EMO's News Blotter

"General worthlessness of the congressional democrats"

From Marshall's Talking Point Memo:

...he walked me through all the terrible things that are in the big omnibus budget bills that are moving through the Congress. And that led to a discussion of the general worthlessness of the congressional Democrats. I don't mean that individually but collectively.

The Republicans hold the two houses of congress by slender majorities. But they are running the place like they have two-thirds majorities in each house. They are pushing through all sorts of things and the Democrats can't really get their act together to stop any of it. With the exception of holding up some judicial nominations they are virtually impotent. And that doesn't at all reflect the reality that the country remains extremely divided along partisan lines.

They're playing by an outmoded set of rules, operating on a defunct system of party discipline, and are generally getting creamed.

The outrage this spawns is the wind that is filling Dean's sails. It's one big, collective: Enough!

In a sense it goes beyond the Iraq vote which has gotten so much attention in this race. Almost all Dean's competitors in the race are compromised by that collective failure. Fair or not, there's a truth to it.

Iraq's Debt

Debt of Iraq, James Baker's assignment.

And more from Marshall...

According to Oxfam, Iraq owes (see page 23 in linked document) a titanic sum of between $55 and $85 billion to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. The $30 billion difference is money from the 1980s (I assume in support of the war against Iran) that the lenders say were loans and Iraq says were grants.

and finally...

"Let's remember what Baker's specialty is. Yes, he was White House Chief of Staff, Treasury Secretary, Secretary of State and various other things. But his real specialty is coming in to save the day when men named George Bush look like they're about to lose their presidencies. He's the family fixer. He did that in 1992 when he gave up State to run Bush's campaign. And he did it eight years later in 2000 when he went to Florida to run the recount battle. The phone just rang again ...

Add to the mix the fact that the neocons react to James Baker's name about the way a gas station attendant does if you try to light a cigarette while you're filling your tank."

The Grand Plan for Iraq

Marshalls article about the neo-cons REAL plan in the Washington Monthly

The pitch was this: The Middle East today is like the Soviet Union 30 years ago. Politically warped fundamentalism is the contemporary equivalent of communism or fascism. Terrorists with potential access to weapons of mass destruction are like an arsenal pointed at the United States. The primary cause of all this danger is the Arab world's endemic despotism, corruption, poverty, and economic stagnation. Repressive regimes channel dissent into the mosques, where the hopeless and disenfranchised are taught a brand of Islam that combines anti-modernism, anti-Americanism, and a worship of violence that borders on nihilism. Unable to overthrow their own authoritarian rulers, the citizenry turns its fury against the foreign power that funds and supports these corrupt regimes to maintain stability and access to oil: the United States. As Johns Hopkins University professor Fouad Ajami recently wrote in Foreign Affairs, "The great indulgence granted to the ways and phobias of Arabs has reaped a terrible harvest"--terrorism.

...

The hawks' grand plan differs depending on whom you speak to, but the basic outline runs like this: The United States establishes a reasonably democratic, pro-Western government in Iraq--assume it falls somewhere between Turkey and Jordan on the spectrum of democracy and the rule of law. Not perfect, representative democracy, certainly, but a system infinitely preferable to Saddam's. The example of a democratic Iraq will radically change the political dynamics of the Middle East. When Palestinians see average Iraqis beginning to enjoy real freedom and economic opportunity, they'll want the same themselves. With that happy prospect on one hand and implacable United States will on the other, they'll demand that the Palestinian Authority reform politically and negotiate with Israel. That in turn will lead to a real peace deal between the Israelis and Palestinians. A democratic Iraq will also hasten the fall of the fundamentalist Shi'a mullahs in Iran, whose citizens are gradually adopting anti-fanatic, pro-Western sympathies. A democratized Iran would create a string of democratic, pro-Western governments (Turkey, Iraq, and Iran) stretching across the historical heartland of Islam. Without a hostile Iraq towering over it, Jordan's pro-Western Hashemite monarchy would likely come into full bloom. Syria would be no more than a pale reminder of the bad old days. (If they made trouble, a U.S. invasion would take care of them, too.) And to the tiny Gulf emirates making hesitant steps toward democratization, the corrupt regimes of Saudi Arabia and Egypt would no longer look like examples of stability and strength in a benighted region, but holdouts against the democratic tide. Once the dust settles, we could decide whether to ignore them as harmless throwbacks to the bad old days or deal with them, too. We'd be in a much stronger position to do so since we'd no longer require their friendship to help us manage ugly regimes in Iraq, Iran, and Syria.

