A Fitting and Lasting Tribute

Earlier this Fall, Susan’s Grandmother, Ruth Meyers, passed away. Grandma joins her husband Don in what I know is a “better place.” Our family used the Thanksgiving break to get together and remember these two people. A week after Thanksgiving, I still find myself sitting here thinking about what a fabulous tribute that was to these two wonderful people.

Don and Ruth, or Pop-Pop and Grandma as they are affectionately known to us, were a blessing to our family. It is not too often these days that children and grandchildren can grow up and say “I knew my Great-Grandparents.” But in this case, it was more than just “knowing them.”

Since I have been a part of this family, Pop-Pop and Grandma were always present at the important events, the holidays, or just to drive over for a visit. And it wasn’t like they lived down the road. For most of the time I have known them, they have lived great distances from the family, but never failed to make as many appearances as possible.

They took an interest in the lives of their three granddaughters. They were amazed and moved with the birth of each new great-grandchild and had a special way of making you feel like your child was the most precious thing on the face of the earth. They kept up with their great grandchildren and always knew the right questions to ask about each child’s special interests – whether it was sports, theatre, or just life in general.

I would sit back and watch the love, pride and joy in each of their eyes whenever they spoke of their daughter, or one of their precious granddaughters. None of their “girls” could do wrong and while “breaking-in to the family” was at times a stressful thing, once you broke through, they embraced and loved you as if you had always been a part of the family.

During our recent gathering, my brother-in-law noted that they were from a bygone generation – the Greatest Generation. They witnessed things during their lifetime that I hope we never have to see. Pop-Pop and Grandma visited us a few years back and we took them to the World War II Memorial in DC. It was a moving experience for me to see the two of them reflect at the memorial that honors the 16 million who served in the armed forces during World War II. It allowed me to have a connection to that part of our history that I never experienced before that moment.

Thanksgiving weekend was an appropriate time for our family to reflect and give thanks for the gift of Don and Ruth. The gathering of our family was a fitting and proper tribute to them. The reflections and time we shared together will remain with me always. I believe it is just what they would have wanted - a celebration of them as witnessed by the family they created.

On our last evening together, we all gathered around the table and shared and reflected on our collective memories of Grandma and Pop-Pop. Whether it was a story of growing up, the sharing of a recipe, a noted mannerism, or a funny story, each person around the table had a memory.

Grandma and Pop-Pop touched each of us in a special way. Our families traveled to be together on Thanksgiving – some of us had a short ride, others traveled all day long. But the important thing was the fact that we were all driven by a desire to be together to share and reflect.

We smiled, laughed, and cried. As we shared our stories and reflections, I thought about the Fred Rogers quote that my wife used to start us off - “In all of our histories there are parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents who came before us….As we help children understand more about the people who came before them, we also help them learn more about who they are themselves…”

I believe that our Thanksgiving weekend together helped me and everyone around that table understand these two special people better and we left that place knowing more about ourselves in the process.

Don and Ruth were a big part of my life for the last twenty-six years. Over that time, my story was rewritten and I was the willing recipient of their love. I am proud and honored that they were my Grandma and Pop-Pop and they will be missed beyond measure.

Healthcare 101

The 72 hour clock has begun to tick as Congress begins its final march to a vote on a healthcare reform bill.

After months of internal debate, discussion, talking to experts, and hosting town hall meetings all across America, two things are clear: 1) Health care costs are on an unsustainable rise in America and must be addressed, and 2) there are too many uninsured Americans in the US today. So the big debate in Washington should be how to address these concerns. Right?

Sadly, since the beginning of the year, the debate in Congress has centered on the majority’s desire to completely redesign our healthcare system overnight. No doubt something needs to be done, but no one has convinced me that it needs to be a wholesale re-write of the system.

A few other facts are also important to note: The health care industry represents 1/6th of our nation’s economy and 85% of all Americans currently have healthcare insurance. I add these facts because I believe they are important to keep in mind as one contemplates this important issue.

This week, Republicans introduced what is called a substitute amendment to the current proposal being considered. I am extremely impressed with this alternative and the concepts included in the proposal have restored my faith in the legislative process – when it is allowed to work. My biggest concern now is the fact that this very thoughtful proposal will most likely never see the light of day or get the debate on the House floor that it deserves. The Republican proposal received its CBO score today and the news justifies my excitement over the proposal.

The most positive fact about the Republican plan…it is the ONLY plan that actually begins to reduce costs according to the CBO, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. That means that one of the key public policy concerns over healthcare can be addressed immediately. The substitute addresses other aspects of the problem incrementally, realizing that addressing the concern over insuring as many as 30 million people is best addressed in small doses, and not by the creation of larger government bureaucracies.

