From the desk of Bob Keefe

March 15, 2010

Bob Keefe — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 18:09:32 +0000

From the desk of Bob Keefe
Washington, D.C.
March 1, 2010

Political Update

The time has come, at long last. We are about to have the final action on President Barack Obama’s health care initiative. The legislative engineering gears are churning on both sides of the Capital getting ready to process the bills ready for the Members to vote on at last.

Under the torturous procedure that is required to bring about votes on the matter, we expect that the House of Representatives will vote Saturday or Sunday on the bill that passed the Senate last Christmas Eve in the exact form that it passed. That bill then will be engrossed and sent to the President for his signature. Once signed, the bill becomes law… but wait, this is just the first act. Reconciliation requires more stagecraft.

The House will then take up a bill to amend the bill it just passed to make perfecting changes and make it more acceptable to the Members of the House. When that bill is passed, it moves to the Senate for action. In normal times, it would be placed on the Calendar and require a super majority (60 votes) to get to a vote. But this will be Reconciliation and it will be available for unlimited amendment and a final vote, all by simple (51 vote) majority.

The Republicans have announced that it will continue to work to defeat the health care initiative. They plan to file many amendments to tie up the Senate and defeat the bill.

By now, the Health Care bill has become a hurdle that the President is required to jump to establish his primacy in this government. It has become the make or break moment for him.

Meanwhile, our Wars Continue

Lest we forget, Americans keep dying and keep being injured in Iraq and Afghanistan. The official count as of March 1, 2010, of the dead since our involvement in Iraq began on March 23, 2003 is 4,383; the dead from the war in Afghanistan from its beginning in September 2001 is 1,020. The count of American service personnel wounded in Iraq is now 31,626; in Afghanistan 9,496 according to the Department of Defense.

I am afraid that war has become a permanent and usual condition of American life – one that directly impacts only a small segment of the population. The fifteen thousand dead and 50,000 wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan over the past ten years is an enormous number, but still few among the general population. It speaks to the fact that the burden of our protracted wars falls on a relatively small number of Americans… and it falls on them very harshly.

Even, within the military, the burden is not disbursed. As the wars wear on, the forces redeploy and redeploy. One third of those recently killed in Afghanistan had served previously in Iraq. It isn’t fair, is it? Nor is it moral to allow such a small percentage of our population bear this enormous burden so that the rest of us can enjoy the fruits of freedom they are protecting.

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -
Robert J. Keefe
TKC International, Inc.
1776 I Street, NW, Suite 900 – Washington, D. C. 20006
Telephone: 202 255-8161 – E mail: rkeefe@tkci.com
Past issues of Political Update available at www.bobkeefedc.com

March 1, 2010

Bob Keefe — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 17:51:55 +0000

From the desk of Bob Keefe
Washington, D.C.
March 1, 2010

Political Update

Washington is warming up… not so much climate-wise, but the political temperature, already in the fever range, is about to get hotter. The calendar is pushing Democrats to move quickly to achieve progress on their health care, financial industry reform and economic recovery programs. The election is approaching and now is the time to move… a lot like Apolo Anton Ohno enterring the last lap of one of his short track ice skating scrambles.

In case you are looking at a calendar and thinking that the election, scheduled for November 2, is still eight months or so away, please re-think. This timetable must be adjusted for Congressional work time. The Congress has set October 8 as the target date for adjournment and they have four “district work periods” (other people would call them vacations) set between now and then. They normally have four day work weeks, but limit voting to three days… So add it up. We have probably fewer than 75 work days until the witching hour… Election Day.

Priority # 1 – Health Care Reform

The historic, televised bipartisan health forum held this past week put the players on the program. President Barack Obama hosted the meeting to engage his Republican counterparts to come up with some form of consensus on the health care legislation. The meeting was really a great policy show and allowed all of us to better understand the positions of both sides. But it did not move the parties one inch toward a consensus. Rather, I think, it pushed the Democrats to move and move quickly. They have to pass health care. It is a prime political imperative. And they are now on record that they will have to do it themselves.

That means that Senate Harry Reid will introduce his “nuclear option”, reconciliation.

Reconciliation

You will hear a lot about Reconciliation in the days ahead. Reconciliation is simply a legislative procedure in the Congress that was created in 1974 during the deliberations on theCongressional Budget Act of 1974 to allow consideration of contentious budget resolutions without the threat of filibuster. Although it was designed to be used only on budget matters, it has been used many times by both Democrats and Republicans to grease the way for legislation that is controversial… not necessarily only for budget related issues.

It is considered the “nuclear option” because it is the action of last resort, the most powerful action the majority can take to pass a bill over stiff opposition. It emasculates the minority by removing the filibuster threat and the need for a 60 vote margin to pass a bill. Members of the Majority like it a lot. Members of the Minority hate it. Whichever party is in the minority will rant and rave and call it every bad word they can think of. Just cover your children’s ears when you see a Republican get ready to address reconciliation.
The process is a somewhat complicate one, but one that can be achieved without interference from the minority. The reconciliation process is triggered when Congress passes a concurrent resolution on the budget instructing one or more committees to report changes in law affecting the budget by a certain date. Then the committee sends their recommendations to the Budget Committee of their House, and the Budget Committee packages the recommendations into a single omnibus bill. The beauty of reconciliation is what happens next. In the Senate, the reconciliation bill then gets only 20 hours of debate, and amendments are limited. There is no chance to prevent the body from moving to a vote on the matter.
The “Byrd Rule” (named after Democratic Senator Robert Byrd) was adopted in 1985 and amended in 1990 to outline provisions for which reconciliation can and cannot be used. The Byrd Rule defines what ways a provision can be “extraneous” and therefore ineligible for reconciliation. Reconciliation generally involves legislation that changes the budget deficit (or conceivably, the surplus) if it does not produce a change in outlays or revenue.
Any senator may raise a procedural objection to a provision believed to be extraneous, which will then be ruled on by the Presiding Officer, customarily on the advice of the Senate Parliamentarian. A vote of 60 senators is required to overturn the ruling. The Presiding Officer need not necessarily follow the advice of the Parliamentarian, and the Parliamentarian can be replaced by the Senate Majority Leader. Every detail works to the benefit of the majority.
It is interesting that this single provision of the budget process was responsible for massive debt accumulation during the last administration. During the terms of President George W. Bush, the Republicans used reconciliation to enact three major tax cuts and several strongly deficit budgets, each of which substantially increased the deficit.
And then on to the House
Under the Democrats’ tentative plans, the House would pass the health care bill developed by the President for this conference last week, and both chambers would approve a separate package of changes using budget reconciliation.
Senator Reid has his problems – but it is becoming clear that Harry may have the easier job. He is working with a bill which enjoys the support of nearly all of his 59 Democratic Senators. That is understandable. The bill Mr. Obama unveiled before his bipartisan health forum last week hews closely to the one passed by the Senate in December, but differs markedly from the one passed by the House. … Poor Nancy Pelosi… The Speaker has more than enough Democrats to pass anything – except things that they do not agree on… and that is the problem.
You may remember that the bill passed by the House won 219 votes, one more than a majority. The lone Republican to vote for the bill, Louisiana Rep. Anh Cao, of has already announced his opposition to the compromise now on the table…It does not have the strong anti-abortion language that was accepted in the House. The Speaker has very little room to maneuver.
The Speaker has to rein in enough votes from two blocs of swing Democrats in the House of Representatives — abortion opponents and fiscal conservatives. Satisfying them is easy, except that when you do, you alienate the bigger block of main line liberals in the House. With Republicans unified in their opposition, Democrats are drafting plans to try to pass a bill on their own. That leaves Ms. Pelosi in the tough spot of trying to keep all of her Members on board. She has to persuade some who voted “no” to switch their votes to “yes”.
There are 39 fiscal conservatives who voted “no” the first time around. Ms. Pelosi is hoping that she can get some to switch those “no” votes to “yes” in favor of Mr. Obama’s less expensive measure. But persuading Democrats who are already on record as opposing a health overhaul to change their vote will not be easy, especially during a midterm election year. Of the 39 Democrats who voted against the House measure, 31 represent districts that were won in 2008 by Senator John McCain of Arizona.
Right now, the people who try to measure these things believe that there are more Democrats who voted “yes”, considering changing their position than “no” voters considering changing. It will be time for Members to risk becoming political martyrs… and volunteers for this category are never plentiful. They like their jobs.
Speaker Ms. Pelosi’s problems are wide spread. She needs to convince some of her senior members, as well as back benchers. It is a tough problem, one that will test the legislative engineering of the Speaker and her team and of the arm twisting squad from the White House. This vote could end up creating a good number of future American ambassadors.
A Bar Mitzvah on Capitol Hill

There was a true Bar Mitzvah ceremony on Tuesday in a House Hearing Room. It was the ritual of coming of age of a 53 year old Japanese Business Executive, Akio Toyoda. It was just like in the Synagogue. Akio Toyoda is old enough to understand and accept the obligations of his new status, and he is proud to have the obligations that came with the job. He read for the first important time as President of his company a policy statement to the United States Congress, not the Torah. His contrition and his earnestness proved him worthy.

He had been called to explain to the Congress and to the American people how the Toyota Motor Company could have so completely lost its dedication to safety control and put so many vehicles on the road that create danger to their users. The committee members were cordial but stern. They expressed concern over the deadly results of Toyota crashes. Toyoda made no excuses, took responsibility for the problems and promised that his company would return to its legendary emphasis on “Quality, Safety and Value.”

Akio Toyoda is the grandson of the founder of Toyota Motor Company. He has been working in the ranks of the company for many years preparing to become its leader, which he did in June of last year. The safety problems were created before he took over. He has been handed the aftermath and the commercial disaster which it has provoked. His reaction has been laudatory. “My name is on every one of our vehicles,” he said, “and I assume complete responsibility for correcting the situations. You have my personal commitment that Toyota will work vigorously and unceasingly to restore the trust of our customers.”

Other Toyodas and other Toyota leaders have made significant presentation in their careers, but this performance under such enormous pressure by the youngish president could be the most important ever. His company is under siege – from the U. S. and Japanese governments for reporting questions; from consumers who question the safety of their vehicles; from the investment community which is watching their Toyota’s net worth dropping by the day; and from their competitors – happy to see the leader fading. Only a Toyoda could stem the tide… and I believe that Akio Toyoda began a turnaround in public opinion and corporate credibility with his simple, honest presentation.

