification and consultation to Congress by the President. Despite numerous proposals to amend the WPR, it continues to languish in the twilight of Executive war powers, and its future is bleak. With emerging technologies such as drones, cyber tools, nanotechnology, and genomics, the ineffectiveness of the WPR will prove even more profound. The WPR’s reliance on “armed forces” and “hostilities” as triggers for the reporting and consulting requirements of the statute will prove completely inadequate to regulate the use of these advanced technologies. Rather, as the President analyzes the applicability of the WPR to military operations using these advancing technologies, he will determine that the WPR is not triggered and he has no reporting requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • HPI Interview: Hill and Policy Crises Attorney General Talks of Drug Epidemics, Cyber and Terror Threats by BRIAN A
    V22, N39 Thursday, June 15, 2017 HPI Interview: Hill and policy crises Attorney general talks of drug epidemics, cyber and terror threats By BRIAN A. HOWEY INDIANAPOLIS – Last week Howey Politics Indiana reported that new Attorney General Curtis Hill has been approached about a U.S. Senate run in 2018. In this HPI Interview, we talked with Hill at the Statehouse about his first five months after spending nearly three decades working in the Elkhart County prosecutor’s office, the last 14 in that elected position. He entered the at- For instance, the Washington Post reported that torney general office this year with some seismic issues the opioid epidemic that has “ravaged life expectancy ranging from an opioid and methamphetamine epidemic, among economically stressed white Americans is taking a to cyber security issues that are hitting Hoosier businesses and consumers in the wallet. Continued on page 3 Mayor Pete heads to Iowa By CHRIS SAUTTER WASHINGTON – It is said that no politician travels to Iowa to give a speech unless they plan to run for presi- dent. So the announcement this week that South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg is scheduled to be a headline speaker at a Des Moines political event “We may have our differences in September begs the question: What is Pete up to? He will be but we do well in times like these speaking along with Oregon Sen. that everyone who serves in our Jeff Merkley, who is by all ac- counts mulling a presidential run. nation’s capital is here because Undoubtedly, Buttigieg is a rising star in the Democratic above all they love our country.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix File Anes 1988‐1992 Merged Senate File
    Version 03 Codebook ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ CODEBOOK APPENDIX FILE ANES 1988‐1992 MERGED SENATE FILE USER NOTE: Much of his file has been converted to electronic format via OCR scanning. As a result, the user is advised that some errors in character recognition may have resulted within the text. MASTER CODES: The following master codes follow in this order: PARTY‐CANDIDATE MASTER CODE CAMPAIGN ISSUES MASTER CODES CONGRESSIONAL LEADERSHIP CODE ELECTIVE OFFICE CODE RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE MASTER CODE SENATOR NAMES CODES CAMPAIGN MANAGERS AND POLLSTERS CAMPAIGN CONTENT CODES HOUSE CANDIDATES CANDIDATE CODES >> VII. MASTER CODES ‐ Survey Variables >> VII.A. Party/Candidate ('Likes/Dislikes') ? PARTY‐CANDIDATE MASTER CODE PARTY ONLY ‐‐ PEOPLE WITHIN PARTY 0001 Johnson 0002 Kennedy, John; JFK 0003 Kennedy, Robert; RFK 0004 Kennedy, Edward; "Ted" 0005 Kennedy, NA which 0006 Truman 0007 Roosevelt; "FDR" 0008 McGovern 0009 Carter 0010 Mondale 0011 McCarthy, Eugene 0012 Humphrey 0013 Muskie 0014 Dukakis, Michael 0015 Wallace 0016 Jackson, Jesse 0017 Clinton, Bill 0031 Eisenhower; Ike 0032 Nixon 0034 Rockefeller 0035 Reagan 0036 Ford 0037 Bush 0038 Connally 0039 Kissinger 0040 McCarthy, Joseph 0041 Buchanan, Pat 0051 Other national party figures (Senators, Congressman, etc.) 0052 Local party figures (city, state, etc.) 0053 Good/Young/Experienced leaders; like whole ticket 0054 Bad/Old/Inexperienced leaders; dislike whole ticket 0055 Reference to vice‐presidential candidate ? Make 0097 Other people within party reasons Card PARTY ONLY ‐‐ PARTY CHARACTERISTICS 0101 Traditional Democratic voter: always been a Democrat; just a Democrat; never been a Republican; just couldn't vote Republican 0102 Traditional Republican voter: always been a Republican; just a Republican; never been a Democrat; just couldn't vote Democratic 0111 Positive, personal, affective terms applied to party‐‐good/nice people; patriotic; etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Geopolitics, Oil Law Reform, and Commodity Market Expectations
