2008 White Elephant Gifts

By definition white elephant gifts refer to a possession whose maintenance cost exceeds its usefulness. White elephant gift exchanges have been over the years a popular holiday party game.

The 2 Regular Guys have a few white elephants to unload from this past year. These stories and events from this past year have cost us much. At this point one wonders how we ever found them useful.

Would you be interested in taking any of these off our hands?

VIDEO: White Elephants The 2 Regular Guys Wouldn't Mind Giving Up For Good

The enemy combatant detention camp at Guantanamo Bay must go. Few brave souls are left to defend Gitmo’s propriety. The Supreme Court last summer delivered the final blow in the case Al Odah v. United States. By striking down the President’s Military Commission Act and thereby granting certain constitutional rights to the detainees, it was only a matter of months before the doors to this camp would be closed. Though closure is a must, we do wish that a reasonable debate might be used to clarify presidential power in times of war.

It is time once and for all to reassess the importance given to the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries. Two relatively small, insignificant and unrepresentative states have for too long kidnapped our presidential nomination sweepstakes. The amount of time and money spent in Iowa and New Hampshire is difficult to defend. Worse, how do we explain that without winning one of them you cannot be president? We love both states. But do we love them that much? It is time to think about a rotating regional primary system in order for a far greater representative selection process.

The currently used Presidential Debate format needs overhauling. Most would agree that too often the moderators see themselves as part of the show. Questions are asked to make headlines rather than make informed citizens. A generation of citizens now believes a debate is nothing more than a well-rehearsed infomercial. Why not use the Lincoln-Douglas debates as a model? Candidates should tour the country holding conversations about the timeliest issues. Such events should not be numbered on one hand but made more routine. It is time for real debate.

High-level discussions have already begun and it is about time to replace the War Powers Act (1973). The relationship between the executive and legislative war making powers has for too long been unseemly. The executive branch has assumed too much power. The legislative branch has become a willing accomplice. Checks and balances during wartime have disappeared. Our Congress has been unwilling to make tough choices. The President has been allowed to make tough choices too easily. A reconsideration of this important constitutional relationship would protect all of our interests.

One last white elephant gift that continues to cost us is the fact that Illinoisans so overwhelmingly rejected the referendum to revisit the state’s constitution. A state constitutional convention is no panacea. Yet as our most recent scandal would attest, many of our political problems here are systemic. With the lack of true campaign finance reform and a pay to play expectation, political impropriety is not just the fault of a few errant rogues. Here in Illinois we have institutionalized graft. The referendum back on Election Day sure looks pretty good albeit in our rear view mirror.

The good news about these gift exchanges is that no receipt is required. With these white elephants, take all of the time you need. Our feelings will not be hurt. In fact we urge you, please return these.

Precedent for the unprecedented?

Before embattled Gov. Rod Blagojevich even had the chance to officially announce his pick to take the U.S. Senate seat vacated by President-elect Obama, lawmakers blunted the power play, insisting they won't seat Roland Burris.

Happy New Year! Gov. Blago followed through with his resolution to fight, fight, fight. Did you see the press conference? True political theatre, Illinois style. Blog here on the latest Blago bizzare move. This guy may be crazy. But it may be crazy like a political fox.

While Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said with a letter signed by all 5o Senate Democrats, that the U.S. Senate would not seat anyone nominated by Blago under the powers in Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution, the text on the Senate's ability to block the Gov.'s appointment is not clear:

"Section 5. Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own members, and a majority of each shall constitute a quorum to do business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner, and under such penalties as each House may provide. "

The appointment of the 71-year-old Burris did not come from an election. Also, there is a precendent Supreme Court decision that would seem to side with the governor.

In Powell v. McCormack (1969) the Court ruled that the Senate could expel, but not exclude a member legally put there.

Adam Clayton Powell pecked at his fellow representatives from his unassailable perch in New York's Harlem. Powell had been embroiled in controversy inside and outside Washington. When Powell failed to heed civil proceedings against him in New York, a judge held him in criminal contempt. His problems were only beginning. He won reelection in 1966 but the House of Representatives voted to exclude him.

Chief Justice Warren concluded that since Powell had been lawfully elected by his constituents and since he met the constitutional requirements for membership in the House, that the chamber was powerless to exclude him.

www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_138/

The governor said he was required to govern, and appoint a replacement for the Senate seat, and that the Illinois General Assembly was playing politics, by not calling for a special election and moving ahead with impeachment proceedings.

Ok. But the theatre was a politically loaded. Included statements by Rep. Bobby Rush that through the race card into the ring.

Politico.com has good coverage of the events plus video of the raucus press conference here:

www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16930.html

Blog here and tell me, do you think Blago is legally right, even if everyone else says he is wrong and should just go away. Also, just for fun, put in your date for when the Gov. will be removed from office by impeachment. Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn said he would be gone by Lincoln's birthday bash on Feb. 20.

Judicial Review....And More

Review for your Advanced Placement Final Exam right here thanks to the Review Guys and CitizenU.org.

Do it today, tomorrow, or anytime even after the final exam when you download to your favorite mp3 player. (The Review stuff sticks at AP Test Time!) Blog me about the creative ways and places you review.

Also if you are studying at night, post a question and I'll check and post back an answer.