He could have easily added the signal line of a true Bar Mitzvah to his presentation, “Today I am a man!”

Meanwhile, our Wars Continue

Lest we forget, Americans keep dying and keep being injured in Iraq and Afghanistan. The official count as of March 1, 2010, of the dead since our involvement in Iraq began on March 23, 2003 is 4,380; the dead from the war in Afghanistan from its beginning in September 2001 is 1007. The count of American service personnel wounded in Iraq is now 31,626; in Afghanistan 9,496 according to the Department of Defense.

We have passed another milestone in the Afghan War… the death of the 1,000th United States service person in that combat. This event passed by last week unnoticed by the public who were engrossed in other things… complaining about snow removal, watching exciting curling matches at the Olympics and such things.

February 15, 2010

Bob Keefe — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 02:42:29 +0000

Washington, D.C.

February 15, 2010

Political Update

Today we celebrate Presidents’ Day, showing our respect and appreciation for the 44 men who have been the Chief Executives of the United States. It is a day off. It is a great day to shop the sales. Others do more… Today the Harry S. Truman Library and Museum in Independence, Missouri, will celebrate Presidents Day by serving fresh-baked presidential cookies to visitors, who can meet Harry Truman, as portrayed by a historical re-enactor.
Beginning at 10 a.m Truman Library volunteers bake selections from the “Presidential Cookies” cookbook and visitors will be able to sample cookie recipes spanning four centuries, including: Brandy Snaps (John Adams); Black Pepper Cookies (Zachary Taylor); Chocolate Macaroons (Benjamin Harrison); Coconut Balls (Harry Truman); Chocolate Nut Drop Cookies (Lyndon Johnson);Oatmeal-Chocolate Chunk Cookies (George W. Bush); Shortbread Cookies (Barack Obama). I think I have found something I like about George W, better than Barack Obama… though the Brandy Snaps are the most intriguing – those Adams boys were snappers!

What is Next?

It seems like we are having an intermission on government. It is not just the snow storm that shut down Washington or the extended February holidays. We seem to have come to a pause in the action. It started when the Massachusetts voters elected Republican Scott Brown to the Senate to upset the Democrats plans to move the Health Care Bill and a number of other of their legislative priorities.

Democratic leaders had not figured on this. Ted Kennedy’s seat was sacrosanct… Massachusetts is the most Red of any state in the country… it could not fall to the Republicans. But it did. State Senator Brown defeated the incumbent Attorney General of the state to become the forty-first Republican member of the United States Senate. And, as we know, the difference between forty and forty-one members of the minority in the Senate is more than the difference between day and night.

Senator Brown’s election changed the entire political landscape. Not only did it remove the filibuster-proof majority of the Democrats, it seems to have changed the entire dynamic of the political scene. It affirmed the voter revolt against the Democrats – something they had been self-denying… It foresaw bad times in the mid-term elections for all Democrats. If it could happen in Massachusetts, it could happen anywhere, maybe everywhere.

So we have this pause while the smart people in the leadership of the Democratic Party figure out what they will do to move legislation, but more importantly, how they will protect their members from that nasty mood of the voters.

We have determined that the Health Care legislation is no longer the most important project in Washington. We are now into worrying about the economy… in particular, jobs. Jobs are the flavor of the month. We need to create jobs, or many members of the Congress will lose theirs. The first take on this problem has not fared well. Senators Baucus and Grassley crafted a comprehensive jobs bill – bi-partisan, tax cuts for the Republicans and various pieces of pork for the Democrats.

The President is a different guy these days… more like the Obama we met in the campaign… sort of “in your face” to the opposition while describing his activity as bi-partisan in nature, challenging his opponents on issues and space. He has invited the Republicans to join him in a discussion session on February 25 in a C-Span broadcast meeting to attempt to iron out a health care package that can be passed. Republicans fear a trap…

Obama is also into a “do it yourself” mode. Unable to get Congressional approval of a commission to examine the national debt, he is moving to do it by executive order. He was able to get the Congress to add a “pay as you go” provision to the “must pass” bill raising the national debt. Expect to see more of him in the next weeks as he moves to regain some traction and get his administration moving.

It is snowing again today in Washington. That will postpone Congressional action for another day or two… I am interested to see what they will do when they get back into action after this protracted recess.

Bye Bayh

Much to the chagrin of Democrats here and across the nation, Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) announced this afternoon that he would not be a candidate for re-election this year. His decision has put the Indiana Senate seat in play – perhaps turning it over to the Republicans this year. In the calculations looking ahead to the 2010 Senate elections, Bayh was always considered a safe bet to be re-elected. He has won five statewide elections in Indiana – by increasingly wide margins. He has raised more than $13 million for this campaign. His decision to retire hurts the Democrats chances to maintain their majority in the Senate.

The Republican opposition is not set, though former Senator Dan Coats is considered to be the most likely winner of the Republican primary. Coats followed his patron, Dan Quayle into the seat when Quayle became Vice President. He retired after a term and a half when facing a race against Bayh. Bayh was running almost two to one ahead of Coats and had a mammoth war chest. Since he left the Senate, Coats served as the US Ambassador to Germany and has, for the past ten years, been employed in Washington as a lobbyist and foreign agent. He established a residence in Virginia and voted there for ten years. In other words, his vita is not the most desirable one for the electorate this year.

Bayh, who served as Indiana’s governor for eight years before becoming a Senator, said in his valedictory that he considered himself an executive, not a legislator, and thinks he can serve more effectively in some other role – not continuing in what he describes as a “dysfunctional Congress.” He mentioned potential roles as a University administrator, a foundation leader or “creating jobs managing a business.” An Indianapolis friend of mine, the CEO of a major company, who knows Evan Bayh as well as anyone suggests that he is a great manager. Bayh ran Indiana extremely well and made decisions with precision. My friend says that Evan will make a great CEO – of a university, a company or a foundation.

Bayh came to Washington in the worst kind of situation for a hard charger. He was a junior member of the minority in the Senate… and it stayed that way for eight long years. A senator friend of mine who came to the Senate in 2006 asked me about my friend Bayh, “Why doesn’t Evan like his job?” he asked me. I noticed that he seemed more interested and more involved these past three years when, in the majority, he could make things happen. But the dysfunction finally got to him when the bi-partisan debt project collapsed last month.

The timing of Bayh’s decision came on precisely the last day he could do so without getting into the race. The deadline for entry (by filing petitions signed by thousands of Hoosiers) is noon tomorrow. It is unlikely that any candidate will qualify and the State Democratic Committee will be empowered to fill the nomination. Three Democratic Congressmen are the most likely to step up for the race. They are Brad Ellsworth, the former mayor of Evansville Barron Hill, from Southeastern Indiana, and Joe Donnelly from the South Bend region. None have statewide recognition and they will be considered the underdog in the race.

(For the record: I met Evan Bayh when he was five years old and I was his dad’s chief of staff in the Senate. I have been involved and observing his career and his life from an insider’s view for lo these many years. He is quite an amazing and competent man.)

Tea Party Politics

The Tea Party movement met for the first time in convention last weekend at Opryland in Nashville Tennessee. Among their announced goals was to develop an organization to promote the goals of the movement and coordinate the activity of their many individual local clubs. Good luck and God bless them. I did not attend the sessions… the $549 registration fee was just too much for me. But I can give you a report on who the people were that did attend and what happened.

Over the years I have had my experiences with third party and rump movements like the Tea Baggers and they are quite predictable. The reports from Nashville confirmed my thinking. Today’s Tea Baggers are yesterday’s Reform Partyers, or Peace and Freedom Partyers, American Independent Partyers or like minded political self governance adherents. The usual lot includes several political “has beens” who are in denial – like Pat Buchanan and Mike Gravel and Alan Keyes – who seek to lead a movement when they lost their welcome in the major parties. And then there are the self-starters who have strong policy views, strong senses of self righteousness and little interest or ability to compromise.

The Tea Baggers are in the latter category. The movement has been evolving from small individual groups around the country. By now there are several significant groupings… the Tea Party Express, the Tea Party Patriots and the Tea Party Nation, to mention a few. Former Republican Congressional Leader Dick Armey has promoted and funded Tea Baggers through his political group, Freedom Works and Fox commentator Glen Beck has championed the same groups.

The reason individuals are drawn to these movements is that they generally do not get along with other political activists. They cannot or will not compromise their own views to coalesce with others. They want it their way, or no way. They are strong willed. They do not compromise. They are easily slighted and never forget or forgive a slight. They will make a lot of noise individually and in small groups. But even with Armey’s money, I do not believe they will be able to get their act together.

I was asked to help the Reform Party build and manage a national convention in 2000. The Perot candidacy had earned the party a significant bounty – some $16+ million – from the Federal Election Program – $2.8 million designated specifically for a national nominating convention. The party had never held a nominating convention before and the new leadership of the party wanted to hold a significant convention as a party building exercise. But two forces interrupted that project. The long time leadership of the Party – Perot agents- and the new force – candidate Pat Buchanan – had their eyes on that money.

The funds became the focus of major internecine warfare. When the smoke cleared, they held a convention of little significance. Buchanan claimed and spent all of the money, much of it on legal fees from internecine fights.

Meanwhile, our Wars Continue

Lest we forget, Americans keep dying and keep being injured in Iraq and Afghanistan. The official count as of October 31, 2009, of the dead since our involvement in Iraq began on March 23, 2003 is 4,376; the dead from the war in Afghanistan from its beginning in September 2001 is 990. The count of American service personnel wounded in Iraq is now 31,626; in Afghanistan 9,496 according to the Department of Defense.

We are rolling the dice in Afghanistan right now. The “surge” strategy that worked so well in Iraq is being implemented in Operation Moshtarak (Dari for “Together”). The goal is to conquer, control and maintain Marjah, a major Taliban stronghold in Helmand province. The city remains the command and control hub for the insurgency. Marjah is also considered to be one of the main narcotics centers in Helmand. In preparation for Operation Moshtarak, insurgents have constructed tunnels and bunkers, brought in heavy weapons, set booby traps and strewn landmines around Marjah. It is reported that 90% of the population remain in the town, trapped by IED belts that ring navigable terrain.