    OKLAHOMA LAW REVIEW VOLUME 63 WINTER 2011 NUMBER 2 GEOPOLITICS, OIL LAW REFORM, AND COMMODITY MARKET EXPECTATIONS ROBERT BEJESKY * Table of Contents I. Introduction .................................... ........... 193 II. Geopolitics and Market Equilibrium . .............. 197 III. Historical U.S. Foreign Policy in the Middle East ................ 202 IV. Enter OPEC ..................................... ......... 210 V. Oil Industry Reform Planning for Iraq . ............... 215 VI. Occupation Announcements and Economics . ........... 228 VII. Iraq’s 2007 Oil and Gas Bill . .............. 237 VIII. Oil Price Surges . ............ 249 IX. Strategic Interests in Afghanistan . ................ 265 X. Conclusion ...................................... ......... 273 I. Introduction The 1973 oil supply shock elevated OPEC to world attention and ensconced it in the general consciousness as a confederacy that is potentially * M.A. Political Science (Michigan), M.A. Applied Economics (Michigan), LL.M. International Law (Georgetown). The author has taught international law courses for Cooley Law School and the Department of Political Science at the University of Michigan, American Government and Constitutional Law courses for Alma College, and business law courses at Central Michigan University and the University of Miami. 193 194 OKLAHOMA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 63:193 antithetical to global energy needs. From 1986 until mid-1999, prices generally fluctuated within a $10 to $20 per barrel band, but alarms sounded when market prices started hovering above $30. 1 In July 2001, Senator Arlen Specter addressed the Senate regarding the need to confront OPEC and urged President Bush to file an International Court of Justice case against the organization, on the basis that perceived antitrust violations were a breach of “general principles of law.” 2 Prices dipped initially, but began a precipitous rise in mid-March 2002.
    [Show full text]
  • Committee on Appropriations UNITED STATES SENATE 135Th Anniversary
    107th Congress, 2d Session Document No. 13 Committee on Appropriations UNITED STATES SENATE 135th Anniversary 1867–2002 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 2002 ‘‘The legislative control of the purse is the central pil- lar—the central pillar—upon which the constitutional temple of checks and balances and separation of powers rests, and if that pillar is shaken, the temple will fall. It is...central to the fundamental liberty of the Amer- ican people.’’ Senator Robert C. Byrd, Chairman Senate Appropriations Committee United States Senate Committee on Appropriations ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia, TED STEVENS, Alaska, Ranking Chairman THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi ANIEL NOUYE Hawaii D K. I , ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania RNEST OLLINGS South Carolina E F. H , PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico ATRICK EAHY Vermont P J. L , CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri OM ARKIN Iowa T H , MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky ARBARA IKULSKI Maryland B A. M , CONRAD BURNS, Montana ARRY EID Nevada H R , RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama ERB OHL Wisconsin H K , JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire ATTY URRAY Washington P M , ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah YRON ORGAN North Dakota B L. D , BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado IANNE EINSTEIN California D F , LARRY CRAIG, Idaho ICHARD URBIN Illinois R J. D , KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas IM OHNSON South Dakota T J , MIKE DEWINE, Ohio MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana JACK REED, Rhode Island TERRENCE E. SAUVAIN, Staff Director CHARLES KIEFFER, Deputy Staff Director STEVEN J. CORTESE, Minority Staff Director V Subcommittee Membership, One Hundred Seventh Congress Senator Byrd, as chairman of the Committee, and Senator Stevens, as ranking minority member of the Committee, are ex officio members of all subcommit- tees of which they are not regular members.