Anyway, here (or hear) are the Review Guys looks at:

Review Guys: AP Foundations/Civil Liberties/Civil Rights.

Review Guys: AP Political Culture/Federalism.

Review Guys: AP Public Opinion/Political Participation.

Review Guys: AP Political Parties/Campaigns.

Review Guys: AP Media/Presidency.

Review Guys: AP Judicial.

Review Guys: AP Interest Groups/Congress.

The politics of the Federal Courts

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/12/08/GR2008120800205.html?sid=ST2008120702887&s_pos=list

There are no cameras in the Supreme Court or other Federal Courts, although movement to advance bills such as the "Sunshine in the Courtroom Act of 2007" has been progressing.

www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=19772

But there are charts that track the decisions that our Judiciary make. Click on the picture above and you will get a great graphic from the Washington Post which shows the number of US circuit court judges appointed by Dems & Repubs as well as the # appointed by Bush. Then click here for an article that argues that Bush may not have changed the Supreme Court as much as he wanted (Justice Stevens the 87-year-old hold out) but he has had a significant impact on the circuit court level.

This article talks about how Obama may be able to create a "major shift"in the federal judiciary.

The chart at the left tracks the the SCOTUS voting record of the last session of the High Court, which had more 5-4 decisions than the Supremes have had in the past.

So bad it "would make Lincoln roll over in his grave"

Our Land of Lincoln already had a political culture of corruption of historic proportions.

But this was bleeping bad -- or good.

Governor Rod Blagojevich's arrest for what U.S. Atty. Patrick Fitzgerald called a "political corruption crime spree" that included attempts to sell the U.S. Senate seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama, puts Illinois solidly No. 1 in the political corruption rankings.

Robert Grant, special agent in charge of the FBI's Chicago office, characterized Illinois' place in the pantheon of political corruption.

"If it isn't the most corrupt state in the United States, it's certainly one hell of a competitor," Grant said.

CNN has several videos on this still breaking story.

www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/12/09/sot.fitzgerald.lincoln.grave.wgn

The Chicago Tribune has full coverage at Chicagotribune.com.

www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-blagojevich-maindec09,0,7734677.story

Even before the 6 a.m. busting of Blago, Illinois has been near the top of any national political corruption ranking.

Last year an article in the Chicago Sun-Times made the case for Illinois as the best among the worst states in political corruption. Afterall, this is a State where votes by dead men are legendary, and four of the last eight governors (Blago, George Ryan, Dan Walker and Otto Kerner) have gone to prison.

James Merriner writes:

"You might remember that in 1998 Minnesota elected Gov. Jesse Ventura, the Reform Party candidate and a former pro wrestler. Witty Minnesotans soon sported bumper stickers -- "My governor can beat up your governor."

Some Illinoisans had enough pride to respond. "Our governor is a bigger crook than your governor," said a National Taxpayers Union of Illinois bumper sticker in 2000.

That's the spirit. We're No. 1!"

So why are we -- the Land of Lincoln -- so corrupt? Professor Larry Sabato -- an AP american Government textbook author, among other things, says it will finally be up to the voters to say enough is enough. In Chicago, there have long been questions about how Mayor Daley gets things done. He was last re-elected with over 60 percent of the vote.

Sabato was asked, assuming that Illinois and New Jersey are among the most corrupt states, why is that? What is different about them?

"Corruption is nurtured by the political culture . . ." he said. "Through the generations, corruption has become strongly associated with politics [and] people just expect the two to go together like love and marriage."

To quote Sabato once more on the culture of corruption: it "depends heavily on what average voters will tolerate from their elected officials."

www.cebcglobal.org/Newsroom/News/News_031107.htm

The citizens probably won't let Blago stand in office for long without resigning. After hearing reports of his explitive-laced corruption conversations, Chicago Tribune and WGN-TV polls showed 95% of the people said Blagojevich should step down now. Reports say he will not resign. So this is still a fasinating developing story.

But for now the people, by way of the polls are saying --- Bleep Bagojevich! (As Patrick Fitzgerald said in making the case against the Governor -- "The bleeps are not what was said." )

VIDEO: Buzzwords Related To Blagojevich Case

Change 1860 Style

President-elect Barack Obama has nominated Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State and Gen. Jim Jones as National Security Advisor. Jones quite possibly voted for his opponent in the presidential election. Clinton warned Iran of retaliatory attacks, where Obama has advocated talks without preconditions.

President-elect Barack Obama is a student of Abraham Lincoln and comparisons are natural. The theme from Obama's Inauguration is taken from a line in Lincoln's Gettysburg Address: "A New Birth of Freedom"

In announcing now half of his cabinet, it is almost becoming cliche,' (And free publicity for historian Doris Kearns Goodwin's book), like Lincoln, Obama is assembling a "Team of Rivals."

Goodwin profiles five of the key players in her book, four of whom contended for the 1860 Republican presidential nomination and all of whom later worked together in Lincoln's cabinet.

www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=981406n

With the Gates and Jones -- and advisor to John McCain -- and then primary rival Clinton, who made the infamous "3 Am Ad" Obama may not only be following Lincoln's lead, but a Chris Mathews Harball strategem -- "Keep your friends close, your rivals closer."

Obama himself, says he wants a healthy, vigorous debate among his advisors. In announcing his new team, the President-elect quoted another Commander-in-Chief making it clear who will be in charge.