Democratic Campaign

Current gallop poll numbers. Dean is out front and has gained signficantly over the past 6 months. Clark has moved into second, Gebhardt has held his own, and Kerry and Lieberman have fallen off significantly.

And here's a survey of the democratic race by the Pew Research Center, taken in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina

Eels Under the Yukon

Eels under Yukon ice turn into cash for villagers
OILY: State biologists set conservative quota on Arctic lampreys and found a buyer.

By JOEL GAY
Anchorage Daily News

(Published: November 30, 2003)

Hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of the squiggly, squirmy creatures are swimming up from the Bering Sea, a seething mass wriggling quietly beneath the river ice to spawn and die. Like salmon, except for the mystery posed by winter's icy cover.

The Promised Land

OP-ED COLUMNIST
from The New York Times
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: November 29, 2003

he history of American conservatism is an exodus tale. It begins in the wilderness, in the early 1950's, with Russell Kirk, Milton Friedman and William F. Buckley Jr. writing tracts for small bands of true believers.

Conservatives crashed into the walls of power during the Goldwater debacle of 1964, and then breached those walls with Reagan's triumph 16 years later. But even with Reagan in the Oval Office, Republicans were not the majority party. Democrats controlled the House, and few Reaganites actually knew how to run a government.

In 1994, with the Gingrich revolution, the conservatives strode closer to the center of power. But even then, they were not quite there. For the rule of exodus tales is that the chiefs who lead in the wilderness and storm the citadels do not get to govern once their troops have occupied the city. Renegades are too combative to govern well.

It was only this week that we can truly say the exodus story is over, with the success of the Medicare reform bill. This week the G.O.P. behaved as a majority party in full. The Republicans used the powers of government to entrench their own dominance. They used their control of the federal budget to create a new entitlement, to woo new allies and service a key constituency group, the elderly.

From now on, as Tony Blankley observed in The Washington Times, if you work at an interest group and you want to know what's going on with your legislation, you have to go to the Republicans. The Democrats don't even know the state of play.

If you are the AARP, seeking a benefit, you have to go to the Republicans. If you are a centrist Democrat like John Breaux or Max Baucus seeking to pass legislation, you have to work with the Republicans.

Under the leadership of Bush, Frist, Hastert and DeLay, the Republicans have built a fully mature establishment of activist groups, think tanks and lobbyists, which is amazingly aloof from the older Washington establishment (not to mention the media establishment). Republicans now speak in that calm, and to their opponents infuriating, manner of those who believe they were born to rule.

The Democrats, meanwhile, behave just as the Republicans did when they were stuck in the minority. They complain about their outrageous mistreatment by the majority. They are right to complain. The treatment is outrageous. But the complaints only communicate weakness.

Democrats indulge in the joys of opposition. They get to sputter about fiscal irresponsibility, just as the green-eyeshade Republicans used to, as the majority party uses the power of the purse to buy votes. They get to make wild charges. They get to propose solutions that ignore inconvenient realities. They never have to betray their principles to get something done, and so they savor their own righteousness.

Minority parties are pure but defeated; governing parties are impure but victorious. The Republicans are now in the habit of winning, and are on permanent offense on all fronts. They offer tax cuts to stimulate the economy and please business. They nominate conservative judges to advance conservative social reform and satisfy religious conservatives. They fight a war on terror. They have even come to occupy the Democratic holy of the holies, the welfare state. In exchange for massive new spending, they demand competitive reforms.

