« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
The Daily Muck
With Senate on Break, Bush Appoints Officials
"President Bush on Wednesday appointed as his top regulatory official a conservative academic who has written that markets do a better job of regulating than the government does and that it is more cost-effective for people who are sensitive to pollution to stay indoors on smoggy days than for government to order polluters to clean up their emissions. As director of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the White House Office of Management and Budget, Susan E. Dudley will have an opportunity to change or block all regulations proposed by government agencies." (LA Times)
Bush Team Built on Foundation of Loyalty
"As Attorney General Alberto Gonzales prepares to face Congress this month, his role in the dismissals of eight U.S. attorneys isn't the only issue under scrutiny. There is also loyalty as defined by the Bush administration. Loyalty with roots stretching back to Texas helps explain why Bush is standing behind Gonzales." (USA TODAY)
A Turncoat in Team Bush's Midst
"Inside George W. Bush's inner circle, there are a couple of cardinal rules. Be discreet. Be loyal to the boss, regardless of whether the boss is loyal to you. For more than a month now, Matthew Dowd—Bush's pollster in 2000 and his chief strategist in 2004—hasn't just been breaking the rules; he's been shattering them to pieces." (Newsweek)
Personal Data at Risk in Lost IRS Laptops
"At least 490 IRS computers have been stolen or lost since 2003 in security breaches that potentially jeopardized the personal information of more than 2,000 taxpayers, a government audit reported Wednesday. The computers were lost in 387 incidents, most of which were not reported to the IRS computer security office as required, according to the report by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration." (USA TODAY)
Wal-Mart Defends Security Measures
"Wal-Mart's normally low-profile security efforts were thrust into the limelight Wednesday when a fired technician alleged he had been part of a large surveillance operation that spied on company workers, critics, vendors and consultants. The company defended its security practices." (Associated Press)
White House Posts Earmarks on Website
"In a direct challenge to Congress and the way it does business, the White House on Wednesday unveiled an online list of all the pet spending projects lawmakers tucked in the federal budget for the 2004-05 fiscal year. The Internet database details spending known as earmarks, funds that lawmakers funnel to projects, programs and sometimes even specific recipients without going through the normal budget review — such as the $25 million provided to California spinach farmers in the recent Iraq spending bill." (LA Times)
Comments (14)
Peter Kohan wrote on April 5, 2007 10:11 AM:One can only hope the Dems get the White House in '08 so they can begin to undo all the damage done to the federal bureaucracy by these conservative hacks trying to "starve the beast." I'd like to see what these peopel do with their lives when they aren't tasked with destroying the country from within.
Arkansan wrote on April 5, 2007 10:20 AM:My grandmother always said, "What can you expect from an ass, but a kick?"
If the Democrats haven't learned that there is nothing trustworthy to come from this gang then it's the Democrats who don't deserve any power. All conversation with the administration must operate under the presumption that even when it is easier to tell the truth, they will lie for the sake of consistency.
TSUMBRA wrote on April 5, 2007 10:49 AM:"SWEDISH EYES"
Kimberly wrote on April 5, 2007 11:08 AM:WWW.ILOVEPOETRY.COM/VIEWPOEM.ASP?ID=91680
FROM THE 'WHAT IF' FILE:
JUST HOW WOULD DICK CHENEY REACT?
A QUICK SHOTGUN BLAST TO THE FACE!
Pelosi and Reid should call Bush on excluding the sponsors of the posted earmarks. In fact, they should go one better, and identify the member of congress who sponsored each one. It should be fairly easy for them to do, especially since it is only for the 2005 fiscal year. We all know that the bulk of them came from Republicans.
Barbara wrote on April 5, 2007 11:33 AM:I worked for the Dept. of Education during the Reagan Administration. They did everything they could to prevent us from providing mandated reports to Congress. I spent a whole year instead of preparing the report, writing memos stating that the report was mandated by Congress and had to be prepared. They finally approved doing the report 30 days before it was due. Most of us in my section left the federal govt under that duress. That sounds mild copared to what Bush and Co. have accomplished.
