Still same as the old boss. A fan of the site sends me this Boston Globe article, which discusses how prominent Democratic politicians pushed to get the second F-35 engine into the final DOD Appropriations bill prior to President Obama's signature. You might remember that F-35 second engine as one of those costly gold-plated things that DOD really didn't ask for and that President Obama said he wouldn't stand for. First it was gone.

The Obama administration has signaled for months that funding for a second F-35 engine in the fiscal 2010 defense bill could become veto bait. Gates spent months, most recently at the beginning of September, making the case that the Pentagon does not need the alternative engine, built by a General Electric-Rolls-Royce team.

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) said

Wednesday that he decided against funding the engine because he was concerned about the floor vote on the entire defense spending bill.

Now it's back.

Senator John F. Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, said that GE officials had told his office that 1,000 jobs in Massachusetts will be saved or maintained once full production begins on the backup engine.

"There will also be some jobs gained, but maintaining jobs right now is very important,’’ he said yesterday, defending his efforts to persuade fellow lawmakers, including the highly influential Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii and Representative John Murtha of Pennsylvania, to overturn Obama’s proposal in a final vote on Saturday.

Inouye chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, while Murtha oversees a House panel with jurisdiction over defense spending.

Kerry also used his influence with the White House to get it to back off a threatened presidential veto. He told the Globe that he ultimately got assurances from Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s chief of staff, that the president would not veto the fiscal year 2010 defense appropriations bill if the money for the engine was included. Obama signed the bill which totals $626 billion, on Monday.

What utter bullshit. This is just unjustified crap, and it doesn't smell any better coming from a Democratic politician than a Republican. In talking about defense acquisition with a colleague, he said that he might believe in Santa Claus, but he didn't believe in acquisition reform. With clowns like this in the Senate and White House, it's no wonder that the Defense Department can't get clear of its huge funding bills and massively overpriced, behind schedule programs.

The VH-71 presidential helicopter program also got $85 million to "wind down" its efforts. Must be a big office. The USMC's Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle is getting $293.5 million, despite its many troubles. I'm severely disappointed.

I think it's pretty obvious that we need to change the procedural rules in the Senate, and hopefully get around obstructionist tactics while still allowing honest debate and compromise. We can't have a system where senators from sparsely-populated states maintain such disproportionate power (and that's not even getting into the reality of a Congress corrupted by K Street):

WASHINGTON - Senate Banking Committee chairman Christopher Dodd, who one month ago proposed an overhaul of financial regulations that was hailed by many consumer activists, has all but jettisoned that proposal following Republican objections and has initiated talks for a new approach designed to satisfy some of his fiercest GOP critics.

Dodd’s strategy has raised concerns among consumer activists who were counting on him to come up with a tougher bill than the one recently passed by the House, and now worry that the entire measure will be weakened.

But the Connecticut Democrat, in an interview in which he laid out his strategy, said it would be too risky to launch another legislative effort that might repeat the Senate’s experience with in the health care debate, in which single senators have forced major rewrites or threaten to defeat the measure.

Dodd’s new approach began last week when he paired four Republicans and four Democrats on the Banking Committee to work together to come up with suggestions on reshaping the legislation. The process has not produced any details and is expected to continue through January, but participants have said they are hopeful of brokering a compromise bill that could get a Senate vote next year.

Asked what has become of his initial proposal, Dodd replied: “I laid down a bill that is as much a reflection of where I am on this as to plant a flag. I did what I wanted to do. I provoked people.’’

The strategy contrasts with the method employed by his legislative counterpart, House Financial Services chairman Barney Frank, who oversaw passage of a bill that would transform the regulatory landscape for banks and many businesses - while failing to gain a single Republican vote. Unlike in the House, where bills can pass by a single vote, Dodd needs 60 of 100 senators to avoid a filibuster.

As Wanda Sykes might say, "I am so damned sick of these @#!*# Democratic snakes on this @#!*# plane!" Yes, once again, ConservaDems are holding a gun to the head of progress. This time, they want to blackmail Congress into overriding the Constitutionally-mandated power of the House over the nation's purse strings - and hand it over to them:

Seven members of the Senate Budget Committee threatened during a Tuesday hearing to withhold their support for critical legislation to raise the debt ceiling if the bill calling for the creation of a bipartisan fiscal reform commission were not attached. Six others had previously made such threats, bringing the total to 13 senators drawing a hard line on the committee legislation.