“the buck will stop with me” when he dismissed doubts over how a heavy-weight “team of rivals” that includes Clinton and a Republican Defense Secretary can work in harmony.

Presenting half a dozen nominees for senior national security posts, the President-elect said that the “strong personalities and strong opinions” that he had brought together would ensure vigorous debate, even disagreement, in the White House.

“But understand – I will be setting policy as President,” he added. “I will be responsible for the vision that this team carries out, and I expect them to implement that vision once decisions are made.”

So will a "Team of Rivals" work? Like 1860, 2008 brings another thin man from Illinois, relatively new to Washington but wise to the world challenged to bring the nation together to face a crisis.

Still, honest Abe didn't have a 24-7 newscycle with "gotcha" potential among the Team of Rivals. Doris Kearns Goodwin is one thing, Fox News quite another.

Also does the exerienced Team of Rivals jive with Obama's campaign Change message? There will be change in bringing debate to the cabinet. President "W' Bush surrounded himself with loyalists the first, second and in some cases third (Attorney General) time around.

Remember that these nomination do have to go through Senate approval. And how's this for a rumor, Bill Clinton nominated by New York Governor David Patrick to take Hillary's Senate seat?

Bonus for anyone who can name the two former presidents to go on and serve in the Senate.

The 110th Congress: The Block and Blame Game

Being blocked by 54 filibusters aimed mostly against conservative judicial appointments by George W. Bush, in 2005 Republican majority leaders made a pitch to abolish the filibuster.

www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/05/10/filibuster_ban_gets_white_house_nudge/

Should a strong Democratic majority -- 58, assuming the still contested Minnesota and Georgia seats don't turn blue -- attempt to do the same?

Like Rodney Dangerfield, this Congress doesn't get much respect. Americans rate it slightly above sludge, but below George Bush, the least admired president in the history of polling.

Who gets the blame for the so-called "Do Nothing Congress?"

Well, as the chart from Secretary of the Senate, shows from January 4, 2007 through November 25, 2008, 138 cloture motions have been filed. That's 34 more than the record-setting chart at the right shows.

Majority rule has essentially been repealed by the F-word Congress. Without the super-majority of sixty votes to end the filibusters, the accomplishments of the 110th Congress were limited (GI-Bill, Children's Health Care and minimum wage as riders as notable exceptions to Progressives; continued stimulus packages to all Americans a victory in the conservative column). The 'Do Nothingness' was reinforced by over 131 veto threats by President Bush (who never issued a veto when Republican majority Congresses ran up record deficits on Capitol Hill).

So the question for the new 111th Congress coming in January, should it move to remove the filibuster? Or is the procedure a needed part of the Cup and Saucer dance that is currently like a slow Washington waltz?

Here is a look at how that 111th Congress breaks down, statistically.

www.cqpolitics.com/cq-assets/cqmultimedia/pdfs/NM-guide-statistics.pdf

Thanksgiving -- a political cultural event

This year marks the 61st anniversary of the National Thanksgiving Turkey presentation. Though live Thanksgiving turkeys have been presented intermittently to presidents since the Lincoln administration, the current ceremony dates to 1947, when the first National Thanksgiving Turkey was presented to President Harry Truman.

So while they say not to talk about religion or politics around the Thanksgiving Day table, here is the Political Warrior cornucopia of political/historical/religious/culture info to impress your guest this Turkey Day.

Starting with the 'Chief Turkey' follow this link to the White House website, where you can find film of President George W. Bush pardon "Pumpkin & Pecan" the two birds that were saved by the president's signature Wednesday.

www.whitehouse.gov/holiday/thanksgiving/2008/

Next this short film from the History Channel has much on our Poltical Culture as linked with Thanksgiving -- watch for how FDR wanted to move up Thanksgiving to spur on the economy and the Christmas shopping season. "Franksgiving?"

Did you know that the author of "Mary Had a Little Lamb" was behind the US making Thanksgiving a national holiday, that Lincoln was the president who initiated this, that there is no proof that turkey was actually eaten on the first Thanksgiving. So many nice tidbits in this video and more of the story here.

And finally, from CBS 2 School the two have their take on the POLs that best play the role of the staples of today's truly American holiday table.

VIDEO: Politics And Thanksgiving

Have a great Thanksgiving. I am thankful for you reading and blogging!

Some 'sweet' influences on Daylight Savings Rider

(Before we all let stores squeeze Thanksgiving and rush into a challenging Christmas shopping season, let's peak back at Halloween one more time and re-visit influences on lawmaking on Capitol Hill. This post origninally posted on Political Warrior in Nov. 2007)

Last year's Trick-or-Treating was different. Because Congress in 2007 moved Daylight Savings time back to the first Saturday in Novemeber, my son went to a record number of doors in the Sunlight. (In 2008, I think he set a new record)

"I got lots of candy more than ever before,'' said then nine-year-old Patrick. "It should have been night, because night is cooler going trick-or-treating, and the houses are more lit up. But I probably wouldn't have got as much candy."

Hmm. Despite the fact that Patrick did get tooth paste at one house, the load of his loot may have been due to influences on Capitol Hill. The New York Times City Room Blog says the candy lobby gave an influential push for a rider to the 2005 Engergy Policy Act.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Policy_Act_of_2005
The NYT story on the influences on federal lawmakers to shed more light on Halloween night (child safety was also a legitimate concern) is linked here:

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/31/an-extra-hour-of-daylight-thank-the-candy-lobby/index.html?hp

More evidence of your government at work. Just for post-Halloween fun, blog any legislation ideas you have to make Halloween more fun.

