July 2009

Guns in the Congress!

by Don Pogreba on July 31, 2009 · 19 comments

I just came across this piece by E.J Dionne about the hypocrisy practiced by members of Congess when it comes to gun laws. How to solve their hypocrisy? Let people bring guns into Congress:

Isn’t it time to dismantle the metal detectors, send the guards at the doors away, and allow Americans to exercise their Second Amendment rights by being free to carry their firearms into the nation’s Capitol building?
I’ve been studying the deep thoughts of senators who regularly express their undying loyalty to the National Rifle Association and have decided that they should practice what they preach. They tell us that the best defense against crime is an armed citizenry and that laws restricting guns do nothing to stop violence.
If they believe that, why don’t they live by it?
Why would freedom-loving lawmakers want to hide behind guards and metal detectors? Shouldn’t NRA members be outraged that Second Amendment rights mean nothing in the very seat of our democracy?

Brilliant.

Mike Dennison has a fascinating story about what Senator Baucus won’t say about his magical health care reform bill. As far as I can tell, the plan won’t actually do anything that might threaten one nickel of corporate profit. Along the way, it will magically provide benefits, though those details seem awfully lacking.

What won’t Baucus’s proposal do?

  • It’s won’t include a public option, opposition to which demonstrates the enormous mental gymnastics required to be a conservative today. Conservatives oppose the public option because a) it will lead to a massive, unwieldy and expensive plan, but b) will drive private insurers out of business because the government will have an unfair competitive advantage. I’m not sure that makes much sense. What does make sense is that the public favors the proposal, which must mean insurance companies don’t.
  • It won’t require businesses to provide health insurance, but will offer “incentives.” My guess? Free expired Viagra and Propecia, with the  occasional “Attaboy!"
  • It won’t tax the wealthiest Americans, but instead will place the expense squarely on the backs of the very people who are struggling to pay their health care costs right now. This is an especially ingenious idea. After years of government tax policy designed to create a class of the super-rich and to neglect working Americans, Baucus’s proposal protects those poor millionaires from class warfare.

It’s apparent that Senator Baucus is much more interested in meeting the needs of those who can afford to make $5,000 campaign contributions than those who cannot afford $5,000 medical procedures and insurance premiums.

Whenever Senator Baucus talks about the important work of his committee, I am reminded of what he said seventeen years ago:

`No more scotch tape and baling wire,” said Senator Max Baucus, a member of the Senate Finance Committee, who spoke at the AAPS regional meeting in Great Falls, Montana, on June 20. “It’s time for fundamental reform, not tinkering.”

Although he does not believe that significant changes will occur in this session of Congress, he thinks they will not be long delayed. . .

Stop tinkering in a back room, Senator Baucus, with people who have no interest reforming health care. They’re killing it, and using you to do it. As Harold Meyerson points out in the Washington Post, it’s a fool’s errand:

Max Baucus, then, isn’t negotiating universal coverage with the party of Everett Dirksen, in which many members supported Medicare. He’s negotiating it with the party of Barry Goldwater, who was dead set against Medicare. It’s a fool’s errand that is creating a plan that’s a marvel of ineffectuality and self-negation — a latter-day Missouri Compromise that reconciles opposites at the cost of good policy.

Matt Yglesias is unimpressed by the latest substance-free self-promotion coming from Senator Baucus on health care reform. Today, Baucus is announcing that he and the rest of his secret bipartisan handshake clubhouse have come up with yet another plan, this one purporting to “cover 95% of legal U.S. residents,” while reducing the federal deficit in its 10th year.

Yglesias offers two possible explanations, each of which seems pretty reasonable. Either Baucus means the bill “covers” Americans in only the very loosest definition of the term, or he’s employing some budgeting tricks and accounting language. Yglesias doesn’t mention a third possibility, that Baucus has sold all federal lands to major pharmaceutical companies.