“You rarely do have the leverage to make a fundamental change,” said Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), who said he hasn’t ruled out offering the independent commission legislation as an amendment to the healthcare reform bill.

What is it about Kent Conrad that makes me want to slap him? Is it that perpetually robotic grin? Is it the fact that he's so reliably a corporate tool? Or maybe it's that somehow, I just know that Celine Dion is on his iPod.

The panel, which has been championed by Conrad and ranking member Judd Gregg (R-N.H), would be tasked with stemming the unsustainable rise in debt.

Among its chief responsibilities would be closing the gap between tax revenue coming in and the larger cost of paying for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits. The Government Accountability Office recently reported the gap is on pace to reach an “unsustainable” $63 trillion in 2083.

The panel would also have the power to craft legislation that would change the tax code and set limits on government spending.

The legislation would then be subject to an up-or-down vote; it could not be amended.

Chris Bowers calls it a "national suicide pact":

Let's review the threat that these five Democrats are making:

* They will allow the United States to default on its debt, which will vastly increase the overall amount we have to pay on our debt

UNLESS

* Speaker Nancy Pelosi turns over Congressional power on Social Security and Medicare to an unelected commission that will almost certainly propose deep cuts in Social Security and Medicare entitlements. Keep in mind that if deep cuts to Social Security and Medicare pass under a Democratic trifecta, the party would be doomed at the ballot box for years to come.

This is completely insane, and there is no choice but to call this bluff.

Let's see these five Democratic Senators explain to the entire nation why they allowed the country to default on its debt. No matter how safe their seats appear to be, no Senator is going to win reelection after making the entire country default on its debt. Their rationale does not matter. Being blamed for making the country default on its debt - especially after all five of these Democrats voted in favor of the Wall Street bailout and are demanding that Social Security and Medicare be cut - will be the effective end of their political careers.

Go for it, guys. Form your national suicide pact. Tell the country that you are demanding deep cuts in Social Security and Medicare, or else you will personally cause the United States debt to double. Let's see how well that message plays on the air.

The Democrats are so strangely self-destructive at times, I have to say this: Please tell me they're not only investigating Democrats, but Republicans, too. Because that would just be stupid. I mean, we didn't bother going after Republican war criminals - so why single out Democrats?

House ethics investigators have scrutinized the activities of more than 30 lawmakers and several aides in inquiries about issues including defense lobbying and corporate influence peddling, according to a confidential House ethics committee report prepared in July.

The report, disclosed on a publicly accessible computer network, was made available to The Washington Post by a source familiar with such networks.

The ethics committee is one of the most secretive panels in Congress, and its members and staff members sign oaths not to disclose any activities related to its past or present investigations. Watchdog groups have accused the committee of not actively pursuing inquiries; the newly disclosed document indicates the panel is conducting far more investigations than it had revealed.

Shortly after 6 p.m. Thursday, the committee chairman, Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), interrupted a series of House votes to alert lawmakers about the breach. She cautioned that some of the panel's activities are preliminary and not a conclusive sign of inappropriate behavior.

"No inference should be made as to any member," she said.

You know that old joke about the definition of mixed emotions: your mother-in-law driving your brand new Benz over a cliff? That's how I feel about the GOP targeting Harry Reid. Can't we find a real Democrat to challenge him in the primary?

And besides, why don't we have a Majority Leader from a safe state who won't be bending over backwards to keep the GOP happy?

Nevada Republicans have been unsuccessful in finding a top-tier candidate, but the head of the GOP's Senate campaign arm promised Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) would face a strong challenge in 2010.

National Republican Senatorial Committee chairman John Cornyn (Texas) admitted Wednesday that time to find a candidate to take on Reid is not unlimited, but he said the chance to take out the Senate majority leader would open Republican wallets around the nation.

"With the right candidate against Harry Reid, money will not be a problem. And not just in Nevada, among contributors there, but I mean nationally," Cornyn told reporters.

"I think we have time, it's not open-ended, to find the right candidate," Cornyn said. "Because of the overall political environment, I don't think there's that kind of urgency that we might otherwise feel to get a candidate early.

"We don't yet have the field completed. My hope is here over the next few weeks that will change," Cornyn said.

But Republicans have seen several prominent potential candidates fall by the wayside in their hunt for the right candidate. Ex-Rep. Jon Porter (R), long seen as a strong challenger, lost his reelection bid in 2008 and has since signed on with a Washington lobbying firm. Former state Sen. Bob Beers (R), another possible contender, suffered the same fate last year.