Remember many District 204 schools have legislated policy banning all of the Halloween hoopla.

Moore: CEOs want socialism for themselves

This post is partly for my sociology class, which just finished watching "Roger & Me." Twenty years after taking General Motors greed to task in his debut documentary, filmaker Michael Moore spoke with anger on Larry King Live Wednesday -- saying the American Auto industry is same as it ever was. Maybe only now it is apparent that that is not good for the country, or the planet.

"They don't believe in free enterprise or free market. They want socialism for themselves. They want a handout and a net for themselves. To hell with everybody else, but give it to them. And I think, really, what we're seeing now — with them, with the banks — we're seeing the end of capitalism, the end of capitalism as we know it ..." – Michael Moore

The New Trough (VIDEO)
Harry Reid "can't get the votes to bail out the auto companies because that's going to help a lot of blue-collar people – people that don't have a voice, who don't have lobbyists fighting for them on Capitol Hill ..."

'What Roosevelt Did' (VIDEO)
"President-elect Obama has to say to them, 'yes, we're going to use this money to save these jobs but we're not going to build these gas-guzzling, unsafe vehicles any longer.' ... they are to build mass transit, they are to build hybrid cars ..."

'Fire the Management' (VIDEO)
"... they've not only hurt themselves, they've helped to provide some of the fodder for this economic collapse that we're facing ..."

Obama Senate Replacement: Will Blago pick be for governing or politics?

(CBS2 School)

HELP WANTED:

Description:U.S. Senate seeks an exceptional individual to join the nation’s leadership team. Aligned to our Illinois State Constitution succession planning process, Governor Blagojevich is focusing his efforts to identify a dynamic leader to continue the nation’s vision for success. This leadership opportunity is available due to a recent resignation (for a very good reason.)

Job Summary: The junior U.S. Senator from Illinois is a full-time, 12-month representative assignment. The selected individual will work closely with the senior U.S. Senator from Illinois (Dick Durbin) during the next two years and will share the responsibility for the representation of the state in the U.S. Senate. This individual will also share the responsibility for congressional oversight of the executive branch. They should also plan on spending the next two years building statewide political alliances and a campaign war chest in seeking election for a 6-year-term in 2010.

Qualifications: Qualified applicants must be a U.S. Citizen for at least 9 years, 30 years old, and reside in the State of Illinois. Applicants must demonstrate a history of working effectively with diverse constitutencies; the ability to promote a positive climate for the Democratic Party; skill at organizing personnel to manage a Senate office, and a track record of formulating and of achieving short and long-range legislative goals. The person selected must also remove their name from consideration as a 2010 Illinois gubernatorial candidate.

Working Conditions: A transition plan will be developed and the identified candidate will be sworn in on January 6, 2009. The salary for this position will be $169,300 and include a comprehensive benefits package.

Application Procedure: Interested candidates should submit an application and mail/attach a letter of interest, résumé, copies of transcripts and three letters of reference to: Governor Rod Blagojevich, James R. Thompson Center?100 W. Randolph, Chicago, IL 60601

P.S. Republicans need not apply.

VIDEO: The Open Senate Seat
______________________

DemConWatch.com reported this last week:

As of right now it looks like it may be either Tammy Duckworth or Representative Jesse Jackson Jr. Congressman Jackson isn't hiding his desire to take over for Obama in the Senate. Tammy Duckworth hasn't sent out any releases to my knowledge but she has said she's interested in the job.

Duckworth, now the Illinois Veterans Affairs director, has been mentioned as a possible replacement for Obama in the U.S. Senate or as Veterans Affairs secretary in an Obama administration.

She accompanied Obama as the Illinois senator marked Veterans Day by placing a wreath at the bronze soldiers memorial between the Field Museum and Soldier Field in Chicago.

Duckworth, then a pilot with the Illinois Army National Guard, lost both her legs in Iraq in 2004 when her Black Hawk helicopter was struck by a rocket-propelled grenade.

She has said she would be interested in either the Senate seat or a post in Obama’s administration.

“I would be honored to be able to do that on a national level,” Duckworth told The Associated Press recently about the prospect of helping veterans. - Army Times

The F-word Congress: Filibuster kills Auto bailout vote

CQ politics reports on the one thing the 110th Congress has done well: Filibuster. Many of the auto workers, leaving their plant in Warren, Mich. above, may have another F-word for their Washington lawmakers....and the CEO's of their companies, who each flew in separate private company jets to Capitol to testify in committees on Tuesday.

"Rust Belt senators worked late Wednesday on a last-gasp compromise after Republicans blocked efforts to carve an additional $25 billion for the auto industry out of the $700 billion financial bailout package.

Majority Leader Harry Reid , D-Nev., voiced little hope that the effort would succeed and did not promise that the Senate would consider the legislation being negotiated by Sens. Carl Levin , D-Mich., George V. Voinovich , R-Ohio, and Christopher S. Bond , R-Mo.

It remained unclear whether there would be 60 votes for the compromise and whether House leaders would embrace it.