The only drawback is that now, as the governing party, they have to betray some of the principles that first animated them. This week we saw dozens of conservatives, who once believed in limited government, vote for a new spending program that will cost over $2 trillion over the next 20 years.

In the past three years, federal education spending has increased by 65 percent. Unemployment benefit payments are up by 85 percent.

Many conservatives are dismayed over what has happened to their movement as it has grown fat and happy in the Promised Land. A significant rift has opened up between the conservative think tankers and journalists, who are loyal to ideas, and the K Street establishmentarians, who are loyal to groups.

The good news for Democrats is that the K Street establishment will slowly win this struggle. The majority will ossify. It will lose touch with its principles and eventually crumble under the weight of its own spoils. The bad news for Democrats is that, as Republicans can tell you, the ossification process is maddeningly slow. After the New Deal, it took 60 years.

Columbia Coffee Farmers get 'between 1 and 2 cents per cup'

Move Over Starbucks, Juan Valdez Is Coming
By SHERRI DAY
Published: November 29, 2003

How about a nice large cup of coffee, light on the guilt?

The Colombian Coffee Federation, which represents more than 500,000 Colombian coffee growers, is planning to open its first coffee shops - all bearing the name Juan Valdez, after the federation's signature character - in the United States by early 2004. Gabriel Silva, the president of the federation, which is based in Bogotá, says the coffee growers have been "too passive" in claiming a larger piece of the $8.4 billion specialty coffee industry.

"In a cup of coffee that you get at a coffee shop, between 1 and 2 cents goes back to the farmer," Mr. Silva said, referring to Colombian growers. "We need to build our own solutions and take the destiny in our hands and really fight for our share of the industry."

Government spending per household is $20,301

No Escaping the Red Ink as Bush Pens '04 Agenda
By RICHARD W. STEVENSON and EDMUND L. ANDREWS
From the New York Times, November 29, 2003

...Brian M. Riedl, a budget analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation, said government spending per household in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30 was $20,301 — the highest level since World War II, he said, even after adjustment for inflation. (His analysis showed that the figure peaked in 1944 at $26,445, as measured in current dollars.)

...

In addition, Congress has deficit-increasing ideas of its own that the White House has supported or at least not opposed. The energy bill that stalled in the Senate before lawmakers recessed provides tax cuts totaling $24 billion over the next decade. And House Republicans, pushing for an overhaul of taxes on international corporations, want legislation that would grant them $60 billion more of tax breaks in that period.

A Day to Skip Shopping

Juneau Empire, November 28, 2993
Letter to the editor

This Friday, Nov. 28, is the busiest shopping day of the year. I dare you to quit you addiction for just one day. Over a million people in over 30 countries around the world will be participating in Buy Nothing Day. Buy Nothing Day, now in its 12th year, is a 24-hour consumer fast and celebration of sustainable living.

Resist the Thanksgiving sales, stay away from Fred Meyer and the mall. Stand on a street corner with a sign to let Juneau and the world know that you can go one day without buying something. It's really not that hard. Make a conscience effort to participate in this event by not participating in America's addiction. It's only one day and if you like the idea of a sustainable lifestyle, see how long you can go without having to use your credit card. A better world is possible, but in order for change to occur we need to alter the way we live and this Friday is the perfect way to start.

Daniel Buck
Juneau

Prescription Drug Coverage

From the New York Times
Friday, November 28, 2003

Under "standard prescription drug coverage," defined in the Medicare bill, a beneficiary would be responsible for the first $250 in drug costs each year. Of the next $2,000, Medicare would cover 75 percent and the beneficiary would pay 25 percent, or $500. The beneficiary would then be responsible for all of the next $2,850 in drug costs.

The beneficiary would thus pay $3,600 for the first $5,100 worth of medicine in a year, and that does not include the premiums, estimated at $420 a year. Beyond that, Medicare would cover 95 percent of the cost of each prescription, after the patient had spent $3,600.

Low-income people without any insurance for prescription drugs stand to gain most from the new Medicare benefit. They could receive extra assistance, reducing their premiums, deductibles and other costs.