It will be a month before we will have a good evaluation. Keep your fingers crossed.

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -

Robert J. Keefe

TKC International, Inc.

1776 I Street, NW, Suite 900 – Washington, D. C. 20006

Telephone: 202 255-8161 – E mail: rkeefe@tkci.com

February 1, 2010

Bob Keefe — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 02:40:26 +0000

Washington, D.C.

February 1, 2010

Political Update

This Update is being written two weeks late… for no other reason than I wanted to wait to see what happened in the United States Senate race in Massachusetts. And I am glad I did. I would have written something encouraging to the Democrats and been dead wrong.

There was certainly nothing encouraging to President Barack Obama and the Democrats from the victory of Senator-elect Scott Brown. The Republican victory does so many nasty things to the Dems. It destroys that fragile 60 vote margin in the Senate that is so important for the conduct of contentious business…and contentious business seems to be all that is pending anymore. It anoints a new, attractive partisan Republican personality from New England. It infuses hope and life in the moribund Republican organization. It makes a whole new health care bill a requirement.

I have considered myself a Massachusetts expert among my colleagues since I designed a win there for the Hawkish Henry Jackson in the presidential primary of 1976. It is not simply the pointy headed liberal enclave of the Harvardians. Rather it has a heavily middle class, ethnic population – the kind of voters who are hurting badly during this current recession. I learned my Massachusetts politics from Senator Ted Kennedy himself. He was a great friend of my candidate, Scoop Jackson, and wanted to help him in his presidential race from behind the scenes. That prompted a delightfully long afternoon in his Senate office, sipping on white wine and marveling at the collective political minutiae about his state that Ted had collected. He took me town by town, pointing out pitfalls, phonies, opportunities and generally important information that one can use in a campaign. It was a display of his attention to the details of his electorate that kept him safely in the Senate for those forty-nine years

But Massachusetts, like every other state, is changing rapidly. Demographic changes continue at a rapid rate as immigration and internal migration has become so constant. It is significant everywhere. The disappearing loyalty of the electorate to the political parties continues and quickens. Massachusetts isn’t the Democratic state I remembered. It is like almost every other state, populated by people who think and vote independently, regardless of their registration.

And in Massachusetts, we saw the depth of the anger and concern the people hold about their current circumstances and the inability of their government to resolve the problems. It is fair to suggest that the Obama Administration has had its eye on balls other than those that the people feel hurt them… and it had better get a better focus, if it has any hope to continue in government and lead the people.

The President Reacts

I would suggest that to call this event a “wake-up call” would be too tame in view of the reaction of President Obama. He has responded with vigor… with passion. He is not taking things lightly and is reverting to full campaign mode.

Clearly he believes that the public are not getting the messages he has been sending and that they are misreading the tea leaves. He intends to help them understand what he is doing and what results from his activity. In just a few days he has:

Given a rousing State of the Union Message – a bit “in your face” to the opposition.
Invaded the Republican Congressional Caucus to go mono e mano with his antagonists.
Visited Town Hall Meeting in Tampa, Florida with VP Joe Biden.
Hosted a Jobs Tax Credit event in Baltimore, Maryland.
Presented his annual Budget message in a series of speeches, and
He gave an interview on YouTube.

The campaign to regain the high ground of the debate in Washington seems essential to the success of the Obama presidency. With the loss of the 60 vote majority in the Senate, he knows that it will be a fight to get any bill through that body. He believes that by the force of his presentations, he can make the difference. It worked for him in the campaign… now let’s see how it works from the Oval Office.

Maddening items that matter

Now that the chickens are beginning to roost in unpleasant places, it is worth taking a look at the items that have created the mindset that is guiding so many of our countrymen. And we will start with a whopper… government spending, in particular for the moment, the prospective health care measure

None of us can really get our arms around the numbers…. They are way too large for our comprehension. But let’s try. The Democrats have tabled a Health Care bill with a $900 billion price tag. You have heard that dozens of times, but what on earth does it mean.

Surprise, surprise… That great big impressive number is misleading. Actually, misleading in both directions. First of all… the bill is for the first ten years of the program, meaning that the bill will cost an average of $90 billion per year. That still sounds big… scary big, but when you put it into the context of national health-care spending it is almost a rounding error. We spent $2.3 trillion on health care last year. The new program cost is less than five percent of the current annual spending… less than a good tip. So is it expensive???

But do not get in line for your free cat-scan just yet. The program – should it pass – will not get started for a couple of years… 2014, to be exact. The startup time is one good reason for the time lag… they have to get your hospital rooms ready and your cat-san machine tuned up. But in addition to this legitimate lag, the delay will also make the price look lower. The CBO is measuring over a ten year period, so three years without spending will make it look much lower. If you really want to check on costs, you have to begin your count in an early years of operations, 2016 would be a good time to start. Under that more practical tablulation, the cost would be about $150 Billion per year… still not a major factor in the total health care cost since inflation in spending will keep that number in the 4 percent range.

So this big bad Medical program that scares everybody is really sort of a marginal expenditure, in the true scheme of things. What is the big deal?

Then we have the budget deficit. Wow. For my long career in politics, I have disliked the politicization of deficits. That is somewhat because it has always been the Republicans railing against Democrats for being profligate spenders… The annual rite of Congress to legislate a higher ceiling for the National Debt is a theatrical spectacle. The party out of power rails against the spending habits of the government… the incumbents try to duck

Now, as a result of what we pleasantly refer to as the “financial melt down” the numbers of the debt and its resultant service costs are astronomical and unfathomable. But the game goes on and provides a rationale for people to get mad at their government. There is a movement afoot to create a bi-partisan commission of some kind to develop a plan to deal with the enormous debt we hold. That is a good idea and would really be neat if it was empowered to do something to resolve the problem.

Prudent budget management is essential for several reasons…

The imbalance is not sustainable… Something will have to give, and relatively soon.
Current projections indicate that the deficits will be in the 4+ percent of GDP and be rising as the nation crawls out of the Great Recession… and that is too high.
The risks to the financial market from the large deficits will endanger the rest of the economy and it will undermine our standing in the world.
And, as important as any of the above, the service on this increased debt would mean moving public expenditures away from public services, security costs, and needed investment into unproductive interest payments.

There is a broad consensus growing that we need to lower our deficits – and do it quickly. As with all public policy questions, the problem is how to do it. Thus, the suggestion (again) is to get a blue ribbon panel studying and planning an escape from this problem even if the seven Republicans who sponsored a resolution to appoint one ran from the idea once the President endorsed it. It appears he will do it himself…

It is an Election Year

I came to work in the Congress in the first year of a term. We worked to make the world a better place, developing ideas, creating concepts and sought to pass bills to improve life and governance. Then the Christmas holidays happened and everybody went home. When they came back to Capitol Hill, everything had changed. I could not believe it. It was now an election year and that was all that was on anybody’s mind. Our work turned almost exclusively to winning the election.

Well, that is where we are. It is now an election year and all eyes are on the campaign.

It is starting early. The Democrats in Illinois changed the date of the Illinois primary in 2008 to accommodate their favorite son’s presidential ambition. It helped Obama by giving him an early victory. But now they are stuck with a very early primary election… In fact, it is tomorrow, February 2. Illinois was always early… the third Tuesday in March – a St. Patrick’s Day sort of time. But now, it will happen before they turn the Chicago River green to celebrate the Irish saint’s day. Both parties have important contests for Governor and Senator.

The Pew Research organization tell us that about half (52%) of registered voters would like to see their own representative re-elected and e 34% say that most members of Congress should be re-elected. That sounds OK, but it is really quite low… the most negative in the past two decades. Low measures on these questions usually come true. The ratings were low in the 1994 and 2006 cycles, when the party in power suffered large losses in midterm elections.

Once more, this year it is the independents who are making their voices heard. Only 42% of independent voters want to see their own representative re-elected and just 25% would like to see most members of Congress re-elected.

As always, all 435 members of the House of Representatives will be up for election this year. Currently, the Democrats have 257 members; the Republican 178. The 2010 class of Senators who are up for election number 35 of which 18 are Democrats and 17 are Republican. Four Republican Senators are retiring and two Democrats are doing so.

Meanwhile, our Wars Continue

Lest we forget, Americans keep dying and keep being injured in Iraq and Afghanistan. The official count as of October 31, 2009, of the dead since our involvement in Iraq began on March 23, 2003 is 4,375; the dead from the war in Afghanistan from its beginning in September 2001 is 978. The count of American service personnel wounded in Iraq is now 31,616; in Afghanistan 4,748, according to the Department of Defense.

While the war wears on and demands on service personnel are continuing and severe, the Senate held a hearing today to review – and hopefully end – the “Don’t Ask; Don’t Tell” policy which defines the rules for gay members of our military.

The Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staffs, Admiral Mike Mullen, gave a strikingly candid and strong statement supporting the end of the Don’t Ask era and the integration of gays into the forces…a strong support for civil rights in the military. It appears that the end is in sight, but not until the military takes a year to study how to handle the new reality. I have a feeling Senator Carl Levin is planning a coup to sneak a cancellation of the policy on the Armed Services Authorization Bill. Hooray.

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -

Robert J. Keefe

TKC International, Inc.

1776 I Street, NW, Suite 900 – Washington, D. C. 20006

Telephone: 202 255-8161 – E mail: rkeefe@tkci.com

January 1, 2010

Bob Keefe — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 02:38:10 +0000

From the desk of Bob Keefe

Washington, D.C.

January 1, 2010

Political Update

Happy New Year! As I sat down to start this Update, I took a look back at the first issues of recent years. There was a common thread of analysis of the previous twelve months. They were not at all like we had thought they would be when they began. You can say that about 2009 in spades. We saw the election of President Barack Obama as the conclusion of divisive politics… the end of racial division and the advent of positive social change.

That did not happen. We had a new President who determined to implement change. His change meant major structural alterations that required ground breaking legislation. The first target, the health care system, has consumed the legislative branch for the year. Republicans have determined that cooperation with Obama is not in their interests and their boycott of anything Obama has destroyed whatever bipartisanship had existed in this city. The hopes for accommodation and collegiality in government have been dashed, and we enter this second decade of the twenty first century as an angry mob of partisans.