With senators anxious to leave town Thursday after a possible vote on extending jobless benefits, action on auto industry assistance this week remained unlikely but not out of the question.

Republicans and the Bush administration oppose aiding the auto industry from the financial bailout fund (PL 110-343), preferring to alter an existing auto loan program at the Department of Energy to let automakers access it immediately. Minority Whip Jon Kyl , R-Ariz., blocked Reid’s attempt to move an auto loan bill (S 3689) on Wednesday.

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docid=news-000002988419

Will Quacks Bailout Auto Industry?

In American politics, a “lame duck” is any politician leaving office as a successor awaits.

The term is typically applied to presidents who will be leaving the White House but are awaiting the inauguration date of January 20th to turn power over to their successor. Like a duck wounded by a hunter, this president lies powerless as those with power approach.

This week, the Congress begins a lame duck session as at least 56 current members will be leaving as of January 6th, 2009. But with S.O.S. calls coming daily from the struggling U.S. auto industry, much is being asked from this lame duck Congress.

Arguing that hundreds of thousands of American manufacturing jobs could be put at risk with no action, Democratic congressional leaders have set the goal of getting at least $25 billion of the $700 billion bailout package set aside for the Big 3 of Detroit. These leaders say the auto industry can not wait until January 20th for action.

The Bush Administration has not rejected the bailout proposal, but has hinted that he would favor using money that had been set aside for the 2007 Energy Bill for any bailout of the auto industry.

Students of government should keep their eyes open for some interesting lame duck legislative intrigue in the coming days with classic legislative lingo resting at the center of this D.C. drama.

Filibuster: A filibuster is a weapon used in the Senate by the minority side (currently Republicans) to permanently delay a bill with permanent debate. It can successfully kill a bill unless 60 Senators vote to limit debate with “cloture.”

Unlike the next Congress, this lame duck Congress has a very narrowly divided Senate where Republicans might very well resort to using endless filibusters to prevent their chamber from passing any bailout.

VETO: If a bailout bill manages to survive a Senate filibuster, President Bush might decide to kill the bill with his Veto power. To pass a bill that has been vetoed, two-thirds of the House and the Senate must then vote to approve the bill. This is not too likely with the narrow Democratic majorities in the 110th Congress.

Pocket Veto: If Congress passes a bill with less than 10 days left in its session, President Bush can simply choose not to sign this legislation into law. In this case, the law is automatically rejected with this “pocket veto.”

111th Congress: The field changes on January 6th with the swearing in of the new 11th Congress. With a more powerful Democratic majority in both chambers, the 111th Congress could turn up the heat on President Bush before his departure on January 20th.

Inauguration: On January 20th, President Obama comes to town with a whole lot of power to replace the lame duck president. He will certainly be more willing to work with the Democratic Congress, but many question what the U.S. auto industry will look like after weeks of lame ducks.

(CBS2School)

VIDEO: The Lame Duck Congress

Executive Order Eraser?

Traditionally the first official act a new president does right after being sworn in is to sign an executive order.

CNN has a good article, here, discussing the controversial decisions that Obama may change from the Bush administration. The video is also a good discussion.

If you want to see all executive orders since 1937, click here. Two of the more famous executive orders are Truman's one integrating the military and Clinton's "Don't ask don't tell."

And then there were two: Indecision 2008

Incumbent Ted Stevens , the Senate’s longest-serving Republican conceded Wednesday that he lost his re-election to Democrat Mark Begich.
“Given the number of ballots that remain to be counted, it is apparent the election has been decided and Mayor Begich has been elected,” Stevens said in a statement Wednesday afternoon.

Begich, mayor of Anchorage, led Stevens by 3,724 votes with an estimated 2,500 votes outstanding as of late Tuesday. Begich received 150,728 votes, or 47.76 percent, versus 147,004 votes, or 46.58 percent for Stevens, out of 307,587 votes recorded.

Long before Stevens issued his statement, Begich had claimed victory and the head of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, Sen. John Ensign of Nevada, had said he was resigned to losing that seat.

Still, despite the Alaska decision, there remains "Indecision 2008" in two more Senate races. Also, governors in Illinois and Deleware are still to name replacements for the seats vacated by President-elect Obama and VP-elect Biden.

Jon Stewart won this bet with a friend with his take on the Georgia recount. He also recapped the situation in Alaska and the still developing re-count in Minnesota. If the Democrats were to carry both Minnesota and Georgia's Senate contests, they would have (when combined with 2 independents) the 60-vote filibuster-proof majority.

www.hulu.com/watch/44807/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-indecision-2008---the-directors-cut

In all seriousness, there are some changes within the Democratic congressional leadership.

House Democrats on Thursday handed Henry A. Waxman of California the gavel of the powerful Energy and Commerce Committee, toppling veteran Chairman John D. Dingell of Michigan.

The 137-122 Democratic Caucus vote was viewed as a referendum on the party’s future approach to energy and climate policy, as well as a test of the seniority system the party has long used to select committee chairmen and ranking members.

The article gives good insight to the inner-workings of Congressional leadership that often, but not always, defers to senority. The Energy and Commerce Committee may have even more importance given the current auto industry crisis.

www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=news-000002988933&cpage=1

Unified States of America

The big winner in last Tuesday’s election was unified government. Between the years 1900 – 1952 unified governed occurred 85% of the time. Since, however, unified government has occurred much less frequently. The trend toward divided government has been an important feature of our contemporary government.