The CBO reports on these two bills illustrate two entirely different methods to get at healthcare reform. Here are some high points:

• The GOP substitute decreases the deficit by $68 billion over ten years. The Pelosi plan increases the deficit by $250 billion.
• The GOP substitute costs $61 billion, or 5% of the $1.3 trillion cost associated with the Pelosi bill.
• The GOP substitute “would reduce health care costs directly by reducing premiums for medical liability insurance and associated costs and indirectly by slightly reducing the utilization of health services,” according to the CBO.
• The GOP substitute cuts premiums 7-10% for small businesses (15% of total private premiums); 5-8% for the individual market (5% of total private premiums); and up to 3% for people working for large businesses.
• In the individual market, Republican plan’s premiums are $5,000 less than premiums in the Pelosi bill. (Under the Pelosi bill, premiums would be approximately $15,000 annually, compared to the current law of $11,000. The GOP substitute would reduce that to $10,120).
• The GOP substitute does not include any new taxes on Americans. Under the Pelosi plan, there are $729.5 billion in new taxes and fees.
• The GOP substitute protects small businesses by reducing health premiums. The Pelosi plan includes $152 billion in taxes on small businesses. Additionally, it includes a $135 billion tax over 6 years for noncompliance with the employer mandate to provide insurance to all workers (CBO).

I normally avoid writing about issues and providing laundry lists of facts, but this issue is too important to rely upon three second sound bites. If anyone is truly serious about this debate, you owe it to yourself to understand all the facts – on both sides of the aisle.

I have what I call a healthy distrust of government. I trust the government implicitly with protecting me. I don’t have the same level of confidence when it comes to the delivery of social services. That’s where I am happy to allow some government intervention and lots of private market influence to take root.

The GOP substitute does that and it takes care of lots of “fixes” that must be addressed to attack the high costs associated with medical care today. By CBO’s own admission, it is the only proposal that does so. I am all for taking it slowly, addressing the concerns incrementally, and developing a solid plan to attack one of the key issues surrounding healthcare reform debate today – costs.

The GOP substitute focuses on costs but includes numerous other reforms as well – from enhancing health savings accounts, to allowing dependents to remain on their parents’ health plan, to allowing Americans to buy insurance across state lines, to guaranteeing coverage for pre-existing conditions.

While the GOP approach is not as broad sweeping as the Pelosi plan, its authors realize that it only begins to attack the entire problem. But I see nothing wrong with that. Healthcare is too large a project to re-write at once. It is too large to consider for only six days. It is too important to rush. The GOP substitute is a start.

I am far more comfortable with a more deliberative approach – one that is incremental, slow, with care and debate, compromise, and an open and fair exchange of ideas and views. That’s the way we will fix this problem.

We all deserve at least that much.

Tuesday’s Real Message – Caution to the GOP

Yesterday was by any account an interesting day in the Commonwealth and around the country. Were the election results a statement on the Obama Administration’s policy agenda? Was the result in Virginia a statement of discontent with the way Democrats are running Washington?

Clearly there is dissatisfaction in the air. On Tuesday, the newest key voting bloc – Independents – flexed their collective muscle once again and made a statement that things are askew and we need to get back on track. Tuesday’s election will certainly be analyzed over the next few weeks and the political pundits will issue their assessment of the votes, but a few things are immediately clear.

First, President Obama was not able to recreate the magic that he generated one year ago. Perhaps people are disillusioned; perhaps they feel that the change they supported has not been delivered upon. The only reality here is that voters were not as engaged as they were last year and the challenge for all candidates will be to figure out how to tap into that excitement and woo the same coalitions back to the polls in 2010. President Obama did actively campaign for the Democratic candidates in New Jersey and Virginia. Some will say that his influence has been deflated in two states that he easily carried just twelve months ago. While this is an important trend that should not be underestimated, there is a bigger message that needs to be addressed.

That message comes straight from the Congressional race in New York. In this much watched race, three candidates vied to replace Congressman John McHugh, a Republican. The Special Election in New York’s 23rd District went to Democrat Bill Owens in this largely Republican congressional district of New York. Congressman-Elect Owens defeated the candidate of the Conservative Party of New York, Doug Hoffman. But this race is notable because of the division between conservatives and GOP leaders. GOP leaders selected state Assemblywoman Dierdre Scozzafava, a moderate Republican, as their candidate, over the Conservative Party of New York candidate, Hoffman.

The Democratic candidate, Owens, headed into Election Day trailing in polls. However, over the weekend, the GOP candidate, Scozzafava, withdrew from the race citing her sudden drop in polls amid continued conservative criticisms, and subsequently endorsed the Democratic candidate.

I know, if you didn’t follow this race, you might think that I was making up this stuff, but it’s all true! While the New Jersey and Virginia Governors’ Races are the headlines today, I think there is an important underlying lesson that must be learned from this race before the 2010 mid-term congressional races – the Republican party must figure out the right balance of standing up to their convictions for conservative principles without being intolerant to a wide array of political views.

With only two major political parties, there are bound to be a myriad of views and opinions within each political party. Not everyone will agree on every principle 100% of the time. The GOP must look forward to embracing the differences that make us strong. A diversity of opinion, and an acceptance of those differences, will allow the party to address the needs of those they represent with a broader appeal.

If the tent becomes so small that we are intolerant of the diversity of opinion within our own ranks, the GOP may never fully realize their potential. In my opinion, that is the real message behind Tuesday’s election results.

They do Grow Up So Fast - Part 2!

It never ceases to amaze me that this life journey we are on constantly tries your patience and always tugs at your heart-strings.