    [Show full text]
  • ("DSCC") Files This Complaint Seeking an Immediate Investigation by the 7
    COMPLAINT BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION CBHMISSIOAl INTRODUCTXON - 1 The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee ("DSCC") 7-_. J _j. c files this complaint seeking an immediate investigation by the 7 c; a > Federal Election Commission into the illegal spending A* practices of the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee (WRSCIt). As the public record shows, and an investigation will confirm, the NRSC and a series of ostensibly nonprofit, nonpartisan groups have undertaken a significant and sustained effort to funnel "soft money101 into federal elections in violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended or "the Act"), 2 U.S.C. 5s 431 et seq., and the Federal Election Commission (peFECt)Regulations, 11 C.F.R. 85 100.1 & sea. 'The term "aoft money" as ueed in this Complaint means funds,that would not be lawful for use in connection with any federal election (e.g., corporate or labor organization treasury funds, contributions in excess of the relevant contribution limit for federal elections). THE FACTS IN TBIS CABE On November 24, 1992, the state of Georgia held a unique runoff election for the office of United States Senator. Georgia law provided for a runoff if no candidate in the regularly scheduled November 3 general election received in excess of 50 percent of the vote. The 1992 runoff in Georg a was a hotly contested race between the Democratic incumbent Wyche Fowler, and his Republican opponent, Paul Coverdell. The Republicans presented this election as a %ust-win81 election. Exhibit 1. The Republicans were so intent on victory that Senator Dole announced he was willing to give up his seat on the Senate Agriculture Committee for Coverdell, if necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • How US Politicians, the President and the Media Frame Foreign Intervention
    Eastern Illinois University The Keep Masters Theses Student Theses & Publications 2018 War Spin: How U.S. Politicians, the President and the Media Frame Foreign Intervention Samantha White Eastern Illinois University This research is a product of the graduate program in Political Science at Eastern Illinois University. Find out more about the program. Recommended Citation White, Samantha, "War Spin: How U.S. Politicians, the President and the Media Frame Foreign Intervention" (2018). Masters Theses. 3713. https://thekeep.eiu.edu/theses/3713 This is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Theses & Publications at The Keep. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of The Keep. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TheGraduate School� � IWNOIS lJNMRSITY· Thesis Maintenance and Reproduction Certificate FOR: Graduate Candidates Completing Theses in Partial Fulfillment of the Degree Graduate Faculty Advisors Directing the Theses RE: Preservation,Reproduction, and Distribution of Thesis Research Preserving, reproducing, and distributing thesis research is an important part of Booth Library's responsibility to provide access to scholarship. In order to further this goal, Booth Library makes all graduate theses completed as part of a degree program at Eastern Illinois University available for personal study, research, and other not-for­ profit educational purposes. Under 17 U.S.C. § 108, the library may reproduce and distribute a copy without infringing on copyright; however, professional courtesy dictates that permission be requested from the author before doing so. Your signatures affirm the following: • The graduate candidate is the author of this thesis. •The graduate candidate retains the copyright and intellectual property rights associated with the original research, creative activity, and intellectual or artistic content of the thesis.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case of Donald J. Trump†
    THE AGE OF THE WINNING EXECUTIVE: THE CASE OF DONALD J. TRUMP† Saikrishna Bangalore Prakash∗ INTRODUCTION The election of Donald J. Trump, although foretold by Matt Groening’s The Simpsons,1 was a surprise to many.2 But the shock, disbelief, and horror were especially acute for the intelligentsia. They were told, guaranteed really, that there was no way for Trump to win. Yet he prevailed, pulling off what poker aficionados might call a back- door draw in the Electoral College. Since his victory, the reverberations, commotions, and uproars have never ended. Some of these were Trump’s own doing and some were hyped-up controversies. We have endured so many bombshells and pur- ported bombshells that most of us are numb. As one crisis or scandal sputters to a pathetic end, the next has already commenced. There has been too much fear, rage, fire, and fury, rendering it impossible for many to make sense of it all. Some Americans sensibly tuned out, missing the breathless nightly reports of how the latest scandal would doom Trump or why his tormentors would soon get their comeuppance. Nonetheless, our reality TV President is ratings gold for our political talk shows. In his Foreword, Professor Michael Klarman, one of America’s fore- most legal historians, speaks of a degrading democracy.3 Many difficulties plague our nation: racial and class divisions, a spiraling debt, runaway entitlements, forever wars, and, of course, the coronavirus. Like many others, I do not regard our democracy as especially debased.4 Or put an- other way, we have long had less than a thoroughgoing democracy, in part ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– † Responding to Michael J.