Unfortunately, new presidents do not get a blank page to work from. They inherit the circumstances left by their predecessor. It is like a progressive party. Obama did become heir to a package of issues and problems that were unique in their severity and importance. The programs and actions he had dreamed of when he began his quest for the office in 2005 did not fit with the hand he had been dealt. He was forced to tear up his things to do list and begin to act on problems he had never imagined. It must have been discouraging to him. But begin he did and he will forever be judged by how he adapted his governance to the new and difficult world that he found awaiting him.

Terrorism 2010

It took a year, but finally, a real and present terrorism threat has challenged him. The Christmas bomber on the flight from Amsterdam changed aviation security again. We reacted to the smuggling of knives onto airplanes, then liquid bomb ingredients and now we have the problem of the plastic explosives sewn into a man’s underwear. We will react again, probably with more body scanning.

Over the past fortnight, I did more miles of travel than Santa Claus. I was inspected and scanned in Washington, Los Angeles, Tokyo, Shanghai, Beijing and Tokyo again. United States inspections were, clearly the most thorough, but all were serious and careful. No where was I subjected to a complete pat down or body scan. But I had bought a ticket by credit card, had luggage (overweight, at that) and was operating on a return itinerary. I had not been to any funny places on my current passport.

When I fly again, and it will likely be soon, what will be different? I have my inspection routine down pat. I put all of my metal things in my sport coat pocket. My passport and boarding pass go in my shirt pocket. My only problem is shoes. I wear my walking shoes and they are usually helped on by a shoe horn, which is not available at the TSA inspection counter. My carry on is usually re-checked because I have a lot of cords packed in it. But I do not hold up the line. I am a good guy to be behind.

I have resigned myself to being at the airport very early… I was at the Beijing airport at 5:30 am for an 8:00 am flight. Maybe I will have to be earlier. Whenever the TSA has changed its process, the lines have gotten longer. But I can suffer this.. For safety.

Meanwhile, I hope the President will crack some heads together between the various agencies that are supposed to be making me safe. As in most enterprises, good communication makes for a good outcome. If our teams are not talking – and that seems to be the case in this latest matter –then we are in trouble. But count me in, I will keep flying.

Harry the Hero

There is no doubt about it. The “The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” is the result of the laudable actions of Senator Harry Reid, the Majority Leader of the Senate from Searchlight, Nevada. Harry prevailed against long odds. His legislative skills and personal persuasion brought a majority of 60 Democrats to vote for the bill on Christmas Eve. The Republican opposition had bet the table against him… and lost. Every member of the Democratic caucus backed the measure; every Republican opposed it.

The Senate passed a historic $871 billion health care reform bill Thursday morning, handing President Obama a Christmas Eve victory on his top domestic priority. Should it become law, the measure would constitute the biggest expansion of federal health care guarantees since the enactment of Medicare and Medicaid more than four decades ago. It is expected to extend insurance coverage to 30 million additional Americans.

Over the last months, Harry Reid was the face in the bulls eye. He was the guy who had this impossible task of creating a piece of legislation that would satisfy sixty of the most persnickety people in America. His chances of doing that were slim or none. He had the impossible task. He was required to deliver a daily report on his task. The television reporters asked him every day how he was doing… and things did not change much from day to day… so he seemed to be failing…at least in the eyes of the beholders.

But, legislation, being like sausage, hard to watch being made, always looks bad, but Harry was still working the recipe. He made it and I am happy for the Senator from Searchlight. He has never gotten the respect he deserves.

Senator Reid began his political career as the Lieutenant Governor of Nevada; ran for Senate but was defeated by Paul Laxalt; served as Chairman of the Nevada Gaming Commission; he was elected to Congress and finally succeeded to a Senate seat in 1987. He succeeded Tom Daschle as the Democratic Leader in 2005.

My most significant memory of a long relationship with the Senator was a time when the newly elected Prime Minister of Andorra visited Washington. Andorra was considering adding gambling to its attractions and he came to the United States to watch his son sing in the Andorran Boys Choirs and to inspect American Casinos… I thought it was a good idea to introduce him to the former boss of the Gaming Commission of the top Gaming state, Harry Reid.

The meeting was a complete bust. I forgot Harry is a Mormon and he spent a half hour lecturing my Andorran friend on the evils of gaming. Harry is a man of principle…

For the Record – The Markets

Let me quantify what you already know. The stock markets have just completed a very dismal decade. They actually collapsed twice in those ten years. The Dow had the best performance. It closed just 8.25 percent below where it ended 10 years ago, in 1999. The S.& P. index closed 23 percent below and the NASDAQ was hit hardest . The bursting of the dot-com bubble pushed it down 44 percent over the decade.

For most Americans, for most of the decade, there was no gain in their personal earning power. It was a lost decade for both the rich and the poor.

For the Record – The Political Polls

Yes, it is an election year. In ten short months the nation will go to the polls to select a new Congress, a third of the Senators, a majority of the state governors, and many, many other officials. Though he will not be on the ballot this year, the election results will be seen as a report card on the Presidency of Barack Obama.

Democrats cannot be happy about the trend lines that have developed since the Inauguration of Obama last January. The answers voters are giving the pollsters on the critical questions are all troubling.

Here are the results of what political experts consider the “state of the union questions:”

The President’s favorability rating:

1/21/09 7/12/09 Now

Favorable 63.0% 51.7% 50.1%

Unfavorable 19.0% 37.8% 44.5%

The favorability rating of Congress:

1/18/09 6/15/09 Now

Favorable 21.2% 37.0% 27.4%

Unfavorable 70.7% 52.0% 65.8

The Direction of the country:

1/20/09 6/13/09 Now

Right Direction 69.3% 45.8% 35.9%

Wrong Direction 23.1% 45.0% 56.7%

Generic Congressional Vote:

1/20/09 6/13/09 Now

Democrat 46.0% 41.0% 43.0%

Republican 22.0% 39.2% 44.3%

Politicians are, by nature, optimists. They see the glass half full. But they are also realists. The Democrats will be more cautious in these coming months. The President must be prepared to accommodate to their concerns.

Meanwhile, our Wars Continue

Lest we forget, Americans keep dying and keep being injured in Iraq and Afghanistan. The official count as of October 31, 2009, of the dead since our involvement in Iraq began on March 23, 2003 is 4,372; the dead from the war in Afghanistan from its beginning in September 2001 is 948. The count of American service personnel wounded in Iraq is now 31,557; in Afghanistan 4,434, according to the Department of Defense.

For the first time in the long war in Afghanistan, the announced death toll includes seven CIA operatives. Close to dusk, when some people on the base were finishing their daily work and relaxing or taking a break before dinner or before returning to their offices for the evening, a man dressed in an Afghan army uniform covering an explosive-laden suicide vest managed to elude security and reach an area near the base’s gym. In addition to the seven agency employees who were killed in the attack, another six agency employees were injured.

The Afghan man was being courted as an informant. He had been invited onto the base for the first time and had not been searched. A senior and experienced CIA debriefer came from Kabul for the meeting, suggesting that the purpose of the meeting was to gain intelligence. The bomber set off the explosives as he was about to be searched.

In this event, the number of CIA employees killed in Afghanistan was tripled. The CIA operatives were responsible for collecting information about militant networks in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and plotting missions to kill the networks’ top leaders. One of the victims was the base chief. The loss of these specialists will impede its ability to collect valuable intelligence on Taliban and al-Qaida forces operating along Afghanistan’s eastern border with Pakistan.

As the additional troops arrive and go to work, we can expect the casualties to mount up more quickly… more troops equal more casualties. We saw that in Iraq and we will see it again in Afghanistan. The death toll in 2008 was 155; in 2009 it is 318, more than double.

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -

Robert J. Keefe

TKC International, Inc.

1776 I Street, NW, Suite 900 – Washington, D. C. 20006

Telephone: 202 255-8161 – E mail: rkeefe@tkci.com

December 1, 2009

Bob Keefe — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 02:57:12 +0000

From the desk of Bob Keefe

Washington, D.C.

December 1, 2009

Political Update

From the looks of it, this will be a very big week for President Barack Obama. Tonight he will unveil his comprehensive Afghanistan policy to the waiting world from the West Point Military Academy. And on Thursday, he hosts a major conference at the White House designed to attack a more important political question, unemployment.

A great deal of his presidency will be defined by these two issues… not so much by what he says in these events, but how the strategies he defines and the results he produces play out over the next months.

These are the two biggest political problems he faces – though it is fair to suggest that there are several other issues on his plate that compete for space in the top two – health care, budget deficit, global warming, just to name a few. All are critical, but Afghanistan and employment are the issues that win and lose elections.

The Wars

The last thing that President-elect Obama would have thought he would be doing these first days of December is explaining his plan to increase the American troop strength in Afghanistan – with still 120,000 troops still in Iraq – just a few days before heading to Stockholm to pick up the 2009 Nobel Prize for Peace. It would have been incomprehensible twelve months ago… but here we are.

While the focus on Iraq has dimmed, we still have more forces there than in Afghanistan – a total of 124,000 U.S. troops as of September 30, 2009. The Coalition of the Willing has collapsed. All other nations have withdrawn their troops. We believe that the force will be drawn down dramatically next year, after the Iraq election now scheduled for January to fulfill the promise Candidate Obama made to end combat operations and withdraw most of the 142,000 troops he found in Iraq when he was sworn in within 16 months.

This would leave in Iraq a residual force of as many as 50,000 troops until the end of 2011, the date the US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement stipulates the removal of all US troops. According to the president, this transitional force would have three missions: training Iraqi security forces, carrying out anti-terrorism missions and protecting American civilian and military forces.

The President, in a prime time address to the nation tonight that mirrored his speech in July 2007 as a candidate, explained his goals, his strategy and his long range vision for the Afghanistan mission. In simple terms, the goals are to provide a security force as part of a counterinsurgency strategy to wipe out al Qaeda elements and stabilize the country, while training Afghan forces and building the central government to be self sustaining and secure. Al Qaeda is, after nine years of war, the reason we went to Afghanistan after their attack on the United States on 9/11. And we are still there trying to eradicate their threat once and for all.

This new troop deployment brings the total U.S. force in Afghanistan to almost 100,000 troops, and they are supported by about 45,000 NATO forces. Obama also emphasized the limit on U.S. resources in manpower and budget, and stressed that the Afghan mission is not open-ended.