Code work: SNAKE
Sojourner wrote on April 5, 2007 11:36 AM:The President appears to be more concerned with doing whatever he can to show that he is in charge. Maybe these appointments are retaliation because he has not gotten his way with Iraq funding.
Regardless, he has wiped out any hope that I have that he has begun to get the message. He thinks he sees hope... it is the proverbial train coming down the track, and he does not have the good sense to know that he is going to be squashed very shortly.
I am a moderate Republican, but I detest this man, and what he and his ilk have done to our country. I strongly suggest to senators Cornyn and Hutchison that it is time to cut your losses, and stop feeding this idiot's ego! Cornyn has not realized yet that there are a lot of disgruntled Republicans in our state -- and he will be up for reelection next year.
Long Memory wrote on April 5, 2007 12:04 PM:The Democrats in Congress ought to get every Republican colleague on the record right now about how they feel about recess appointments. If not, then when the GOP is out of the White House they ought to resign themselves to never seeing any nominees come to their respective committees.
People tried to point out that bipartisanship with the Democratic Party in Texas is to bipartisanship at military justice is to justice. Not many people paid attention, and we're paying the price today.
les wrote on April 5, 2007 3:49 PM:I get this image of bush hiding under the bed, with his little handful of doomed appointments; every now and then he sticks his head out and whimpers, "Is Congress gone yet? Are they gone? Can I appoint now?"
uptown wrote on April 5, 2007 4:38 PM:Time to call BS on these appointments. Article II, Sec. 2, of the Constitution says, “The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.”
Notice the words: "vacancies that may happen DURING the recess". These vacancies existed before the recess.
Holy Cow! wrote on April 5, 2007 4:45 PM:So what's the problem with recess appointments?
"President Bill Clinton made a recess appointment of Bill Lan Lee as Assistant Attorney General for civil rights, when it became clear that Lee's strong support of affirmative action would lead to Senate opposition. Similarly, when the Senate did not vote on his nomination of James Hormel to be Ambassador to Luxembourg, Clinton made a recess appointment. Many people felt that the Senate's inaction was because Hormel was openly gay, and when he was appointed became the first such person to serve as a U.S. ambassador. Clinton made 140 recess appointments over two terms." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recess_appointment
ahem wrote on April 5, 2007 5:53 PM:Shorter Cow: oranges make a great apple pie filling.
No matter which side does it, the use of ambassadorships as prizes plain stinks. To be British ambassador in Washington, you basically need to be at the very top of the Diplomatic Service; to be US ambassador in London, you need to be a horse breeder or car dealer.
steambomb wrote on April 6, 2007 1:20 AM:If he was my A.G. he wouldn't get a chance to resign. I would fire his ass. I would hold a press conference to do it. Then I would ask for an independent counsel to investigate whether he lied to congress or not. Then I would appoint an A.G. with integrity and ask for a damage report. But he isn't my A.G. he is dumbyas.
helen kenney wrote on April 6, 2007 4:01 AM:i have never posted anything on the internet before. all i can say about the bush league is get them gone now
Wag wrote on April 6, 2007 12:56 PM:Enclosed is the text of an e-mail that I sent to Senator Reid earlier today. If there are any Muckrakers out there who could comment on the fesibility of this proposal, I would like to hear from you.
Dear Senator Reid-
As Senate Majority Leader, you are making a huge impression on the bush White House. I commend you for the work you are doing, and fully support your actions in concert with Rep. Pelosi.
President Bush's recent recess appointments indicate that the current White House will stoop as low as possible to maintain their unchecked power. It is time for the Senate to strongly answer these abuses.
What are the requirements for the Senate to remain officially in session? Would it be possible for the Senate to stay in session without going out on recess for the next 2 years?
I would urge you in the strongest way possible to find a way to avoid having the Senate go in to recess. If there is no recess, then there can be no abusive recess appointments.
Sincerely,
Wagner Schorr-Ratzlaff, MD
I also posted this at Talking Points Memos.