I recently wrote that watching my daughter “graduate” from elementary school tore me up as I watched my little girl walk across the stage. And today, I just experienced another first in my journey – watching my eldest take off from a family vacation to head back to college.

Wow. It seemed really odd to watch one of my children leave our vacation home separately from the family. I know he is a young man, complete with the autonomy that comes with being 19, but it was still a strange feeling. This week’s vacation was our last week together as a family this summer. Despite reading and listening to accounts of the difficulties of having college kids come home for the first summer, our experience was very pleasant.

Having the family all together for the summer was very enjoyable and it’s hard to believe that the summer has already come to an end.

But today, the realization that we are on the cusp of a new era, a new chapter and frankly, a new “normal” for our family, hit home. I suspect it will take some time for me to adjust to this new normal that sees our children become independent enough to slip in and out of our daily lives, our daily routines. It is a day of paradoxes, for it is a day that we work all our lives for, yet it one that you are slightly sad to see arrive.

You raise your kids to be independent, to grow up to be responsible and productive citizens. And while he is not there yet, he seems well on his way.

I certainly experienced this to some degree last year as we sent him off to be a college freshman. But over the last year, I have witnessed some of the transitional changes that will culminate in graduating from college and entering the world as a productive adult.

God gives us nine months to prepare for a new child to enter the family fold. I am grateful that there is a four-year transition from teenager to young adult. I have a feeling, based on how I feel right now, that I will need every bit of the four years to adjust!

From a parent’s view, watching your child move closer to that ultimate goal is exciting. Nevertheless, it is indication that life will never be the same, and its time to embrace the new normal.

The First Annual Beth Bryan Swim A Thon

Our community has been working hard to find a meaningful and lasting tribute to a friend, colleague and neighbor. All of this energy has resulted in the formation of the Springfield-Burke Relay for Life Commmittee. This group of dedicated friends have been busy working with the American Cancer Society to make the first Springfield-Burke Relay a reality. The Relay is scheduled for May 14-15, 2010 at the West Springfield High School.

The Springfield-Burke Relay For Life Committee recently announced their first event - The First Annual Beth Bryan Swim-A-Thon – at Orange Hunt Pool from 9-11 PM on Sunday, September 6th. (register by August 28, 2009 by emailing the committee at SpringfieldBurkeRFL@gmail.com).

The Swim-A-Thon will give all of the kids and families touched by Beth an opportunity to work together in her name for a good cause, enjoy the pool for the last time before school starts, and have a bunch of fun doing it! We will have music, refreshments and games. The Swim-A-Thon will also launch our 2010 efforts in style – and in a way Beth would have appreciated – in the pool!

The pledge form is above and participants are asked to find sponsors for the event and set an individual goal of $25-50 each. If we all participate, we can make this inaugural event a huge success, and all the donations are tax deductible. Checks should be made payable to the American Cancer Society. We want a great turn out, so if you know someone who might like to help out, please feel free to forward this pledge form for them so they can join us for the Swim-A-Thon as well!

In case you don't know much about the Relay For Life, it is the American Cancer Society’s signature activity. It offers everyone in a community an opportunity to participate in the fight against cancer. Teams of people camp out at West Springfield high school and take turns walking or running around a track or path. Each team is asked to have a representative on the track at all times during the event. Relays are an overnight event, and ours is scheduled to begin at 7:00 PM on May 14th and ends at 7:00 AM the following morning.

Teams of people from all walks of life have fun while raising much-needed funds to fight cancer and raise awareness of cancer prevention and treatment. No matter who you are, there’s a place for you at Relay. To participate, form a team, or dedicate a luminaria, please get involved and contact the committee at SpringfieldBurkeRFL@gmail.com or call me at 703-866-3733.

Relay For Life is a life-changing event that brings together more than 3.5 million people across the nation to:

• Celebrate the lives of those who have battled cancer. The strength of survivors inspires others to continue to fight.

• Remember loved ones lost to the disease. At Relay, people who have walked alongside people battling cancer can grieve and find healing.

• Fight Back. We Relay because we have been touched by cancer and desperately want to put an end to the disease.

The First Annual Beth Bryan Swim-A-Thon is the first step toward that goal in 2010 and we welcome your participation!

They do Grow Up So Fast!

Earlier this week, I sat in the Orange Hunt Elementary School Cafeteria for what I presume will be the last time and watched my little girl walk up on stage to be congratulated for completing her elementary education.

I was struck by the fact that my daughter, the one who began Kindergarten in this very place, was leaving it as a young lady. She is filled with imagination, talent, and beauty. She is no longer that little child who seemed to be dwarfed by all those incredibly large 6th graders just a few years ago. There she was, standing tall and proud. When they called her name, I watched her cross the stage with poise and confidence.

As I sat there, I thought to myself how pleased I was to be able to use words like imaginative, talented, confident, proud, and poised to describe one of my children.

I have always loved being a father. From the first day our first child came home, they have inspired me to new heights. Today, my three children are becoming three fine young adults, each with their own peculiarities, talents, and gifts. They are all developing their own personalities and characteristics.

But they would not be the great kids they are without the strong and constant presence of a dedicated and loving mother. I am truly blessed to have a strong, loving, caring, and confident woman in my daughter’s life.