    [Show full text]
  • The Senate in Transition Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Nuclear Option1
    \\jciprod01\productn\N\NYL\19-4\NYL402.txt unknown Seq: 1 3-JAN-17 6:55 THE SENATE IN TRANSITION OR HOW I LEARNED TO STOP WORRYING AND LOVE THE NUCLEAR OPTION1 William G. Dauster* The right of United States Senators to debate without limit—and thus to filibuster—has characterized much of the Senate’s history. The Reid Pre- cedent, Majority Leader Harry Reid’s November 21, 2013, change to a sim- ple majority to confirm nominations—sometimes called the “nuclear option”—dramatically altered that right. This article considers the Senate’s right to debate, Senators’ increasing abuse of the filibuster, how Senator Reid executed his change, and possible expansions of the Reid Precedent. INTRODUCTION .............................................. 632 R I. THE NATURE OF THE SENATE ........................ 633 R II. THE FOUNDERS’ SENATE ............................. 637 R III. THE CLOTURE RULE ................................. 639 R IV. FILIBUSTER ABUSE .................................. 641 R V. THE REID PRECEDENT ............................... 645 R VI. CHANGING PROCEDURE THROUGH PRECEDENT ......... 649 R VII. THE CONSTITUTIONAL OPTION ........................ 656 R VIII. POSSIBLE REACTIONS TO THE REID PRECEDENT ........ 658 R A. Republican Reaction ............................ 659 R B. Legislation ...................................... 661 R C. Supreme Court Nominations ..................... 670 R D. Discharging Committees of Nominations ......... 672 R E. Overruling Home-State Senators ................. 674 R F. Overruling the Minority Leader .................. 677 R G. Time To Debate ................................ 680 R CONCLUSION................................................ 680 R * Former Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy for U.S. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid. The author has worked on U.S. Senate and White House staffs since 1986, including as Staff Director or Deputy Staff Director for the Committees on the Budget, Labor and Human Resources, and Finance.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 112 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 112 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 157 WASHINGTON, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 6, 2011 No. 186 House of Representatives The House met at 10 a.m. and was endured 125 years of change, growth, day, December 4, New York Times enti- called to order by the Speaker pro tem- and service. Today, Consumers Energy tled, ‘‘How the Food Industry Eats pore (Ms. FOXX). delivers electricity and natural gas to Your Kids’ Lunch.’’ This has serious f 6.8 million of Michigan’s 10 million consequences for the 32 million chil- residents in all 68 counties of the dren who rely on school lunches, and DESIGNATION OF SPEAKER PRO State’s Lower Peninsula. often the breakfast program as well. TEMPORE For the past 125 years, Consumer En- Unfortunately, when one-third of our The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be- ergy has operated under the timeless children of school age, 6 to 19, are over- fore the House the following commu- principle: provide customers with safe, weight or obese, this matters. nication from the Speaker: reliable, and affordable energy service. There’s no denying that the institu- WASHINGTON, DC, This principle has played an integral tional and political forces combine to December 6, 2011. role of improving the quality of life for favor giving our kids unhealthy food. It I hereby appoint the Honorable VIRGINIA generations of Michigan residents. It doesn’t just shortchange the children FOXX to act as Speaker pro tempore on this also has been responsible for the and their families with huge medical day.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vice President in the U.S. Senate: Examining the Consequences of Institutional Design
    The Vice President in the U.S. Senate: Examining the Consequences of Institutional Design. Michael S. Lynch Tony Madonna Asssistant Professor Assistant Professor University of Kansas University of Georgia [email protected] [email protected] January 25, 2010∗ ∗The authors would like to thank Scott H. Ainsworth, Stanley Bach, Ryan Bakker, Sarah A. Binder, Jamie L. Carson, Michael H. Crespin, Keith L. Dougherty, Trey Hood, Andrew Martin, Ryan J. Owens and Steven S. Smith for comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript. Madonna also thanks the University of Georgia American Political Development working group for support and comments, and Rachel Snyder for helpful research assistance. All errors remain the authors. Abstract The constitutional designation of the vice president as the president of the United States Senate is a unique feature of the chamber. It places control over the Senate's rules and precedents under an individual who is not elected by the chamber and receives no direct benefits from the maintenance of its institutions. We argue that this feature of the Senate has played an important, recurring role in its development. The vice president has frequently acted in a manner that conflicted with the wishes chamber majorities. Consequently, the Senate has developed rules and precedents that insulate the chamber from its presiding officer. These actions have made the Senate a less efficient chamber, but have largely freed it from the potential influence of the executive branch. We examine these arguments using a mix of historical and contemporary case studies, as well as empirical data on contentious rulings on questions of order.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case Study of Crossfire Hurricane
    TIMELINE: Congressional Oversight in the Face of Executive Branch and Media Suppression: The Case Study of Crossfire Hurricane 2009 FBI opens a counterintelligence investigation of the individual who would become Christopher Steele’s primary sub-source because of his ties to Russian intelligence officers.1 June 2009: FBI New York Field Office (NYFO) interviews Carter Page, who “immediately advised [them] that due to his work and overseas experiences, he has been questioned by and provides information to representatives of [another U.S. government agency] on an ongoing basis.”2 2011 February 2011: CBS News investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson begins reporting on “Operation Fast and Furious.” Later in the year, Attkisson notices “anomalies” with several of her work and personal electronic devices that persist into 2012.3 2012 September 11, 2012: Attack on U.S. installations in Benghazi, Libya.4 2013 March 2013: The existence of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server becomes publicly known.5 May 2013: o News reports reveal Obama’s Justice Department investigating leaks of classified information and targeting reporters, including secretly seizing “two months of phone records for reporters and editors of The Associated Press,”6 labeling Fox News reporter James Rosen as a “co-conspirator,” and obtaining a search warrant for Rosen’s personal emails.7 May 10, 2013: Reports reveal that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) targeted and unfairly scrutinized conservative organizations seeking tax-exempt status.8
    [Show full text]