Lt. Gov. Brian Krolicki (R) is already in the race, but he was indicted for misappropriation of funds during his tenure as state treasurer. Though Krolicki maintains his innocence and has pleaded not guilty, he is no longer a candidate national Republicans speak of.

When I lose patience with the pace of healthcare reform, I remind myself exactly how much detail work is involved. (Via MSNBC: Above, House Energy and Commerce Committee Special Assistant Mitch Smiley, center, thumbs through boxes of amendments to the America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, on Friday.) So stay patient and keep calling, we're getting closer all the time. All three major committees have finished their version and will vote in September:

Reporting from Washington -- President Obama's ambitious plan to overhaul the nation's healthcare system got a major boost when a pivotal House committee passed a compromise bill Friday night, clearing the way for a floor vote this fall.

The bill was approved 31 to 28, with five Democrats and all of the Republicans on the energy and commerce committee voting against it. Despite the defections, enough liberal and conservative Democrats were able to come together to break the deadlock that had stalled the bill for weeks.

"We are a diverse caucus with many points of view," said committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman (D-Beverly Hills). "We've agreed we need to pull together."

To reach agreement, Waxman earlier this week had accepted conservative lawmakers' demands to limit the bill's price tag to $1 trillion over 10 years, exempt more small businesses from the employer-provided insurance mandate, and reduce the number of low-income people who would qualify for subsidized coverage.

But those changes provoked a backlash among liberals. To win them back, Waxman crafted a compromise that would restore low-income subsidies. The committee also added a major provision that would limit the premium increases that insurers could impose, and another that would let the government negotiate pharmaceutical prices under Medicare's prescription drug program -- a goal long sought by liberals as a way to reduce drug costs. (The idea was bitterly opposed by Republicans when the program was established in 2003, as critics questioned whether the government would secure discounts.)

The bill is designed to provide insurance for the 46 million people in the U.S. who now go without it; to curb healthcare costs; and to make it harder for companies to deny coverage or increase premiums.

"We have a historic opportunity to transform our healthcare system," Rep. Mike Ross (D-Ark.), a leader of the panel's conservative faction, said ahead of the vote.

But Republicans said that despite changes made to address conservative Democrats' concerns, the legislation remained a costly, intrusive expansion of government power over medical care. Conservatives did little more than "pick the color of the lipstick on this pig," said Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.).

The vote came just as House members prepared to leave town for a monthlong recess.

It looks like the mighty Emperor Max Baucus and his royal lords are finally releasing details of their health care plan and to nobody's surprise they decided to screw America.

After weeks of secretive talks, a bipartisan group in the Senate edged closer Monday to a health care compromise that omits two key Democratic priorities but incorporates provisions to slow the explosive rise in medical costs, officials said.

These officials said participants were on track to exclude a requirement many congressional Democrats seek for large businesses to offer coverage to their workers. Nor would there be a provision for a government insurance option, despite President Barack Obama's support for such a plan. The three Democrats and three Republicans from the Senate Finance Committee were considering a tax of as much as 35 percent on very high-cost insurance policies, part of an attempt to rein in rapid escalation of costs.

Also likely to be included in any deal was creation of a commission charged with slowing the growth of Medicare through recommendations that would take effect automatically unless overturned by Congress. "We're going to get agreement here," Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the Finance Committee chairman, said Monday. "The group of six really wants to get to 'yes.'"

The merry band of six court jesters are doing what they've been paid to do. Kill health care reform. The gang of fools are putting themselves between you and your doctor. That's if you have any. Check out how much money he's taken from Health Industrial Complex.

Howie Klein writes:

No one serving in the Senate today has taken as much money from the Medical-Industrial Complex as Baucus ($2,865,881) other than notorious corporate whore Arlen Specter ($4,066,433) and two former presidential candidates, John Kerry ($8,163,141) and John McCain ($8,672,260). Baucus even tops Medical Industry shill Mitch McConnell ($2,755,468). And when it comes to the Financial Sector-- the banksters, Big Insurance and Big Real Estate-- Baucus was also on the payroll in a major way. His $4,675,393 in donations put him in the Top 10, with corporate whores like Mitch McConnell, Alexander Lamar, Arlen Specter, Joe Lieberman, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Chuck Schumer... basically the folks who oversaw the economic legislation that dragged the economy right over the cliff.

Max and his gang are only worried about one thing. Making sure the health insurance industry makes out like thieves. The above chart shows where his loyalties are.