There is a direct correlation between that incredible woman and the confident, poised young lady I saw walk across the Orange Hunt stage this week.

A Glimmer of Hope Dashed Within the Same Day

It’s been a while since I felt strongly about writing something, but this week on the Hill, and please note it’s only Wednesday, has been a study of contradictions on bipartisanship.

I’ll start with the one of the most hopeful signs I have seen in a long time that bipartisanship is alive and well. This week, after several months of working in a very bipartisan fashion, the Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations marked-up it annual funding bill. A “mark-up” is the legislative process where the bill is reviewed and amended before being reported out of subcommittee and passed on to the full committee for consideration. The Chairwoman of the subcommittee, the Honorable Nita Lowey from New York, worked with her own members and the Republican members on her subcommittee to craft a well balanced bill.

Chairwoman Lowey allowed discussion, debate, participation and an honest give and take between subcommittee members throughout the process. Her staff was responsive to requests and at the end of the process; a legislative product was presented that truly illustrated the strength of the process. The result was a bill that included many of the majority’s priorities, major priorities of the minority, and a balanced and effective oversight regiment for Congress.

I witnessed a true give and take – and watched the Chairwoman work with the Ranking Member of the Committee, the Honorable Kay Granger – to the point where each side gave enough to bring forth what I believe is a better piece of legislation. Just as envisioned.

But, every good story in Washington seems to have an equally disappointing one. In contrast to the spirit of working together noted above, the leadership in the House yesterday shut down debate on the Floor after only 22 minutes of consideration of another appropriations bill – the Commerce, Justice, and Science bill for fiscal year 2010.

The budget passed a few months ago spends $1.089 trillion in American taxpayer money for discretionary government programs in the 2010 fiscal year. Last night, debate began on the first of 12 bills which make up this spending proposal. The Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations bill totals $64.31 billion in taxpayer money, which represents a 12% increase over the funding levels for this bill in the last fiscal year.

Just like in the subcommittee process outlined above, debate on this measure deserves to be held. Unfortunately, as members of the minority attempted to question the majority on funding levels, instead of defending their spending, or allowing it to be curtailed or re-directed, Democrats shut down the U.S. House of Representatives after just 22 minutes of amendment debate on this massive spending bill, preventing any Republican – or Democrat who disagrees with the leadership - from debating its merits or limiting its spending.

It was a stark contrast for me to watch a $64.31 billion bill debated for only 22 minutes before the process was cut off by the majority, after witnessing the comity on the State, Foreign Operations Subcommittee. A few years ago, Congress took three days to debate this bill. Precedent – both when Republicans were in the majority, and when Democrats have been in control – has always allowed for an open debate on these spending bills.

I think that is why I was so surprised to watch the majority shut out 94 proposed amendments. The majority of these amendments would have saved billions in wasteful government spending and better prioritized how Washington spends taxpayer funds.

With total control of Washington, it baffles me that the majority just doesn’t allow this debate to occur and vote down those GOP amendments they don’t like. Had the give and take taken place – like the process that was embraced by Chairwoman Lowey and Ranking Member Granger – important and pressing matters would have been openly debated and I am confident that a better bill would have emerged.

Remembering Beth Bryan

Over the last few days, I have tried my absolute best to get my arms around my sadness over the death of friend and despite my best efforts, I am still struggling with that today.  I have experienced the passing of loved ones before, so I struggle with why I have been so profoundly impacted by the loss of Beth Bryan.

After much reflection, I believe I am starting to understand…

Beth was an extraordinary woman.  She was everyone’s friend.  She was the neighborhood mom that every kid felt comfortable with, looked up to, and loved.  She was a loving wife to her husband Mike, and a dedicated, passionate mother to her own children.  She was a devoted daughter and sister.  Beth was a woman of faith, a teacher, a Scout Leader, a Swim Coach – and the list goes on.

Beth had a way with making anyone feel comfortable no matter what the circumstances.  She was warm and welcoming.  As a matter of fact, she had a signature smile that attracted return smiles like bees are attracted to honey.  Even if you did not see Beth on a daily basis, you would see her walking her dog or at the pool, and the first thing out of her mouth was always, “Hey Darlin’, how are you?” 

Beth was that rare individual that you come across on this all too often short life journey and you instantly want to be friends with.  Beth touched more people than I think she perhaps even realized, from neighborhood friends who first met nearly 20 years ago putting their eldest children on the bus for the first day of school, to the countless families and friends she touched in her capacity as a swim coach in Northern Virginia.

This was no ordinary life.  This was indeed an extraordinary person. That realization and the impact she had not only on me, but on all those around me, is perhaps the reason why her death has been so difficult to process.

Today Beth is embraced in the arms of angels and those of us left behind will never forget the impact she had on us.  The community of friends that remain on the journey are better off for having known Beth and we will all need one another as we continue to grieve and attempt to adjust to the daily routines in our lives. 

I am reminded of a song by the Eagles and the refrain truly summed up my feelings… “There's a hole in the world tonight, There's a cloud of fear and sorrow, There's a hole in the world tonight.”   Beth’s passing leaves a profound hole in all of our worlds. 

