I’m going to bookmark this article so I can come back to it on an as needed basis. It goes into great detail about the challenges facing an Obama administration even with big majorities in both houses of Congress. If you want to know who Obama will have to deal with to get his health care or green economy bills passed, this is the article to read. It also looks into the history of one-party rule going back to Kennedy and contemplates lessons learned. It’s a very good piece of journalism and quite educational for those unfamiliar with either the history or The Hill.
One insight is the importance of communicating now with the important committee chairmen, so that they can get started working on the agenda for the first 100 days. Another insight is the importance of setting the right priorities in terms of scheduling, and in not putting too much work into the system. I think I’ll do a comparative piece soon that looks at the cultural differences between the Democrats congress that Clinton inherited and the one that Obama will (hopefully) inherit.
Here’s a totally inside baseball problem: The process of FBI vetting potential political appointees is broken. It takes far too long, and is far too onerous on those selected. Obama ought to dispense with it, publicly, and go to an after-the-fact process to weed out any real stinkers.
I completely disagree. You do all the vetting you can so you minimize the damage sure to come anyway.
Well, then your trying to run your administration without the people needed to do it. It’s a choice of two evils: taking the chance on political damage from appointing someone who turns out to have problems, versus long delays in getting who you need to help.
And I’m not sure I trust the FBI to be as prompt as possible; I think they sabotaged the first Clinton administration on this very point.
in a sentence, the financial crisis. now in the second inning, will consume the next occupant at 1600.
Ignore the spin. Ignore those who point fingers at the messenger as a doom and gloomer.
Good thing Obama communicates well. Like FDR he’ll be dealing with the same challenges…but of greater magnitude. The Weimar experience ahead.
Mugabe awaits to issue his welcome to the club.
Thanks, BooMan. My time is limited these days so I really appreciate when you call out an article like this.
I read it as a bit of a warning shot across the bow from a very nervous set of Democrats. They want power, but they don’t have Obama’s popularity. I’m sure some are upset that this upstart young guy bounded past them to seize the nomination. Now, they don’t want him dictating the Congressional agenda.
But someone has to dictate, and someone has to accept dictation, if we’re going to move ahead quickly. Otherwise, the long slog of compromise wastes valuable time.
I really hope Obama and Pelosi and Reid can form a quick working relationship. And I hope we ALL, in the Blogosphere, work hard to defeat Steny Hoyer the next time he’s up for election (assuming they can field some reasonably qualified Democrat to run against him) so that we don’t have a wolf in our midst tending the sheep.
that’s exactly how I see it: a warning shot. And so much “no we can’t” language!
heh. Indeed. This seems like some real foreshadowing: I think it’s digby who’s noted that the democrats are far more likely to kneecap their own than they are to attach republicans (the last 2 years has shown this clearly).
i suppose this makes me “cynical” although I prefer the term “realistic”.
Oooh, here’s another gem:
Translated: “I know we promised to [end the war] [fund alternative energy] [give you universal health care] [pick your pet project], but the republicans will say boo, so we can’t. Sorry, maybe next time when we have a bigger majority”
Funny how this never seems to be a problem for the GOP….
I’ll add a self-interested piece: care for our vets and their facilities. Right now, I’m sitting in McGuire VA hospital in Richmond, worried and pissed. Worried, b/c my FIL has been in here for a few days, and he’s not doing well. Pissed b/c this place looks like it was built in the 1950s:outside is good but inside up in these rooms, it looks old, paint is chipped off some of the doors, and they are almost overcrowded. Do you know that some of the rooms have four beds to a room?
That’s just what I’ve observed on first glance. And ya know what? This is probably one of the best VA hospitals in the system.
But I’m supposed to be broken up over Tony Snow? “Public servant” my ass!! Self servant is more like it.
What is it about these people foolish that they send others for their goddamned folly, huh? Trust me when I tell you I’ve seen young and older men here. They have wonderful volunteers who brought and served food for the vets (who are allowed) their families, and staff; and the staff has been incredibly friendly. But the conditions of this facility are not nearly as good as it could be.
To describe this place as “shabby” is to be kind.
Your standard wingnut wouldn’t be caught dead here.
I hate those fuckers, I really do. How careless they are with lives of others. If ppl aren’t in their circle then they don’t give a shit. We just cannot go on like this, people!
We just can’t.
That should be, the volunteers serve food to the vets here who are able to take part in it, i.e. Those who may be here for appts., etc. But those in bed, in ICU, etc. obviously didn’t participate. Families could b/c the canteen is closed on the weekends.
At least now there’s only 1 other person in the room now instead of three.
Obama’s surveillance vote spurs blogging backlash
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/11/obama.netroots/index.html
What a joke! Where’s the backlash? No there there! `Night FISA!
How about this one….?
Fueling VP speculation, Obama heading to Iraq with Hagel, Reed
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
LOL!
that’s the laziest attempt to cover the blogging backlash possible. He literally mailed that piece in.
I wonder if this is why he has seemed reluctant to directly attack unitary executive powers–he knows he’ll need it all when the collapse comes after Bush.
….and I can’t say he’d be wrong.