DADT: Senate Republicans Hold Civil Rights Over A Barrel

Senate Republicans have decided to hold civil rights over a barrel. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that Republicans will not allow a vote on the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell until they reach a consensus with Democrats over the Bush tax cuts. Republicans favor extending all of the cuts, which have exacerbated the federal budget deficit. Most Democrats, however, favor allowing the cuts for the highest income owners to expire.

Recently, Senators Scott Brown and Susan Collins, two moderate Republicans, have expressed support for repealing DADT. While Brown's statement does not reference a tax deal, Collins explicitly ties her support for a repeal of DADT to a resolution of the tax issue.

The Republicans are simply engaging in smart political bargaining. Democrats know that the DADT repeal must take place, if at all, before Republicans assume control of the House next year. Republicans are using the DADT issue to gain support for their tax plan.

Good politics, however, also requires parties to frame the terms of the debate. Democrats should continue working on the tax issue, but they should also call out Republicans for threatening civil rights in order to provide handouts to wealthy Americans.

Repealing DADT is a cost-free measure. It is unrelated to tax policy. Repealing DADT will end a policy of irrational and unfair discrimination by the national government. Many Republicans support the ban because they or their constituents oppose equal protection for gays and lesbians. Democrats should not allow their bigotry to go unrecognized in these debates.

The Dubious Benefits of Obama's Political Compromises

President Obama continues to "reach out" to conservatives and moderates. The benefits of this approach, however, are dubious at best.

Ben Nelson
Obama, for example, secured support for healthcare reform legislation from Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska by giving his state millions of dollars in Medicaid assistance. Although Nelson finally overcame his opposition to patients in insurance exchanges receiving abortion servies, Obama's outreach did not create a new partnership between the two. Instead, Nelson has announced that he will join Republicans to filibuster the nomination of Craig Becker to sit on the National Labor Relations Board.

Republicans oppose Becker's nomination solely because he is pro-labor. They have not, by contrast, opposed pro-business nominees. Instead, the opposition is purely ideological. Nelson's move will probably kill the nomination.

Joe Lieberman
After he was elected, President Obama tried to smooth things out with Senator Joe Lieberman. Many Democrats wanted to deprive Lieberman of his seniority because he endorsed and openly campaigned for John McCain during the 2008 presidential election. Despite the wishes of many Democrats, Obama stepped in to make peace and told Senate Democrats not to punish Lieberman.

Lieberman, however, recently opposed Obama's healthcare proposals. Consequently, President Obama, in a controversial move, ordered Harry Reid to drop the public plan and Medicare buy-in options from the pending legislation.

Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe
President Obama has also struggled to define pieces of his legislative agenda, including the stimulus package and healthcare reform, around the political leanings of Susan Colins and Olympia Snowe. Neither of the two Senators from Maine, however, support his healthcare agenda. Furthermore, the stimulus package would have passed without the support of Collins and Snowe, but Obama made unnecessary concessions to obtain their votes.

Republicans Generally
Most recently, Obama has tried to warm up to Republicans. He debated House Republicans at a recent retreat, and he has offered to meet with Republicans to discuss bipartisanship regarding healthcare reform -- which seems doomed after the election of Republican Scott Brown as a Senator from Massachusetts. Republicans, however, have either resisted the idea or accepted it with major caveats.

Comprising With Moderates and Conservatives, Criticizing Liberals
Although Obama continues to reach out to and to make compromises with moderates, members of his administration have harshly criticized liberals. For example, responding to progressive criticism regarding healthcare reform, senior members of Obama's staff called liberals "irrational" and "insane." Rahm Emanuel has also stated that liberal critics of moderate and conservative Democrats are "fucking retards." The White House has clearly decided to isolate its liberal critics.

Final Take
While the Obama administration criticizes its base of support, it continues to chase down the approval of moderates and conservatives. If the latter approach paid off politically, then perhaps it would make sense. But to date, the benefits of this approach are dubious at best.

New Partisan Theatrics on the Left: GOP Supports the Flu

Ok. I'm back. I have been scarce recently, due to professional constraints. Now that I have returned, I have discovered a litany of blog posts which essentially say the same thing: The GOP voted against flu preparation funding in the stimulus. The news is spreading like a....virus...across the web (yeah, cheesy intentional pun).