Until we meet again friend, know that you are loved and missed dearly.

 

Happy Tax Day!!

Well, I procrastinated about doing taxes longer this year than I can ever recall in the past and I am not sure why. And when I say procrastinate – I mean like I am still working on the returns!!

I’ll be honest…in 2008 I heard lots about taxes and how no family making less than $250,000 a year would see any tax increases. And sitting here today seeing my income stay the same as 2007 but my tax liability increase, gives me great pause about whether that statement is true or will be factual as I sit down to complete my 2009 tax return a year from now.

On this Tax Day, I think all taxpaying Americans should be concerned that our leaders are actually poised to enact runaway tax hikes over the next few years and this “tax train” is speeding down the tracks without any ability to slow down or stop.

So, what is all the fuss about? I decided to track down some facts about the tax situation for people like me. Here is what I have discovered so far…

• On April 2, 2009, the US House of Representatives passed H.Con.Res. 85, the Democrat budget resolution, by a vote of 233-196. The budget increases taxes by $574 billion over five years and $1.154 trillion over ten years.
• Days Spent Working to Pay Taxes in 2009: US Avg. 103.
• Americans will pay more in taxes than they will spend on food, clothing and housing combined.
• The Democrat budget recently passed by Congress will double the national debt in 5 years and triple it in 10 years.
• Every American child born this year will owe $70,000.
• The President recently proposed his first budget, which includes the following:

Cap & Tax: The President's budget proposes a national energy tax that would cap greenhouse gas emissions from regulated entities and require businesses to purchase permits or "allowances" for their emissions-an effective tax on all energy consumption. This proposal is commonly known as “Cap and Tax,” and according to a Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) study, this tax will cost the average American household up to $3,128 per year in increased energy costs.

Health Care Taxes: President's budget proposes more than $630 billion in new spending on health care reform as a mere "down payment" for additional spending to come.

Small Businesses Taxes: In 2010, the President’s budget will increase taxes on all taxpayers that earn more than $200,000 individually, or $250,000 as a couple. The majority of the burden for this $637 billion tax increase will be borne by small business owners (who pay taxes on this income as part of their individual returns). Small businesses create 60 to 80 percent of all new jobs in America. These new taxes will stifle job creation and economic growth in the midst of a recession.

Capital Gains and Dividends Taxes: Under the President’s budget, taxes on capital gains and dividends would increase for individuals with an income over $250,000 (married) and $200,000 (single) from 15 to 20 percent, increasing taxes on investors by $338 billion over ten years.

Charitable Giving Tax: The budget caps the value of itemized deductions at 28 percent for those with an income over $250,000 (married) and $200,000 (single), which will reduce charitable giving by $9 billion a year.

Death Tax: The President’s budget reinstates the death tax scheduled to be fully repealed in 2010.

Carried Interest Tax: The budget would more than double taxes on carried interest, increasing taxes up from the capital gains rate (15 percent) to the income tax rate (39.6 percent). Carried interest is interest gained on profits from investments and is generally used to pay investment fund managers based on the fund’s performance for investors.

Energy Producer Tax: The President’s budget imposes $31 billion in punitive new taxes on domestic energy production over the next ten years, encouraging U.S. companies to move jobs overseas and increasing our overall dependence on foreign energy supplies.

LIFO Accounting: The President’s budget proposes repealing the first-in, first-out (LIFO) accounting rule which allows businesses to assume the most recent inventory item purchased is the first sold. According the President’s budget, the change would result in a $61 billion tax increase over ten years, borne mainly by manufacturers and small businesses that purchase a great deal of inventory each year.

Wow – just a little research unearthed this non-exhaustive list!

It is time to stop procrastinating, complete and file my 2008 return, and start saving for my 2009 tax bill!

Place the AIG Blame Where it Belongs....

The same people yelling about bailing out private insurance businesses are the people screaming about efforts to collect and control the use of taxpayer funds at these very same companies.

Words like “outrage,” “incomprehensible,” and “offensive” have all been used to describe the AIG mess and I don’t disagree with those characterizations. I just wish my fellow Americans would look a bit closer at the way Washington works and understand the use of legislative tools and strategy before criticizing every action taken. Americans need to do a little research, comprehend “strategy” votes, understand procedural maneuvering and avoid the far too frequent knee-jerk criticism and condemnation they so easily dish out to our elected officials. At the end of that analysis, if you still believe the actions taken were wrong, by all means criticize with a passion.

However, in the case of the AIG bonus situation, instead of being angry at Congress for casting what I could best describe as a “no-confidence” vote in the administration’s handling of the AIG bonus issue, I believe anger and “outrage” should be focused at the correct players – namely the White House and the Treasury Department.

Facts are a stubborn thing and a quick review of the facts sheds some much needed light on this issue. On March 19th, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 1586, the first legislative response to the public outrage surrounding battered insurance giant American International Group, Inc. It targets a narrow group of individuals, topped by executives and other employees at AIG on the receiving end of $165 million in bonus checks. The final vote was 328-93, surpassing the two-thirds majority needed to pass the bill under suspension of the rules, an expedited procedure that bars amendments and limits debate.