In pursuing this new troop deployment, Obama is swimming directly upstream and alienating his political base. Most Americans (32 percent) oppose the increase while about 4 in 10 (39 percent) say the number of troops should be decreased. Just 2 in 10 say troop levels should be kept the same. Democrats are the least likely to support an increase – just 17 percent do, compared with 34 percent of independents and about half of Republicans. Obama pulled some scabs off of years old divisions in the Democratic Party with his decision to expand the Afghanistan conflict. The Hawk and Dove division of the party of the 70’s may be re-emerging big time. It is not pretty.

This new commitment is expected to cost $30 billion a year. To date, $915.1 billion dollars have been allocated to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan based on the total approved amounts through the end of Fiscal Year 2009. In addition to this approved amount, the FY2010 budget shows a $130 billion request for more war spending. This would bring total war spending in Iraq and Afghanistan to more than $1 trillion.

Unfortunately, these costs are just the start of a long drain on the national treasury to pay for these conflicts. The residual cost of providing care for the injuries and health problems of the veterans of these wars will be immense. The count of the wounded now measures over 35,000. Twenty percent of those injured have serious brain or spinal injuries- not counting those with psychological problems. Thirty percent of US troops serving in these theaters have developed serious mental health problems within four months of returning home. The care and treatment of these veterans will cost billions into the next decades.

And what do we get for thousands of American lives and Billions of our dollars? A recent poll in Iraq showed that:

Iraqis “strongly opposed” to presence of coalition troops… 82%
Iraqis who believe Coalition forces are responsible for any improved security… -1%
Iraqis who feel less secure because of the occupation… 67%
Iraqis who do not have confidence in multi-national forces… 72%

What a pretty dish to set upon the Presidential table.

Jobs

Last week The Federal Reserve raised its estimate for economic growth next year and, while forecasting lower unemployment ahead, although the jobless rate will stay uncomfortably high for at least the next three years. That is bad political news for the President and his party. Nothing matters as much in politics as the unemployment rate.

The economic stimulus package passed last winter to stop the slide of the economy over the precipice did wonders for the overall economy and particularly, the stock market, but it did little to address the problem of unemployment. The forecast shows the central bank expects gross domestic product, the broadest measure of the nation’s economic activity, to grow between 2.5% to 3.5% in 2010. That’s a bit more bullish than the 2.1% to 3.3% growth it had forecast for the period back in June.

The Fed predicted high employment through this year and they were right. Now they are predicting high unemployment for the next several years and that is really bad politics for the incumbent party. The unemployment rate, which hit 10.2% in October according to the Labor Department’s latest reading, is expected to improve to between 9.3% to 9.7% for all of 2010.

Getting America back to work is going to be the subject of a one day conference on Thursday at the White House. The President has invited economists, business leaders, union and political leaders – 130 in all, to try to brainstorm the problem and come up with concrete plans to add jobs to the economy. The conference is really a preliminary to the development of a jobs program by the Administration and the Congress.

Here’s why. As unemployment has increased, Democrats have fallen behind Republicans in Gallup’s generic congressional ballot. The latest survey shows that the Republicans now lead the Democrats 48 percent to 44 percent – the first time Republicans have held a lead in the survey in several years. And 2010 is an election year.

The Jobs Conference will propose some form of government action to directly get more jobs. One proposal Obama is seriously considering is a tax credit for businesses that bring on new workers. Obama as a presidential candidate proposed a similar plan, one that would award a $3,000 credit to businesses for each new, full-time worker that they hired. Such a plan was opposed when Congress was writing the stimulus in February, arguing that there were more direct ways of spurring economic action.

Labor unions favor fiscal aid to help states stave off teacher and public employee layoffs, transportation and other infrastructure investments and increased loans for small businesses. Plans for more infrastructure spending and expanding small businesses’ access to credit are also favored by Congress.

For sure, some form of job stimulus will be forthcoming… and soon. This week’s session will plant the seeds of what that stimulus will look like.

A Missed Deadline

President Barack Obama surprised many this past week by adding a trip to Copenhagen for the meeting of United Nations Climate Conference to wrestle with other world leaders over the challenge of developing an international policy to control the emission of green house gases and fend off the ominous threat of global warming. It was once hoped that this conference would agree on an international treaty to lock in national emission standards to replace the Kyoto Treaty which will expire soon.

Obama’s presence at the conference will be brief and more symbolic than participatory. He will arrive empty-handed. The United States is not prepared to provide the leadership other nations had expected in this vital effort. Climate change has lost ground in the pecking order of priorities. United States policy on this issue is unsettled.

Emission standards are controversial. A few nations, including the United States produce a vast majority of the noxious gases that are blamed for climate change. Our emissions are caused by our vast use of petroleum in transportation and coal to produce electricity in support of our modern advanced way of life. Less developed nations are loathe to commit to emission standards that might impinge on their increased industrialization and modernization. They want to grow through industrialization the way we did… and not have to worry about the soot and smoke that their chimneys belch carbon into the air.

Emission standards are controversial in the United States, too. There is broad public support for an energy reform policy that reduces carbon emissions and promotes increased reliance on alternative and renewable energy. Americans believe it is urgent that we end our dependence on oil, especially imported oil, and see the development of alternative energy as offering real potential to create the next generation of American jobs.

I’m afraid the consideration of health care reform by the Congress may have taught them bad lessons on how to act. Climate legislation is easily as complicated as health care. There are ample special interests which will want to protect their turf and their profits. Additionally, there is a geographic phenomenon that does not exist in health care. The energy producing states, Texas with its oil, Montana with its coal, see their interests challenged by methodical carbon reduction. And those states have two senators who can obstruct, delay, and object to legislative proposals. It could be Health Care Version 2.0, and that is a shame. We need to do it right.

Meanwhile, our Wars Continue

Lest we forget, Americans keep dying and keep being injured in Iraq and Afghanistan. The official count as of November 30, 2009, of the dead since our involvement in Iraq began on March 23, 2003 is 4,367; the dead from the war in Afghanistan from its beginning in September 2001 is 929. The count of American service personnel wounded in Iraq is now 31,607; in Afghanistan 4,684, according to the Department of Defense.

By the time I have to rework these totals in the next Political Update, President Obama will have begun to implement his new policy for the Afghanistan problem. I wish there were good options, but I fear there are none. I am glad he took a holistic look at the situation…not just a review of troop requirements.

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -

Robert J. Keefe

TKC International, Inc.

1776 I Street, NW, Suite 900 – Washington, D. C. 20006

Telephone: 202 255-8161 – E mail: rkeefe@tkci.com

Past issues of Political Update available at www.bobkeefedc.com

November 15, 2009

Bob Keefe — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 04:15:27 +0000

From the desk of Bob Keefe

Washington, D.C.

November 15, 2009

Political Update

It was not easy. It was not big. But it was a win… And President Barack Obama and the Democrats really needed it. By the narrow margin of 220-215, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act. When, after a majority had been recorded, Rep. Joe Cao (R-LA) voted “yes,” he made the vote bi-partisan.

Health Care reform is not yet a done deal. But it is moving. Speaker Nancy Pelosi took personal responsibility for its passage and her persuasion; her strategies; and her power pushed the bill forward. Now it goes on to the Senate where it faces another massive test. Getting 51 votes for a bill looks easier now… But they will need 60. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid plans to begin consideration of Health Reform sometime next week. The Senate, being the Senate, will not do it quickly. If they are able to get a final vote on the bill before Christmas, I will be surprised.

I am convinced that a substantive health care reform measure will be enacted.

What did the elections tell us?

So much big news has been happening, it is hard to believe that the off-year elections were just eleven days ago… Before we forget them completely, let’s look at them to see if there are any significant trends developing. The Democrats lost a couple of big ones… the governors’ races in Virginia and New Jersey. The Republicans continued their string of losing special elections for the House of Representatives – losing one in New York and one in California. The two candidates who spent their personal fortunes wildly had problems – New Jersey Governor Corzine losing and New York Mayor Bloomberg squeezing out a narrow victory.

It is clear that the Republicans are not dead in the water. Their brand is tarnished, but they proved that they can mount significant challenges with good candidates. And the Democrats problem cannot be blamed entirely on their current weakness among Independents. The excuse that the growth of self-identifying Independents comes from Republicans calling themselves Independents, but continuing to vote like Republicans, does not wash.

When I began my political career, the Democrats counted on the Solid South for the big chunk of the votes needed to win national elections and control the Congress. Democrats depended on hawkish, culturally conservative, populist white voters. We began to lose that group of voters in the 1960’s when the Party began to cultivate the support of blacks, liberals and union members. President Bill Clinton took this new group and was able to convince enough of the Roosevelt voters to support him. When he promoted fiscal conservatism and social moderation, he broadened the party’s appeal in the Border States and northern suburbia.

When the party nominated Barack Obama last year those old coalition members from the Solid South days abandoned the Democrats. Obama won without them because he was able to raise the level of interest and intensity in the new base and – faced with the results of the Bush years – suburbanites and other moderates supported the non-Bush candidate.

So here is the challenge for Democrats in the years just ahead. The election of the first Black President has happened and will not happen again. The coalition of suburbanites, poor blacks and upper class liberals is not a comfortable base from which to govern. Clearly the enthusiasm that built the Obama majorities last year was absent this year. With the intensity that the extreme right is demonstrating, the next elections will be difficult, hand to hand combat on a myriad of issues.

So much of the party’s prospects depend now on the persona of the president. It seems unlikely that a Democrat can run away from him. But running with him may not be easy…If he can achieve more success with his big issues, the enthusiasm Dems need may return.

The Inconvenient Issue

The insolvable issue of abortion has come again to the forefront of the public policy debate in the United States. This time, it threatens the effort to revamp our flawed health care system. It has, in past times been a stickler for solutions in other policy debates ranging from education to welfare to military questions.

The issue is more than difficult. It is a genuine “no win” policy for the political world. It pits the sanctity of life against the free will, and sometimes the health, of an individual. It has strong religious overtones. It brings out the most demonstrative emotional reactions from individuals and groups.

Abortion was not a significant issue in American politics before the early 70’s. The Roe versus Wade decision rendered on January 23, 1973 provided a legal basis for the medical abortion procedure. That action stirred the hopes of those who support it and ignited the vigorous opposition of those who oppose it. There quickly formed “Right to Life” and “Right to Choice” forces which have grown and prospered over the years. The court decision came at the time that the women of America began to stir politically and fought for their equal rights. Abortion became a prominent element in their platform.