Digby makes an excellent point about a new CBO report:

Strangely, the headline to this article doesn't characterize this development as a devastating blow to Republicans and opponents of health care reform the way every other report from the CBO has been characterized as a devastating blow to Democrats, even though it punctures one of the industry's central arguments against the public plan:

A new government health insurance plan sought by President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats could coexist with private insurers without driving them out of business, an analysis by nonpartisan budget experts suggests.

The estimate by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office — seen as good news by Democrats — comes as leaders pushed Monday to make progress on health care overhaul before lawmakers go home for their August recess.

I personally don't like insurance companies and I'd be happy if we had a system where they weren't necessary. But if they could be made to do their business in a fair and equitable manner, sell their products honestly and fulfill their obligations, then we could probably live with them. Rapacious greedheads making obscene profits on the backs of sick Americans, however, is an immoral and expensive arrangement that can't be tolerated any longer.

If strict regulation and competition from a public option would force insurance companies to participate in universal health care as decent corporate citizens then I won't complain. I also won't care if a public plan does end up driving out those which insist that spending billions in compensation to their CEOs is necessary but fulfilling the terms of their policies isn't. It's really up to them.

Why isn't the media all over this CBO report? Didn't you hear the trumpets roar before the pundits held up the report and asked Judd Gregg why he's against the public option now?? We're trying to change health care in America and people are usually afraid of change. Even if the change will help them. It's natural. Baucus and the Senate Finance Committee are only interested in protecting their donors.

Jane Hamsher says:

The Finance Committee was supposed to deal with -- wait for it -- finance. Instead, President Baucus and President Snowe decided that they'd just write the whole damn bill themselves and have included a competing co-op plan that would replace the public plan offered by the HELP committee.

Because three Republican Senators are worth more than 76% of the country to members of the most exclusive club in the world.

They certainly have a mighty high opinion of themselves.

Yes, three republicans rule the world of health care. I understand why Orrin Hatch quit the group. He wasn't needed to make sure these sorry fools helped destroy the bill.

Via Washington Post:

Sen. Ted Stevens, the longest-serving Republican in the Senate, disclosed in an interview that the FBI asked him to preserve records as part of a widening investigation into Alaskan political corruption that has touched his son and ensnared one of his closest political confidants and financial backers.

Stevens, who is famous for bringing home federal earmarks for Alaska when he was Appropriations Committee chairman, was not previously known to be linked to the Justice Department's probe, which has uncovered evidence that more than $400,000 worth of bribes were given to state lawmakers in exchange for favorable energy legislation.

Investigators have used secret recording equipment, seized documents and cooperating witnesses to secure the indictments of four current and former state lawmakers, including the former state House speaker, shaking the core of Alaska's Republican Party. Read more...

I sure hope he hasn't cleared out his internets tubes yet. Howie has more...

Jon Swift: Fred Thompson kicks Gandhi's ass...

The Impolitic: Arizona US Attorney fired for failed porn case? Overlooked amidst all the controversy, former US attorney in Los Angeles Debra Wong Yang, who says she departed the US Attorney job of her own volition, and who until recently headed the office in charge of the investigation of former House appropriations committee chairman Jerry Lewis (R-Ca), reportedly got a $1.5 million offer to join the firm representing Lewis.

NPR Check: It's good that NPR reported on the death of a key witness/survivor of the 1981 El Mozote massacre in El Salvador. It's disgraceful that they ignored the most significant reasons why the story remains timely and relevant

The Kingsland Report: The Fed spent $76 billion last week to prop up markets...

Bob Geiger: The best of the week's editorial cartoons...
Programming Reminder: Watch Talkleft's Jeralyn discussing Gonzogate on CNN's Reliable Sources today

Ben Smith :

Two senior aides to National Republican Campaign Committee Chairman Tom Reynolds participated in “damage control” conference calls concerning correspondence between Congressman Mark Foley and a former congressional page -- two days before the scandal became public, and earlier than previously reported.

NRCC Communications Director Carl Forti and Reynolds then chief-of-staff Kirk Fordham both took part in the first call the evening of Wednesday, September 27, and one call the next day, Forti and other sources familiar with the call confirmed. Forti's involvement and the NRCC's role in the run-up to the Foley scandal add another link between the disgraced former congressman and Reynolds, who has said he knew only indirectly of questionable emails, and that he reported them to his House superiors. They also reflect another moment at which House GOP leadership was aware of concerns about Foley and pages.

Continue reading »