The legislation would impose a 90 percent tax on the bonuses, targeting a narrow group of individuals at about a dozen firms that have received more than $5 billion in federal aid, including AIG. It is important to note that AIG is now 80 percent owned by the federal government and on the receiving end of $170 billion of taxpayer bailout money.

It is equally important to understand that the bonuses were allowed as a result of a Democratic decision to remove a tax proposal similar to the one included in H.R. 1586 from the economic recovery legislation. Instead of including this language in the recovery legislation, House Democrats replaced it with language that specifically prevented restrictions on bonuses paid pursuant to contracts signed before Feb. 11. Leaders stated that this provision was added at the request of the Administration.

So, if you are in the minority and have no control over the legislative agenda and wish to make a point, what do you do? You use every legislative tool you have to send a strong message and in this case that message was a “no-confidence” vote in Secretary Geithner and the Administration for negotiating the exclusion of restrictions on taxpayer funds in the Economic Stimulus legislation.

Should the AIG Bonus legislation, as passed by the House, ever become law, I think there is a good chance it could be declared unconstitutional. And I think lots of smart Republicans and Democrats realized that when they cast their “yes” vote. The ultimate fate of the House bill is not clear. The Senate version of a bonus tax differs in some key ways from that of the House. And while the legislation feels like "justice" to those outraged, it is at best bad public policy and at worst, unconstitutional. But I believe it is so much more than that. I think frustrated members of Congress wanted to send a message.

While I believe a strong message was sent to Administration, a stronger message was sent to those receiving our tax dollars. That message was “finally someone is looking out for us and you should take caution when taking these valuable resources from hard working Americans.”
Surprisingly, that message was sent, received and apparently processed by those on the receiving end.

A final version of the legislation has not been signed into law, but just look at the results so far. First of all, Secretary Geithner recently stated that he will deduct $165 million from the next $30 billion that AIG is slated to receive. Secondly, Edward M. Liddy, the government-installed chairman and CEO of AIG, has asked employees to return portions of their bonuses and said that at least some are doing that. And finally, according to New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, nine of the top 10 bonus recipients have already agreed to return the money, and half of the total $165 million may be retrieved.

I would suggest that those “outraged” by Congress’ action take heart and understand that sometimes Congress works the way it was intended. I would argue that in the case of the AIG bonus mess created by the Administration, they did just that. This legislation is bad public policy and hopefully will never become law. But the threat of that possibility has sparked the right outcome.

Update on my last post.... (see "Really?" below)

Judd Gregg Withdraws Nomination for Commerce Secretary

President Obama's choice for commerce secretary, Senator Judd Gregg, Republican of New Hampshire, withdrew his nomination on Thursday. He said there were "irresolvable conflicts"
between him and the administration.

Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com/?emc=na

Really??

Have you heard the latest on efforts at bipartisanship in Washington?  President Obama announced that the director of next year’s Census report would report directly to Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel instead of the Commerce Secretary as is customary.  How is this a bipartisan issue?  

Read on…

For those of you who don’t know what the census is, it is that constitutionally mandated decennial requirement that counts all the people in the United States.  Census data directly affects how more than $300 billion per year in federal and state funding is allocated to communities for neighborhood improvements, public health, education, transportation and much more.  Census data is used to apportion seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and to redistrict state legislatures.  It also affects school district assignment areas and other important functional areas of government.

President Obama, who impressed us all with his outward gesture of bipartisanship with the selection of Republican Senator Judd Gregg as his Commerce Secretary designate, just collapsed under pressure from Democrats in Congress who complained to the White House that Judd Gregg could not be trusted to conduct a complete census.  The National Association of Latino Officials stated that it had “serious questions about his willingness to ensure that the 2010 Census produces the most accurate possible count.”

The apparent nod to Congressional pressure raises great concern for me.  Why would you pick a man to be your Commerce Secretary only to announce that you really don’t trust him to be non-political with something as sensitive as the Census?  I believe that this challenges Mr. Gregg’s integrity and competency to run the Department and more importantly, raises concerns once again in my mind about this Administration’s true commitment for changing the way government works, and for the calls for bipartisanship.

Think back with me for a few minutes – back to 2001. In the wake of the Election of 2000, President-elect George W. Bush (R) reached out to the Democratic Party for his nominee to head DOT, but let’s make believe it was the Department of Commerce.  After the closest race in 112 years, Bush chose former San Jose Mayor and Representative Norman Yoshio Mineta (D-CA), a Japanese-American as his Secretary designate who was Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Commerce.  Soon after that appointment, Bush announced that the Census Department would not fall under the Democrat, but would report directly to someone in the Bush White House, like, let’s say, Karl Rove.  Can you imagine the uproar?

Bush’s actions would have been criticized by everyone as a half-hearted attempt to live up to a campaign promise.  Others would have flat out condemned the President as violating the good faith entrusted to him by the American people.  But today’s actions didn’t get much mention at all.  

I believe that actions speak louder than words.  And this newest development screams loudly.  The seizure of the non-political Census Bureau by the political structure in the White House should raise red flags from Washington to San Diego.  It is troubling at best, and it represents an outright power grab at worst.