The political world was forced to react. With the electorate split widely on the subject, every politician was forced to explain his position in terms that satisfied the group whose side he chose while creating the least amount of antagonism among others. I have seen many versions of the answer, from both those who choose Life and those who choose Choice. The most common pro-choice phrase used is one that I credit President Bill Clinton with crafting. It is:

“I believe that abortion should be legal and rare.”

That precedes a discussion of how to make it rare…. Better counseling, better pregnancy prevention techniques… etc. It is an answer that tries to bridge the chasm of emotional positions of the electorate… It is a rhetorical band aid…. There is no perfect answer. The issue defies compromise… it is black or white, making it a very difficult issue for politicians to address.

The first major exposition of the issue in the political world came in Louisville, Kentucky at an issues conference sponsored by the Democratic National Committee in late 1975. The conference was designed to expose potential candidates for the presidency in 1976. I was there with my candidate. Sen. Henry Jackson. The conference presented an excellent panel on the abortion issue covering the medical, legal and moral aspects of abortion. Leaders from both sides and real experts made presentations. When the conference was over and we were driving away, one of our advisors turned to the Senator and said, “Scoop, I don’t know where you stand on this abortion issue, but I have made up my mind. I believe that abortion is murder…and I am for it.” Scoop did not accept this advice.

Beware of the Early Polls

The 24 hour news cycle has produced such a demand for news that speculation on politics has become a standard fare. Ollie Quayle, a top pollster once told me that he was very skeptical of the “what if” polls that media like to promote. He said early polls make no sense. If the election were being held today, the campaign would have happened over the past month and the information of the voter would be totally different.”

But “what if” polls are principal courses on all talk television menus. A couple of seasoned and wise political consultants wrote an article about the efficacy of early polls that I really enjoyed… and saved. Here is what Mike Murphy and Mark Mellman wrote on this subject. They were commenting as the 2008 campaign was just about to start.

It is reminiscent of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle we all heard about in high school physics class. Professor Werner Heisenberg postulated that “the more precisely the position is determined, the less precisely the momentum is known.” Applied to a political race, this suggests that the more we measure how the candidates stand now, the less we may know about where things are going to end up — because the measurement itself can render the findings inaccurate.

The noisy onslaught of public opinion polling in the media so early in the process would amuse the good professor, because the numbers are really little more than a vain attempt to measure something that hasn’t happened. Because voters are not required to make a decision until election day, they remain open at the early stage in the race to new information, alternative perspectives and late-breaking developments — all of which render today’s poll results, to one degree or another, meaningless.

Consider this: More than two-thirds of the Democrats who voted in the 2004 Iowa caucuses didn’t decide who to vote for until a month before the caucuses. Iowa’s Republican caucus-goers are no different. In 1996, nearly a quarter chose their candidate on caucus night or in the preceding two days.

Meanwhile, the press ignores Heisenberg’s principle — that the measurements themselves, printed in bold type on Page 1, create their own distorted results, inaccurately advantaging some while disadvantaging others. By creating a potentially illusory sense of momentum or of failure, these pseudo-measures affect the extent of media coverage, fundraising, endorsements and the willingness of volunteers to engage.

The result is a cycle. Early national polling is used to declare winners and losers. Those declarations affect the flow of money and coverage, which is then reported as winners and losers, thereby driving the next polls.

Why?

The massacre at Fort Hood this past week again raises the question: Why are weapons of mass murder so readily available in our nation? Why do we allow anyone to acquire “Cop Killer guns and ammunition?”

The weapon used by the assassin was legally purchased at Guns Galore, a gun shop in Killeen, Texas, near Fort Hood. The gun is a FN Herstal Five-Seven Semi-Auto Handgun described as a “one cop killer” gun. What makes the Five-Seven different from other handguns is that it is essentially a pocket-sized assault rifle. It can carry a 30 shot cartridge and fire them semi-automatically within seconds. The Brady Campaign says it bought and test-fired a Five-Seven, and that it successfully penetrated a police vest.

Pray tell me what civilian use can there be for such a weapon? It was developed for use by military air crews and drivers for their defense. But what use is there for such weaponry by the average citizen. Certainly it is not a hunter’s gun. It’s power is totally unnecessary for marksmen . It was designed and is built to kill people. That is all it is good for. So, why is it available in your neighborhood gun shop and on the internet? It makes no sense at all.

Meanwhile, our Wars Continue

Lest we forget, Americans keep dying and keep being injured in Iraq and Afghanistan. The official count as of October 31, 2009, of the dead since our involvement in Iraq began on March 23, 2003 is 4,362; The dead from the war in Afghanistan from its beginning in September 2001 is 920. The count of American service personnel wounded in Iraq is now 31,557; in Afghanistan 4,434, according to the Department of Defense.

By the time I have to rework these totals in the next Political Update, President Obama will likely have unveiled his new policy for the Afghanistan problem. I wish there were good options, but I fear there are none. I am glad he took a holistic look at the situation…not just a review of troop requirements.

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -

Robert J. Keefe

TKC International, Inc.

1776 I Street, NW, Suite 900 – Washington, D. C. 20006

Telephone: 202 255-8161 – E mail: rkeefe@tkci.com

Past issues of Political Update available at www.bobkeefedc.com

November 1, 2009

Bob Keefe — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 19:26:05 +0000

Political Update

The Political Update is back. The re-ignition issue appeared October 15 in many email boxes, but there were significant delivery problems and just a fraction of my posts were delivered. If you are interested in my “Mea Culpa” for its absence, the issue is posted at www.bobkeefedc.com . Political Update will continue to appear twice a month.

The Off Year Elections

Seldom do the elections in the year following Presidential elections make much noise. They are few. They are local – mayoral contests primarily- with just two gubernatorial contests. Somehow, this year’s roster of races has become interesting –two because of the enormity of the spending in the campaigns, and one because of the bare knuckles competition among the conservative movement in an otherwise routine Congressional race.

The governor’s race in Virginia is a done deal. The Republican candidate, Bob McDonnell is running at least twelve points ahead of Democrat Creigh Deeds. McDonnell has run a model campaign for Republicans in this political atmosphere. He is exciting the conservative base while working the independents and moderates on local economic issues. It is working. Deeds never “got it.”

New Jersey is a different case. There is nothing pretty about this race. After a lackluster term in office, Governor Jon Corzine is spending his way into a lead in these final days. His campaign is outspending his two opponents and focusing on negative ads against Republican Chris Christie – a former US Attorney. At the end of this week, Corzine will have spent nearly $140 million of his own money to win elective offices in New Jersey… one Senate race in 2000, his first Governor’s campaign in 2005, and now this extravaganza. He is likely to win.

Another big spender is also swamping his opposition just across the Hudson from the Corzine race. Michael Bloomberg, the New York City Mayor has broken his own spending record from four years ago, dropping $85.2 million on his campaign for a third term with 11 days to go until Election Day. He enjoys a 16 point lead over Democrat William Thompson Jr. and is spending just under a million dollars a day. Go, Bill! Make him spend it all!

The most interesting contest is not about money, but about ideology. I don’t know if President Barak Obama knew what he was doing when he reached into the Republican Congressional ranks and appointed John McHugh to be the Secretary of the Army. It was a great appointment for the President and the country. Secretary John McHugh served for 16 years on the House Armed Services Committee retiring as its ranking minority member. His upstate New York District includes Fort Drum – a key military installation – and the district has not been represented by a Democrat since 1870.

Mc Hugh’s nomination has set off one of the great free for all battles within the conservative political movement and the Republican Party. Eleven local Republican county chairmen anointed an assemblywoman, Dede Scozzafava, as their party’s nominee for the vacant seat. Scozzafava is a mainstream conservative by New York standards. Her voting record is to the right of her fellow Republicans in the Assembly, but she supports abortion, same-sex marriage and endorsed the Obama stimulus package. That makes her suspect.

The battle pits traditional Republican leaders like Newt Gingrich and Minority Leader John Boehner supporting their nominee, Scozzafava. But Doug Hoffman, representing New York’s Conservative Party won the backing of prominent national conservatives, including former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and commentators Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. The combatants began to view the race for New York’s 23rd Congressional District as a struggle for the soul of the GOP. It became very nasty. So nasty that Scozzafava has now withdrawn three days before the election

Local polls had the race 35% for Hoffman; 35% for the Democrat Bill Owens; and 20% for Scozzafava. It looks like it is Hoffman’s to lose. Scozzafava endorsed Owens today.

I was hoping for a win by Dede Scozzafava – just to propose that she co-sponsor a bill with Congressman Eni Faleomavaega of American Samoa to test the press corps’ spelling skill.

There is another congressional race on tap for Tuesday… California Lt. Gov. John Garamendi is poised to take a seat vacated by another Obama appointee, Ellen Tauscher. It means that John’s lifelong dream of being Governor is over.

It should be an early election night… nothing much to stay up late for.

Health Care at Last?

Don’t look now… Health care legislation is about to be considered on the floor of the House of Representatives… and the Senate is not far behind. After the years of rhetoric and the months of nasty debate in the trenches, the first real chance for the passage of national health care reform is at hand.

There will still be twists and turns and changes in details, but I am confident that by Christmas time, President Obama will have his opportunity to sign a significant health care reform package. It will cover the basics that he outlined in his campaign… He will have succeeded in a “big one.”

The problem is that when this big one is done there is a parade of other major matters to be developed… Financial services reform is on the tracks. Something needs to be done about the Climate issue before the world meets in December to tackle that problem. We have an energy bill waiting in the wings. The economy grew last quarter, but what do we need to do to keep it growing and add jobs. And, if you have not noticed, the nation is at war – two of them, in fact. It will be a busy winter.

What a Difference a Year Makes

It was just one year ago this week that the country was celebrating the election of its new President, Barack Obama. Expectations and hopes were high as a kite. His victory brought excitement, new celebrities and a sense of accomplishment to the nation. We had just overcome racial prejudice and elected a smart, young, attractive communicator.