Such trends appear over.

Divided government occurs when the majority party in Congress differs from the party of the President. In recent years this has meant a Democratic majority in charge of the legislative branch and a Republican George Bush as President.

Unified government occurs when the majority party in Congress is the same as the party of the President. Since 1952, we have experienced unified government only about one third of the time. As political scientist-in-chief David Mayhew has written, “Divided we Govern.”

One would expect that divided government produces gridlock and unified government yields legislative productivity. Yet the facts may be counter intuitive. Mayhew and others have argued that significant legislation is no more likely in a unified government. Periods of divided government may encourage greater deliberation and subsequent bipartisan success.

Unified government, however, often finds itself trapped and snared by incestuous bickering. Agenda setting rarely has one master. The White House and Congress often have different constituent groups to please. The push and pull of the legislative process may butt up against Obama and his minions. Obama won the election after all by appealing to his moderate side. Ramming a liberal agenda through Congress may make for a short honeymoon.

The last time we had an extended unified government, all the way back to the 1960s, significant reform legislation was passed. This included advancements in civil rights, education and health care. In G. Calvin Mackenzie and Robert Weisbrot’s latest book The Liberal Hour they argue:

“The institutions of national politics and bureaucrats who inhabited them . . . produced social and economic changes that have become the deep and enduring legacy of the 1960s.”

Unified government need not to be feared. Years ago Woodrow Wilson wrote – “It is only once in a generation that a people can be lifted above the material things. That is why conservative government is in the saddle two thirds of the time.”

Has our time arrived?

Barack Obama was not the only winner in the electoral victory. Unified government is back and looking stronger than ever. The recent trend toward divided government was soundly defeated. Only time will tell what the consequences will be of taking that last trend out of town.
(From CBS2School)

VIDEO: Unified Government

A 'Plum Book' of government jobs for Obama to fill

While the nation's unemployment rate rises to a 14-year high, there is someone who is hiring -- President-elect Obama. But just how many jobs does he have to fill?

We know already that with more than 1.8 million civilian employees, excluding the Postal Service, the Federal Government is the Nation’s largest employer. According to the 'Plum Book' -- a 209-page paperback position inventory, the new Obama administration will be looking to replace about 8,000 positions from the Bush administration.

Hope he has a good human resources director, like Mrs. Wolak.

Ambassadors are one job covered in our textbook -- this page will show you what the Book says about those jobs. Jobs in the EOP (Executive Office of the President) can be found on this page. Go here for the entire cabinet. Go here for the legend. Finally, you can read an article by the Washington Post on the 'Plum Book' here.

Fascinating stuff, your bureaucracy at work. Remember, Democrats and Republicans administrations alike, the Federal Government is always hiring every four years.

A career guide to industries in the Federal Government can be found here, at the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

www.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs041.htm

Can Uprising Be Sustained?

The numbers coming in are confirming it, young people finally collectively made their voices heard as voting members of "We the People." Liberal filmaker Michael Moore calls it the "Slacker Uprising." I call it an example of democracy working, when people put their democracy to work.

MSNBC reports:

Young Americans can finally shake off their reputation for civic apathy. Young people appear to have voted in higher numbers than ever before, preliminary reports show. And analysts say this demographic’s heavy tilt toward Barack Obama was a determining factor in his historic victory.

An estimated 24 million Americans ages 18 to 29 voted in this election, an increase in youth turnout by at least 2.2 million over 2004, reports CIRCLE, a non-partisan organization that promotes research on the political engagement of young Americans. That puts youth turnout somewhere between 49.3 and 54.5 percent, meaning 19 percent more young people voted this year than in 2004, estimates John Della Volpe, the director of polling for the Harvard Institute of Politics. And that’s a conservative estimate, Della Volpe says.

“It looks like the highest turnout among young people we’ve ever had,” says Della Volpe, adding that 12 percent more Americans in the overall electorate voted. The youth share of the vote also rose to 18 percent — a one-percent increase over the last three presidential elections.

//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27562023/

Despite being outnumbered by the "Gray Panthers" (65+) voters aged 18-29 made up 18% of the total voting population, while to just 16% for senior citizens.

Blog here and be proud of your generation....The question is will it last?

___________________

Overall, higher, but not record turnout

Many expected an amazingly high voter turnout, but as CNN's head pollster and National Journal columist Bill Schnieder reports, record voting numbers never really materialized.

"Just over 208 million American citizens were eligible to vote this year. Edison Media Research estimates that more than 130 million people voted for president, either in person or by mail. That's 62.6 percent of all eligible voters.

That is 2 points higher than the 60.6 percent who turned out four years ago, according to a report by the Center for the Study of the American Electorate. The 2008 election continued a steady trend of higher voter turnout since 1996 (51.4 percent in 1996; 54.2 percent in 2000). But the 2008 figure is not exactly a quantum leap. In fact, it's slightly lower than the 64 percent of eligible voters who turned out in 1964 and the 67 percent in 1960."