John Nichols, a writer with The Nation, started the flurry of posts this morning (I believe) with this zinger: GOP Know-Nothings Fought Pandemic Preparedness. Nicols describes a process where silly Republicans voted to water down the amount of money devoted to pandemic preparation in the stimulus package:

When House Appropriations Committee chairman David Obey, the Wisconsin Democrat who has long championed investment in pandemic preparation, included
roughly $900 million for that purpose in this year's emergency stimulus bill, he was ridiculed by conservative operatives and congressional Republicans.

Obey and other advocates for the spending argued, correctly, that a pandemic hitting in the midst of an economic downturn could turn a recession into something far worse -- with workers ordered to remain in their homes, workplaces shuttered to avoid the spread of disease, transportation systems grinding to a halt and demand for emergency services and public health interventions skyrocketing. Indeed, they suggested, pandemic preparation was essential to any responsible plan for renewing the U.S. economy.

But former White House political czar Karl Rove and key congressional Republicans -- led by Maine Senator Susan Collins -- aggressively attacked the notion that there was a connection between pandemic preparation and economic recovery.

Now, as the World Health Organization says a deadly swine flu outbreak that apparently began in Mexico but has spread to the United States has the potential to develop into a pandemic, Obey's attempt to secure the money seems eerily prescient.

Of course, even Nicols acknowledges that no flu pandemic exists. But he does not acknowledge that the stimulus package was an extra stream of money separate from the normal operating budget of the federal government and the normal allocation of money for general spending projects, including public health initiatives.

Nicols does not present any evidence whatsoever to demonstrate that the normal budget failed to devote sufficient funds to the agencies responsible for addressing public health concerns. Nicols also fails to demonstrate why, if necessary, Congress cannot simply allocate funds now as part of an emergency spending plan. Instead, he whips out his partisan club and starts pounding. He does not even state whether the pandemic funds that actually made it into the package are being used to combat the swine flu.

My Take: I agree with critics who argued that including pandemic preparation funds in the stimulus package did not promote the policy behind the plan -- stimulating the economy. Public health is a general policy issue; it is not properly addressed in legislation combatting a financial crisis. Furthermore, opposition to including the the funds in the stimulus package does not mean that any particular member of Congress opposed investing in pandemic preparation as a general policy matter. Accordingly, my fellow liberals are just pumping out hot air on this one.

Apparently, the mercurial stock market has responded negatively to the flu, a fact that Nicols believes proves the link between the flu and the stimulus. But this argument is not persuasive. The stock market reacts and overreacts all the time. Extreme daily movement in the market usually has nothing to do with sound economic analysis. Instead, it results from public panic, which Nicols's analysis invites.

Finally, while Nicols blames the GOP for opposing the inclusion of pandemic preparation in the stimulus package, he fails to acknowledge that Democrats voted for them as well. The stimulus package would have passed without the votes of the 3 purple Republicans. If the Democrats believed that including the full amount requested by Obey was so compelling, they would not have supported the Republican cuts. On this point, one blogger says that Senate Democrat Charles Schumer also blasted the notion of including pandemic spending in the stimulus package.

My Very Cynical and "Bitter" Outtake: I wonder how the kids in racially segregated urban poverty schools are doing today. While liberals are blabbing incessantly about this silly matter, they should have been analyzing pressing social issues related to poverty and unequal opportunity. Decaying public schools pose a bigger threat to the economy and to public health than GOP opposition to specific items in the stimulus package. Liberals pretend that they are a "progressive" antidote to the GOP, but from here, it looks like many of them do not care about progressive issues at all. So long as they can beat up Republicans, they are happy. But that does not put food on people's tables, right? Yes -- I am venting.

Related article: Dems Put Swine Flu to Good Use.

UNSTIMULATED

The stimulus does not have enough votes to pass in the Senate -- and senators are scrambling to cut (gut?) the proposed measure. Susan Collins and Ben Nelson, two moderate Republicans, want to eliminate $200 billion from the package. But it appears that lawmakers have already inserted a new provision that makes the legislation more expensive (a new home purchase tax credit). Good luck!

I think it's pretty remarkable that Republicans have been able to hold up the stimulus, despite the sweeping Democratic victory in national and state politics this year. Clearly, some Democrats in the Senate disagree with the package in its current form. And, perhaps the release of a Gallup poll which shows that only 38% of the public supports passage of the legislation in its current format has something to do with the current stalemate.