It’s hard not to be skeptical when Senator Baucus is involved. He has a well-developed history of promising substantive reform before wilting under the pressure of Senate Republicans. I’d certain that it’s vastly more important to Baucus that he pass a bill to burnish his legacy than it is that he makes a dent in real costs for American workers and real coverage for Americans living in poverty.

Each passing day makes the failure of the Democratic majority in Congress and the President to act decisively on health care a reminder that one shouldn’t place too much faith in elected officials. This process has been defined by its timidity, its secretiveness, and its contempt for citizens. Last night, I saw an ad that told me that Barack Obama and the Congress have a plan for health care reform. All I could think then, and now, is when might they feel comfortable sharing it with us?

Leading the “charge” all along? Senator Baucus, who might have to invite an actual Democrat to his next meeting if he wants to call it bipartisan.


Random Thoughts for a Monday

by Don Pogreba on July 27, 2009 · 7 comments

in Denny Rehberg

How does Dennis Rehberg deal with all the contradictions in his positions? Now I see that he is upset that stimulus money isn’t getting to Montana fast enough to create jobs, even though he doesn’t believe that the stimulus will create jobs.

Spending the past six hours (and far too much of the summer) reading law review articles makes me wonder whether or not law schools teach their students to write poorly. Sadly, my day and a half at law school didn’t provide an answer to the question.

Is the Independent Record ever planning to cover something other than mental illness? The series has long outlived its potential to generate interest.

In or out. Either I am going to get back to actually blogging at this site, or give it up. I can’t say whether a lack of energy or a sense of frustration is driving my malaise, but I’m certainly not contributing much to the discussion at the moment.


When he’s not authoring resolutions honoring the city of Billings, Representative Rehberg is hard at work, making symbolic gestures to appeal to his rabid base. Is he working on a solution to the health care crisis? Does he know one exists? Probably not. He does, however, know how to grandstand about the issue.

From the Representative’s Facebook page comes this insight:

rehbergnonsense

This leads me to ask a few questions.

  • Does our representative pledge not to vote against the bill until he has read it?
  • Has Representative Rehberg ever voted for a bill that he hasn’t read in its entirety?
  • Has he ever read an entire bill?

When not making politically charged but ultimately pointless pledges, Rehberg is spending his time on tired old conservative tropes. This week? The specter of the scourge of flag burning!

Montana Republican Congressman Denny Rehberg has sponsored a bill that would create a constitutional amendment prohibiting the physical desecration of the American flag. Similar legislation has been introduced at least seven times since 1990 after the Supreme Court ruled that burning the flag was a constitutionally protected form of free speech.

Representative Rehberg, 1994 wants its issue back.

How about doing some real work for the people of Montana? We’re going through a tough stretch in the United States—largely the result of Republican mismanagement of the economy and foreign policy—and we can’t afford to have our one representative spending his time on political stunts and grandstanding.

A Question About Tea Party Types

July 18, 2009

Doesn’t it seem like a lot of these hard-working, free-enterprise loving patriots have a lot of days off?  Maybe they have trouble filling out job applications for some reason. Bookmark on Delicious Digg this post Recommend on Facebook Buzz it up share via Reddit Share with Stumblers Tweet about it Subscribe to the comments on [...]

Read the full article →

Will Senator Baucus Stand for Working Americans on Health Care?

July 12, 2009

Greg Kauffman of the Nation is unimpressed with Senator Baucus: The party has a popular president, a strong majority in the House and a filibuster-proof sixty-member caucus in the Senate. It also has 72 percent of all Americans–including 87 percent of Democrats and 50 percent of Republicans–saying they want a public plan option to compete [...]

Read the full article →

A Critical Read of Dennis Rehberg’s Take on Cap and Trade

July 12, 2009

While some might be tempted to believe the Competitive Enterprise Institute penned editorial that Representative Rehberg has been peddling around the state’s newspapers, looking at it while a tiny degree of scrutiny might change your perspective. Representative Rehberg: While the eyes of the nation are on the health care debate in Washington, D.C., Congress is [...]

Read the full article →