Schnieder goes on to break down the numbers, in which he sort of downplays the young vote. This is the old adage, "Lies, Damned Lies & Statistics." While the percentage turnout of 18-29 year olds went up from 17-18%, what Schnieder sees that as a minimal increase, he does not take into consideration the rage of age 18-29 is the smallest category calculated and that there are less people living in that category than any of the others. It is also the first time in electoral history (since exit polls have been calculated) that the youngest category of voters turned out at a higher rate than their more populous groug of grandparents and their Gray Panther friends.

www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/pl_20081112_6998.php

_______________________

Activist Michael Moore's film 'Slacker Uprising' cronicles a 42-day, 62-city tour in 2004 designed to get the young vote out in what he called his attempt to remove George W. Bush from office.

Moore writes:

My goal was to help turn out a record number of young voters and others who had never voted before. (That part was a success. Young adults voted in greater numbers than in any election since 18-year-olds were given the right to vote. And the youth vote was the only age group that John Kerry won.)

What I encountered during the tour and the filming was both inspiring and frightening, so I thought, hey, this might make for a funny and enlightening movie! Each night, thousands would show up to volunteer in the Slacker Army against Bush. This drove local Republicans nuts. In one state they tried to have me arrested. At two colleges, rich donors offered to donate more money to the college if they would ban me from campus. Nearly a half-dozen universities kept the Slacker Uprising tour off their campuses. But there was no stopping this movement. By the time we got to Florida, 16,000 people a night were showing up.

It was clear that young people were the ones who were going to save the day -- just as they are (now known, clearly were) in this year's election.

Michael Moore is a lightening rod. But love him, or hate him. Agree or disagree with him, this is a film anyone who studies government and politics should see. You can download the film for free here.

It seems to me a movement can not just be against something or someone as it was in 2004. It has to be FOR something, or someone as it was this time.

/slackeruprising.com/

Electoral Map Changed, Officially

A look at the 2008 Electoral Map, which last Friday included a 1 district call for Barack Obama in Nebraska (the first time since 1968 that the Cornhusker State did not also go the way of winner-take-all) indicates that what political scientists call a critical election occurred this year.

Aren't all elections, critical? But for the sake political science discussion a critical election or a realigning election occures when the coaltions supporting the parties become disrupted and voters realign their allegiances, with a new party becoming the hegemonic party for decades at the presidency and congressional levels.

There’s a long line of research on this, but the most compelling account of partisan realigment is found in the notion of a “critical election.” In an election contest whereby the political system is facing a fundamental national crisis of catastrophic proportions, voters choose the party out of power and elevate a new, enduring partisan coalition at the levels of the presidency and Congress. The elections of 1860 and 1932 are the key examples. The Republican Party was the dominant party in American politics following Abraham Lincoln’s election at the moment of national crisis precipitating the Civil War; and in 1932, Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected in a New Deal realignment that emerged out of the calamity of the Great Depression.

The Wikipedia page on realignments (which features an excellent review of the scholarship) singles out 1932 as classic case of partisan realigment:

Of all the realigning elections, this one musters the most agreement from political scientists and historians; it is the archetypal realigning election. FDR’s admirers have argued that New Deal policies, developed in response to the crash of 1929 and the miseries of the Great Depression under Herbert Hoover, represented an entirely new phenomenon in American politics.

With the highest young voter turnout in history (numbers, wise) that went big for Obama; With a democratic 50 state strategy expanding the blue on the electoral map; a with the possibility of a New New Deal (Time magazine cover story) ushering in what conservatives claim will be a more soicalistic America, the 2008 could very well go down in history as more than a Change Election. It would qualify as a Critical, or Realigning election.

_______________________

And the Winner Is.....

Our Electoral Pool Champ is Jim Z. who missed the electoral count by just one vote, 364-174. Jim also called Obama's final popular vote pretty darn close, 54%. Way to go Jim! We'll award you your major award next week.

At this point, the final Obama popular vote is 53%-46% (CNN). According to fivethirtyeight.com (the best prognosticator of this year's election) the Obama vitory may have more symbolic than Bill Clinton's 370 EC tally in 1992, because of the geographic color change of the electoral map. Also, an 18% third-party popular vote pull of Ross Perot kept Clinton's victory as a plurality of the electoral, not a majority.

//www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/obama-wins-omaha-ne-electoral-vote.html

Questions may be already being answered

Electoral-vote.com blog had some great nuggets on some of the major questions to be answered by Tuesday's election day.

The first deals with, well, early election days. With a record number of early voters in 31 states having already cast their ballots, questions are raised about who does early voting favor and how might the large number of early voters throw off tradition exit polls on Tuesday night:

"One problem with all this campaigning is that for many voters it is too late. According to the Early Voting Information Center early voting is going to break all records. For example, in North Carolina, 42% of all Democrats, 35% of all Republicans, and 30% of all independents have already voted. In Florida the numbers are 22%, 15%, and 20%, respectively."

CNN also has a story on early voting, with a map to all the early voting states and its results.

One complication caused by early voting is that the exit polls Tuesday will sample only 60-70% of the electorate and it may well be a biased sample given the fact that so many Democrats have voted early so Tuesday voters may be disproportionately Republicans.

Questions the election will answer

The LA Times has a story about four questions this election will answer:

1. Is America prepared to elect a black President?
2. Is the old red-blue culture war still going on?
3. Do Americans want a bigger government or a smaller government?
4. Has the demographic composition of the electorate fundamentally changed?