We had some understanding of the state of the nation that night of his celebration in Grant Park in Chicago, but I don’t think we really comprehended the depth of our economic problems… they were just becoming revealed. But on that night and in that time, we were content that we had just elected a leader who could do whatever was needed to right the ship of state. He could not leap over buildings, but he was seen to have super abilities.

The economic news was sour. The problems of the economy seemed overwhelming. The focus of the new administration had to be the economy and off it went. Between the last gasps of the Bush Administration and the early Obama actions, trillions of dollars flowed into troubled banks and companies and governments. It was Keynesian economics at a new and previously unexplored super level. It was scary.

The citizenry did not really understand what they were seeing. But they had faith in their new leader. They gave him high marks and saw the nation beginning to move into the right direction.

But it did not last. The president determined to tackle the tough political problems and to move a very aggressive legislative program. It seemed to settle into the fight over health care reform. The fight has been costly to the President. If he wins the health care fight, he will resuscitate his magic to some degree and regain some of his momentum… It is an important fight for him, and I believe he will succeed.

But for the moment, let’s look at the numbers in what is referred to as the “State of the Union” polling numbers. They are weak:

v The President’s approval rating:

Approve 52.0 %

Disapprove 43.0 %

v Is the country moving the right or wrong direction:

Right Direction 38.8%

Wrong Direction 55.0 %

(A year ago it was 21% Right Direction – 73% Wrong Direction)

v Who will you vote for in the next Congressional election:

Democratic candidate 45.0%

Republican candidate 39.5%

I’m old fashioned. I think the economy will drive the President’s popularity and that of his Democratic Party. That is what it is really all about. In that regard the most important number will be the unemployment rate, which last month hit a 26-year high of 9.8 percent.

This explains why creating jobs is a top priority in the White House and in the Democratic-led Congress. The lawmakers know their own jobs are at stake if they fail to deliver.
In next year’s election, the Democrats face a head wind. The party in power typically loses seats in the election after a new president — in this case Barack Obama — takes office. The wind could become a storm if the ranks of the unemployed swell. The rate is widely forecast to top 10 percent before going down.

Meanwhile, our Wars Continue

Lest we forget, Americans keep dying and keep being injured in Iraq and Afghanistan. The official count as of October 31, 2009, of the dead since our involvement in Iraq began on March 23, 2003 is 4,355; The dead from the war in Afghanistan from its beginning in September 2001 is 911. The count of American service personnel wounded in Iraq is now 31,527; in Afghanistan 4,198, according to the Department of Defense.

What to do about these wars, particularly the Afghan front, is a terrible problem for our decision makers and it is clearly making serious demands on our President. For me, the critical question is “Why are we there?” Certainly, President George W. Bush had good reasons to send American forces to Afghanistan in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. The attacks were planned there. The terrorists trained there. The GHQ of the sponsoring group Al Queda was there.

It made sense to attack the location that was the incubator of the deadly attacks. But that was then. We have been there for eight years now and it seems that our mission has changed. Al Queda, we are told, is no longer resident and headquartered in Afghanistan, but has migrated to Pakistan. Our enemies in Afghanistan seem to be the Taliban and such other terrorists who occupy that land. If history is any indicator, there is an unending supply of local warriors – call them Taliban or something else – that can keep a military campaign going indefinitely.

I am delighted that President Obama is making a total review of the Afghanistan situation. We need to have a clear understanding of what we are doing there. We need to identify our mission and who are friends and enemies there are. Only when that is understood can we begin to develop a total strategy for our actions there and know the total commitments we must make to achieve goals that are agreed upon.

The toughest job facing Obama in this exercise may well be to sell the results of his consultations and planning to the American people. The steady air transport loads of the casualties into the Dover Air Force Base continue to discourage the populace.

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -

Robert J. Keefe

TKC International, Inc.

1776 I Street, NW, Suite 900 – Washington, D. C. 20006

Telephone: 202 255-8161 – E mail: rkeefe@tkci.com

October 15, 2009

Bob Keefe — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 19:19:36 +0000

Political Update

Welcome back to the Political Update… It has been on hiatus for the past four months. After the excitement of the 2008 elections and the stimulation surrounding the inaugural, it took a few months off – not to recover – but to refocus. The political happenings of 2009 are very different than the past years. The center has shifted and the players are either new or wearing different uniforms. Rather than gurgle about the new team, or babble about the significance of insignificant things, I decided to sit back, allow the newness to begin to wear off, and restart when I felt more comfortable with the new scene.

That is not to say that nothing of significance has happened since February. Quite to the contrary, there has been a whirlwind of activity from Day One of the Obama Administration – too much to recount here.

Suffice to say that I have liked much of what I have seen. I like President Barrack Obama as a person and very much as a public servant and leader. I like all of the Obama family who have put glamour and fun into the everyday routine of the White House.

As an old pol who has seen a lot of political operations in Washington, I was impressed by the way the Obama Administration went about its political business.. Without getting too much in the way of policy and governing, the President and his team were getting their political work done quite well. Then Summer happened and the weight of the contentious issues came into play. These past months have been a real test for the Obama political team. I still believe they will work out their problems.

Their political game is a strong one. They start with leftovers from the campaign which are bountiful – a mailing list of supporters of more than thirteen million, a finance organization which set records for raising campaign money, the finest command of the new media and the organizing tools that it presents, and a President who has strong personal support, mass appeal and amazing presentation skills.

Despite their weakened numbers, the Republicans have not capitulated. They are focusing on issues and pseudo issues with emotional value to upset the Democratic bandwagon and cripple the new president. They have had some success; made a lot of noise; and slowed the Obama agenda.

After the fiery conflicts of the summer, we have settled in to a classic legislative battle over the President’s #1 priority, health care reform. The preliminaries are over. The committees have reported their bills to the table. Now the leaders are preparing to to make a stew out of the potsful of ingredients that they have been delivered. Speaker Nancy Pelosi will find it easy. The two bills that are before her are relatively similar and going in the same direction. Majority Leader Harry Reid has a more difficult task. He has three pieces of legislation that are dissimilar, and lacking in elements that the House Caucus seem to be extremely interested in…

By now you have been overexposed to the issues of the health care dispute. You know a single payer plan from a Cadillac plan… Forget it, in the next five or six weeks, fifty or so Congressmen and Senators will make new plans with new terms and end up with a new and exciting plan and it will move to the President for signature.

An Embarrassment of Honors

A Committee of five persons elected by the Norwegian Parliament (Storting) decided this past week that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 should be awarded to President Barack Obama. Their decision to honor the President is a great honor for him, but since it seems so premature – an honor for what they expect from him, not for what he has done – that it has become a mixed blessing for him.

The President needs to perform. He is long on rhetoric (and it is really good rhetoric) but short on performances. He is involved in big, complex problems and seems to be making progress. The Nobel Committee did not do him a favor by calling attention to this situation in the way they did.

The Big Issues of 2009

President Obama has a plateful of big issues – more than one would think were smart to juggle at one time. But Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel believes that a crisis, like the one we are experiencing should not be wasted. They provide excellent opportunities to make big gains… like when the linebackers and safeties are crowding the line of scrimmage is the best time to launch the long pass.

Here are the big items on his issue plate:

Health Care Reform – The top – and currently the most controversial – proposal from the Obama White House…

You know more about health care reform than you want to know. You have seen it everywhere you look. Of course, determining facts from factoids is difficult. The information being channeled to you is quite contradictory.

A few things we all agree to:

Health care costs are a problem for most Americans – and it is getting progressively worse. We need some relief.
Those of us who have insurance like what we have. We do not want to change.
We are worried that our personal choices or control of care will be diminished by any new program.
We would like to see some form of universal coverage, but not at the risk of lessening our own care.
We do not want our insurance company to change coverage when we need them.
We do not want any increase in taxes to pay for the new program.

This is a tough prescription, but it is the formula that the lawmakers are trying to achieve. I believe they will do it. Health care reform will pass and satisfy these requirements.

Climate Change – Saving the planet from carbon dioxide saturation and rising world temperature.

It may be an inconvenient truth, but remedial action is not easily achieved. This is the toughest legislative program to pass. It has all of the normal problems. Industry objects to the remedies. Benefits are long term, hard for the average citizen to assess. It looks like it will cost everybody something. Republicans oppose the bill unanimously… And, in addition, there are serious regional differences. Coal producing states versus the rest of the world.

The House has passed a significant bill based on a cap and trade system to limit carbon dioxide exhaust. Now the Senate is cranking up for the battle. Senator John Kerry just joined Chairman Barbara Boxer to lead the battle. This will be a battle royal. It is a tossup.

Financial Industry Reform – The hangover from the financial meltdown is slowly receding, but the regulatory regimen that allowed the crash is still in place – no real changes, so far.

There is no dearth of ideas or plans on what to do, but there is also substantial opposition to every possible change. The banks are still the banks – where the money is. And they are prepared to spend it all they need to stop the march of reform.

The battle is just to begin. On the House side, Barney Frank is ready to push his committee to pass meaningful reform… wide reaching, from consumer credit protection to ‘too big to fail” restrictions. He will refuse to fail…

Chairman Chris Dodd is possessed. He is up for re-election and running well behind. He has been tarnished by coziness with financial institutions. Now he is about to lead a crusade to reform that very industry. He is a competent legislator and will get a bill that is meaningful out of his committee.

This rosy summary is subject only to the caveat that the public pressure for reform (which is low) may overcome the enormous spending spree by the financial industry to stop it. That may not happen. Something will pass… but the industry may have it full of water.

2009 Elections

In the first post-Obama elections of note, there are two gubernatorial elections that will be decided on November 3. Of course, there will be implications drawn from the results as to the electoral condition of the President.

Both states in play went for Barack Obama in 2008 – New Jersey stayed red by 57-42%, and Virginia voted for the Democrat for the first time in ages by a 53-47% margin.

The issue in New Jersey is the incumbent Democratic Governor Jon Corzine. After a career in banking (including a stint as co-CEO of Goldman Sachs with Henry Paulson), he bought a senate seat from New Jersey. Five years into that six-year term, he decided to be governor and outspent the opposition to claim the chair. His first term has had everything – scandals, romantic entanglements, near death accidents, closure of state government- serious distractions to the role of governor – but little good governance. At the end of the term, he is in a desperate struggle with Chris Christie, a former US Attorney. Christie maintained a huge lead (as much as 12 point at one time), but has lost the momentum and Corzine’s money machine and Christie’s errors are chewing up his vote and it is now a very close race. There is no way any national trends could be determined from this very New Jersey race.