Is this really the "change" that President Obama talks about?  I don't think so, and if I were Senator Gregg, I would remove my name from further consideration and return to the U.S. Senate.  Really!

The Stimulus Package Passes

The first test of the new Administration’s clout on Capitol Hill ended earlier this evening with a party line vote on the much talked about stimulus bill.  All week long we have heard about bipartisanship and working together.  Despite the talk, there was no way to overcome the fundamental philosophical differences that exist between our two political parties.

Today the House voted 244-188 (with 11 Democrats joining 177 Republicans in opposing the bill) to pass the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, H.R. 1, also known as the Stimulus Bill.  

Everyone agrees that there is a problem with our economy; however, the fundamental differences between the parties precluded a bipartisan solution to the problem.  In one 15-minute vote today, the House of Representatives spent the equivalent of all the revenue the U.S. Government collects in one single year.

That is an astonishing fact, but pales in comparison to some of the representations made in support of the legislation.  For instance, proponents of the bill state that the legislation will create or save 3 million jobs.  But at what cost?  With a price tag of $825 billion, that means American taxpayers are spending about $275,000 for each new job created.

I try hard to look at all sides of these complex debates and I have tried to analyze this matter as best I can without looking at the talking points and sound bites.  No matter what your political affiliation, today’s actions should cause you concern.

All this week and last, GOP efforts to include some of their amendments in the legislation were ignored.  GOP supporters called for more tax relief and despite the criticisms, everyone, including the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (known as CBO), acknowledged that tax cuts will impact the economy more quickly than big government spending.

Perhaps more to the point, analysis by President Obama’s senior economic advisors also demonstrated that tax cuts provide a bigger bang for the buck.  Earlier today, when the methods and economic models developed by the President’s top advisors were applied to a non-partisan estimate of the tax relief provided by an alternate measure to H.R. 1, it demonstrated that the Republican substitute could create 6.2 million jobs over the next two years, or twice as many jobs for half the cost to the American taxpayer.

Despite these facts – not sound bites – all efforts to include these concepts in the final product were ignored and dismissed.   If you are reading this, I am sure we do not agree on everything, but I hope and trust that we all can agree that some of the “stimulative” spending in this bill is not truly stimulative.

As a matter of fact, I would like to challenge someone to demonstrate how funding for climate change research, federal building repair, and AmeriCorps, is stimulative.  What about the $335 million appropriation for sexually transmitted disease education and prevention programs? How exactly does that stimulate the economy?

The bill also includes $650 million in coupons for Digital TV converter boxes and $137 billion, with a “b,” to create 32 new government programs. There's $1 billion for the consistently deficit-ridden Amtrak; $2 billion for child-care subsidies; and $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts, which is known for generating controversy, not jobs.

Spending obviously must be part of the formula, but spending on this level, with no real hope of job creation, is not stimulus.  As a matter of fact, each of the 152 earmarks in this bill should have been considered in the normal and regular legislative process of Congress, not in this large initiative, which was supposed to be a true economic stimulus package.

Tonight President Obama stated that he was disappointed that the legislation did not garner any bipartisan support and continued by saying that he hopes the final product that ultimately comes to his desk is a better product.  But back on Capitol Hill, where the new era of bipartisanship was summarily crushed this week, the stimulus bill was written based on the wish list of every living interest group in America. As Speaker Nancy Pelosi put it, "We won the election. We wrote the bill."

The Democrats did win, but as I said back in November, it is easy to talk about governing – it is much harder to actually govern.  Good leaders, those that secure their place in history, don’t keep reminding you that they won.  They lead.  The leadership in Congress vowed to work in a bipartisan manner for what was best for the United States.  By any account, they have failed miserably to live up to the promises of reform they made to the American voter.

Tonight, I hope for the sake of all of us that President Obama gets his wish for a better product, but I fear that the majority’s arrogance will prevail – even over the objections of the President.  And if that happens, the Republicans should let the Democrats take all of the credit for today’s vote, and the ramifications. 

Missing the Mark on Bipartisanship

According to Webster’s dictionary, the meaning of bipartisanship is “of, relating to, or involving members of two parties; specifically marked by or involving cooperation, agreement, and compromise between two major political parties.” 

The new Obama Presidency struggled with the concept of bipartisanship in Washington this week and to the new President’s credit, he stood by his words and promises and did his best to include the members of both political parties in the discussions of the day – specifically, how to craft the President’s $800 plus billion dollar economic stimulus plan. 

On the heels of the inauguration of our new president, Congress set about doing its business by crafting an $825 billion stimulus bill.  As you have heard before, watching legislation go through its process is like watching someone make sausage.  If you have ever watched someone make sausage, you know it is not a pretty site.  And this was no exception. 

While the GOP has been trying to define their role in the new environment, I believe many members of the party were relieved to hear President-Elect Obama earlier this month state that he welcomed Republican ideas on the stimulus.  More importantly, this week, he responded to GOP requests to be heard on the stimulus and said he thought some of their ideas had merit.

To stick with the analogy, this was probably the gathering of ingredients we need to actual begin making sausage.  Then the grinding began…

House Democrats unveiled their version of a $825 billion dollar stimulus, drafted without Republican input.  Speaker Pelosi stated that “Our Republican colleagues had some constructive suggestions which we will review,” and she continued after the meeting with the President by stating “I have a very good feeling coming out of this meeting that we’ll be able to reach more bipartisanship.”