Virginia is a very different story. It too is a very local race, but the dynamics have national consequence. Virginia has been the glamour state for Democrats… electing two relatively liberal Democratic governors in a row, and then carrying the state for Obama after years of Republican dominance. Is it a mirage, or is it real progress for the Democrats. The changing demographics of the Old Dominion have made it practical to believe it is real electoral progress.

The Republicans have fielded their well selected, well trained and experienced candidate, Attorney General Bob McDonnell. The Democrats had a three way primary that was won by the outsider Criegh Deeds, a long time State Senator from rural Virginia. (He beat the money man – former Democratic National Chairman Terry McAuliffe – and the young “comer”, State Senator Brian Moran).

McDonnell is conservative, very, very conservative. He described his social conservatism in a major grad school thesis that has been uncovered in the campaign. It defines a mindset that strikes fear in the hearts of any right minded woman and has ancillary discussions of other touchy social situations. The treatise defines the right end of right wing thinking. The revelations it contained cut deeply into the early momentum that McDonnell had developed. Then, Deeds became a known quantity… and it has been downhill for him every since. The momentum of early September, when the McDonnell treatise was the news has given way to a reverse of the polls…. McDonnell has a double digit lead today… and it is growing.

Deeds does not fit the pattern of the recent successful Democratic gubernatorial candidates. He is not a Mark Warner, nor is he a Tim Kaine. He is not the polished performer that they are, and he is not in the same philosophic mold of these recent winners. McDowell, however, is very much in the ideological pattern of the most recent Republican governors of the state.

I’m glad I am not a Virginian any more.

Robert J. Keefe

TKC International, Inc.

1776 I Street, NW, Suite 900 – Washington, D. C. 20006

Telephone: 202 255-8161 – E mail: rkeefe@tkci.com

March 1, 2009

Bob Keefe — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 15:19:05 +0000

Political Update

It has not taken long to understand that when President Barack Obama promised change, he meant BIG change. He means many changes. And he means to change things quickly. One has to believe that the President has been thinking about this new job he has for a long time… He seems to have made a rather thorough review of our nation, studying it closely, looking for imperfections and looking for improvements that could make things better for the country and its people. And now, he is planning to make the changes the he feels are necessary.

His projected agenda is robust and ambitious. But no one can say he didn’t tell us what was coming. The fact is that his program is precisely as advertised, from his determination to tackle the health care problems to the tax increases for the upper income group. It is just that he is attacking such a tough group of issues at once that looks daunting. His goals are high, but so are the obstacles that he must clear to achieve them.

Now we will see how effective he can be in getting the Congress to pass the controversial measures he has tabled. It is not easy to project the degrees of difficulty in the key elements of his program… His first and most important challenge is the economic crisis. That has shown to be difficult in itself… requiring him to compromise to get the three Republican Senate votes to pass his program.

He is asking Congress to enact a number of contentious measures that have been defied decision in calmer times. His budget proposal cuts subsidies for big farms; combats global warming with a pollution tax on industries; raise taxes on the wealthy; make big changes to health care, including lower reimbursements for Medicare and Medicaid treatments and prescription drugs.

Each of these proposals is guaranteed to begin a major fight in Congress and ignite fierce debates across the country. The President is proposing to move these measures and other like matters in a concerted manner in an interrelated plan that he sees as important to level the economic playing field for all Americans.

That was the Week that Was

When we look back on this current crisis, I believe that last week will be seen as the time that marked a significant passage. Americans have known for some time that the economy was in unparalleled problems. They have seen their neighbors if not themselves lose jobs, savings, and confidence. But last week the crisis seemed to have been transformed from something transitory to something much more serious. It seems to be resisting the myriad of remedies that is being applied.

In crucial moments, previous presidents have used the venue of the House

of Representatives to reassure the American people. Lyndon Johnson’s

speech after the Kennedy assassination, Gerald Ford’s speech after the resignation of Richard Nixon are just two in my memory that rose to the level of importance as Barack Obama’s address Tuesday night. In times like these, the nation welcomes a big speech in a big venue about a topic that is important to their lives. The president had the nation’s attention, and his speech rose to the challenge and opportunity.

Last week’s speech was the functional equivalent of a State of the Union address, though Obama technically won’t give one of those until next year. It was in the same setting and it laid out the President’s analysis of the nation’s problems and his plans to address them. But

the Obama speech was different. States of the Union addresses are

generally dreary affairs, important sounding laundry lists of programs and proposals that everyone knows are going nowhere. Not so with Obama’s pseudo-SOTU address.

The President’s rhetoric was tough. The challenges he faces are daunting and he minced no words in explaining them. The economy contracted by a stunning 6.2 percent in the final three months of 2008, its worst showing in a quarter-century. Obama says the crisis calls for gutsy actions. He seems to be ready to take whatever is necessary.

The president pointedly used the word “rebuild” throughout his address.

But in truth the blueprint he set out last week was not only to rebuild the country, but really to build a very different country. We don’t yet know what Obama’s new America will look like. No one, not even Franklin Roosevelt, knew in March 1933 what New Deal America would look like when the president was finished. But one thing seems quite certain. If the Barack Obama succeeds the country will not look like the America of February 2009. That is the real meaning of last week.

The Republicans are in disarray. They cannot seem to get their voice. The CPAC conference did not produce a leader for the party. The response to the Obama speech was more of a tragedy for a bright young Governor than a serious challenge from the opposition party. Their challenge is great, too. The polls show that the country clearly wants its young president to succeed. The public is willing to give him a break. But it is also giving him more leeway than any president of our time.

The Battle Ahead

The battle plan has now been unveiled. It was outlined by Obama in the budget proposal he made on Thursday. It is an expansive list of programs that will require a number of hard-fought legislative battles.

The president seems to understand what he is in for. He began his campaign for his budget package in his weekly radio and internet address. The message was populist and his tone was feisty. He expressed appreciation for the opponents of the program, depicting them as champions of the interests of the wealthiest few with the help of powerful lobbyists.

He noted that “passing this budget won’t be easy because it represents a threat to the status quo in Washington. They are gearing up for a fight,” he said, “And so am I.”

I am reminded of the Health Care War of 1993. President Bill

Clinton determined to develop and pass a comprehensive health care plan.

It would reach into every corner of the profession… and affect many, many vested interests. First Lady Hillary Clinton, you will recall, led the effort and managed a broad based effort to remake the health care system from top to bottom.

Hillary’s crusade united and ignited those vested interests, from the doctors to the hospitals, to the pharmaceutical houses and everyone in between. They reacted en masse… and in a historic manner.

Never before had so many affected business people been so frightened by government action. The response was truly amazing, and, in my opinion, changed the way Washington worked…

With so many wealthy targets so thoroughly scared that their livelihood was at risk, they did what seemed natural to them. They determined to throw money at the problem. Task forces of industries were formed. Trade associations went on red alert. Saatchi and Saatchi opened a whole new ad agency to react to the problem. Teams of visitors flew to Washington to sell the anti-Hillary story. The campaign would prove to be a bonanza to public affairs consultants, ad agencies and lobbyists, and leave us with the memory of that great television ad series featuring Harry and Louise.

Well, it worked. The business community had met the acid test and succeeded. They proved that American public policy could be impacted by the clever spending of money. They saw that putting money into one end of the policy process got the desired result out of the other end of it.

I am convinced that the Health Care War of 1993 really opened the faucets of lobbying funding for Washington in ways different than before… and public policy has been more at greater risk from financial forces ever since.

That battle was pretty one-sided. The Clinton team was not as savvy as the industry. They never got their act together. But this time can be different. The president’s remark that he “is gearing up for a fight” implies that the Obama forces are prepared to fight fire with fire… and this time they have the ammunition to make their effort a successful one. They have the organization that they used to win the White House still in place across the country. They have the skilled media and internet operators available to support the president’s

positions. It will not be a one-sided fight this time.

Little Progress in Minnesota

Minnesota remains under-represented in the United States Senate.

The Board of Elections has declared Democrat Al Franken the winner by

225 votes out of about 2.8 million cast. But Republican Norm Coleman has challenged the state board of elections decision and now, a three-judge panel there is hearing arguments in Coleman’s challenge.

Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty explains “Coleman has raised irregularities that rise to the level of legal issues, legitimate legal issues, that could change the result. It’s moved from a simple thing you can track, like vote counts, to pretty complex legal issues, so for average people to be able to guess how it’s going to come out is challenging,” Pawlenty said. “There are constitutional issues and obscure election law issues that are being sorted out by teams of lawyers and the courts and the like.”

And Minnesota law says that a certificate of election cannot be issued while a challenge is being processed. So there still is one empty seat in the Senate.

Meanwhile, In Iraq

Lest we forget, Americans keep dying and keep being injured in

Iraq and Afghanistan. The official count as of March 1, 2009, of the

dead in Iraq since our involvement began on March 23, 2003 is 4,253.

There have been 660 Americans killed in Afghanistan since that war was begun in 2001. The Department of Defense says that more than 46,000 American service personnel have been wounded in these two theaters

On Friday, the President Obama announced his timetable for ending hostilities in Iraq. He was faithful to his campaign promises, but it contained some important adjustments. The president lengthened his 16-month timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops to 19 months, thus adopting the middle of the three options the Pentagon studied. He set a ceiling of 50,000 troops for the “residual” force he has always said would remain. The plan will allow U.S. commanders to maintain a large force in the country through Iraq’s crucial parliamentary elections at the end of this year.

The President characterized Iraq not as a fiasco to be abandoned but as a “great nation” whose “future . . . is inseparable from the future of the broader Middle East.” He said his administration aimed for “a new era of American leadership and engagement” in the region and “will work to promote an Iraqi government that is just, representative and accountable, and that provides neither support nor safe haven to terrorists.

The president briefed a number of the congressional leaders, including Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). Mr. McCain called Obama’s plan “reasonable.”

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -

Robert J. Keefe

Principal – Meridian Strategies, LLC

1920 L Street, NW, Suite 410 – Washington, D. C. 20036

Telephone: 202 223-8839 – Cell: 202 255-8161 – E mail:

rkeefe@verizon.net