There’s that word again!

As the week progressed, the majority was frustrated with the minority and the minority felt like they were only getting lip service, and not much more.  So where does the bipartisanship that everyone mentions come into play?  Is it the act of listening or is it something more? 

Without listening to the other side, two opposing views can never reach compromise. Obviously, hearing proposals with thoughtful attention and consideration are at the very core of listening.  But the word “bipartisan,” by its very definition, implies moving beyond the act of listening.  Bipartisanship includes action, like involving, cooperating, agreeing and compromise. Unfortunately, that does not appear to be what happened this week in Washington.  Our leaders stopped at the “listening” phase.

The House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey let Republicans offer amendments to the plan’s $358.1 billion that falls under the jurisdiction of this committee and then proceeded to explain why none of them were worthy of passage – and none of them did.  The committee approved its bill by on a strict party line vote of 35-22. Democrats warned that action is needed soon to help the struggling economy, while Republicans questioned both the size and content of the package.

Over at the Ways and Means Committee (the other committee with jurisdiction), members met to mark up the plan’s $275 billion tax portion of the economic stimulus bill.  After turning back Republican attempts to change it, the panel approved the tax section of the broad draft legislation on a party-line vote of 24‑13. Republicans unsuccessfully offered amendments that would have further reduced income taxes, eliminated taxes on unemployment benefits, “patched” the alternative minimum tax for 2009 and expanded tax incentives for home purchases.

The actions this week on the Hill hardly rise to the level of bipartisanship.  Listening is important, but without any commitment or willingness to move past listening, we cannot reach the goal of bipartisanship.

According to the Wall Street Journal, during the meeting with the President this week, one Republican Senator questioned the President over why Congress should accept a certain piece of the package.  According to the account, participants said the new president replied simply, "I won."  Based on what I have learned about this President so far, I find it difficult to image that he actually said this, but making sausage is difficult work.  Nevertheless, the American people want the hope and promise of this new Administration to rise above comments like the alleged one reported by the Journal. 

2009 presents what I believe is a monumental, and perhaps a once in a lifetime, opportunity for a truly bipartisan discourse in government.  Republicans failed to engage to do so, which is why they were “unelected.”  However, less than one week into our new government, it pains me that our new leaders appear to be heading down the very same path yet again. 

Has Change Really Come to America?

I drove into work this morning and was struck by the fact that most of the gates were removed, the security barricades were gone, and screening facilities from yesterday were removed. As I drove through what was a massive screening and holding location yesterday, it dawned on me that less than 18 hours ago, we all witnessed history with the Inauguration of Barack Obama.

There was excitement in the air, people of all races and backgrounds became friends on long lines and even longer metro rides. As I waited for the security guard to clear me to enter the Capitol, I stopped and thought what a fragile state our country is in.

Could the good feelings of yesterday be wiped away as easily as the barricades were removed, or will all of us that were on the grounds of the Capitol yesterday leave this place and return to their respective homes with this sense of history, cooperation, and collaboration for the good of the nation?

This morning I logged onto the White House website and saw the message that read “Change has Come to America.” I want and pray that change has landed on our doorsteps and I hope that change has truly come to America. But as I sat in the crowd of 1.8 million people yesterday, my excitement, hope and joy of the day was replaced by the harsh reality that we as a nation will never change until and unless we are willing to embrace change.

No one – neither Republicans, nor Democrats, conservatives nor liberals – are immune from a failure to embrace change. And no matter how often we say Change has Come to America, we can’t just will it to happen, we must all embrace it.

The “event” that triggered all of this concern for me was the introduction of the 43rd President of the United States yesterday. As George W. Bush was introduced, the crowd erupted in loud roar of boos and hisses – reminiscent of an angry mob at a sporting event. But here is the difference; this was not a sporting event. The fight was over, George W. Bush’s party lost the Presidency and we were there to honor the historic nature of the inauguration of America’s first African American President and the time honored tradition of our peaceful transfer of power. The protests and objections against the Bush Presidency are over. The message was heard. His party lost. OUR new President won.

I did not agree with everything the Bush Administration did, but I do know this – George Bush ran for election, won the election (twice) and held the office of President of the United States. If you don’t respect the man, one should at least respect the office. I did not vote for Barrack Obama, but I respect the office he has attained. I want him to be successful and I pray that he is able to accomplish half of what he sets out to do. And I know that President Obama wants us all to work together, because as he said yesterday, “together, we can do anything.” The first step in achieving that goal is to stop looking in the rear view mirror and start looking ahead.

There are too many challenges that stand before us. We cannot afford to point fingers or lay blame. That is not the tone of our new President and hopefully he will inspire those who decide to stand still or even move backwards to rethink their decision.

Today we stand at the threshold of a new day. We have added a new milestone in our collective history. And it will all be for not until we all embrace the hope that President Obama espouses. If we as a nation don’t take this opportunity to walk this journey with our new President, his vision of “Change has Come to America” will never truly be realized. And what a shame that lost opportunity would be for all of us.