To this list, one might add:

1. Have the Republicans been changed from a national party to a regional party?
2. Has public financing of campaigns gone the way of the dodo?
3. Has the political power of the evangelicals waned?

Study shows virtually no evidence of voter fraud

The Republicans have been talking a lot about voter fraud, but yet another study shows that it barely exists. Politico has a story in which a reporter pressed Ronald Michaelson, a veteran election administrator who is now working for the McCain campaign, to cite a single documented case of voter fraud that resulted from a phony registration and he could not come up with even one example. When asked, another McCain official, Ben Porritt, came up with 13 articles. However, 11 of these did not involve registration fraud at all and only one involved a noncitizen voting. While there is no doubt that low-paid workers for ACORN and other groups have turned in false registrations to ACORN (to earn a bit more), the organization itself selects out the clearly bogus ones and puts these in a separate envelope before turning them in (as required by law). This is how the bogus registrations get in the news. However, documented cases of bogus registrations actually leading to illegal voting are virtually nonexistent as the fraud being committed is the low-paid workers defrauding ACORN itself of a bit of money, not actual voting fraud.

Let's have an Electoral College Pool

The Nov. 2 projection of http://www.electoral-vote.com/

predicts Obama will win the elctoral vote 353-185. This would make mandate-like numbers. The McCain camp says polls are tightening in battleground states. What do you think the electoral results will be on Tuesday. Blog your final projection, with one best bet of a battleground state. Also include your prediction of the overal popular vote. The closest to the final outcome in our pool will win a major award.

Voter Suspression vs. Voter Fraud

Voter Supression vs. Voter Fraud. They are both among the seven problems that Time Magazine outlines in the problems that may face the projected record setting number of voters that will show up to vote on Tuesday. Both the Democratic and Republican National Committees have teams of lawyers on retainer to fight to protect "democracy" as John McCain recently said.

A problem is how do we do that. While it is not voter registration procedures that have kept American voting at a lower rate than most industrial democracies over recent history, the case can be made that we do make it more difficult on our citizens than other countries. The top two problems, relating directly to Voter Supression (the GOP playbook) and Voter Fraud (a Democratic necessary evil) was highlighted in Time last week:

The Database Dilema

"Joe the plumber" is not registered to vote. Or at least he is not registered under his own name. The man known to his mother as Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher, who has become a feature of John McCain's stump speech, is inscribed in Ohio's Lucas County registration records as "Worzelbacher," a problem of penmanship more than anything else. "You can't read his signature to tell if it is an o or a u," explains Linda Howe, the local elections director.

Such mistakes riddle the nation's voting rolls, but they did not matter much before computers digitized records. The misspelled Joes of America still got their ballots. But after the voting debacle in 2000, Congress required each state to create a single voter database, which could then be matched with other data, such as driver's licenses, to detect false registrations, dead people and those who have moved or become "inactive." In the marble halls of Congress, this sounded like a great idea — solve old problems with new technology. But in the hands of sometimes inept or partisan state officials, the database matches have become a practical nightmare that experts fear could disenfranchise thousands.

In Wisconsin, an August check of a new voter-registration database against other state records turned up a 22% match-failure rate. Around the time four of the six former judges who oversee state elections could not be matched with state driver's license data, the board decided to suspend any database purges of new registrants. But database-matching continues elsewhere. In Florida, nearly 9,000 new registrants have been flagged through the state's "No Match, No Vote" law. (Their votes will not be counted unless they prove their identity to a state worker in the coming weeks.) In Ohio, Republicans have repeatedly gone to court to make public a list of more than 200,000 unmatched registrations, presumably so that those voters can be challenged at the polls, even though most of them, like Joe, are probably legit. "It's disenfranchisement by typo," explains Michael Waldman, executive director of the Brennan Center for Justice, which tracks voting issues.

Elsewhere the purges are peremptory. A county official in Georgia this year removed 700 people from voter lists, even though some of those people had never received so much as a parking ticket. Another Georgia voter purge, which seeks to remove illegal immigrants from the rolls, has been challenged by voting-rights groups that say legal voters have been intimidated by repeated requests to prove their citizenship. Back in Mississippi last March, an election official wrongly purged 10,000 people from the voting rolls — including a Republican congressional candidate — while using her home computer. (The names were restored before the primary.)

With just days until the election, the scale of the database-purge problem is unknown. Millions have been stripped from voter rolls in key states, but the legitimacy of those eliminations remains unclear. The sheer volume of state voter checks against the federal Social Security Administration database, however, has raised concerns. Six states that are heavily using the federal database were recently warned by Social Security commissioner Michael Astrue about the danger of improperly blocking legitimate voters. "It is absolutely essential that people entitled to register to vote are allowed to do so," he said in October.

"Mickey Mouse" Registrations and Polling Place Challenges

Thanks to a few bad apples, ACORN is no longer just an oak-tree nut. McCain blames the group for "maybe perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history." Members of Congress have demanded investigations. The fbi is asking questions. Republican protesters have started crashing political events in squirrel costumes.

Yet the problem of registration fraud is age-old. For decades, both parties and many other groups have paid people to go out and register new voters. In the case of acorn, a community group that represents low-income and minority communities, this led to a massive registration drive this year, which signed up 1.3 million new people, mostly in swing states. The problem is that a small fraction of those new voters don't exist. That's because the 13,000 part-time workers conducting the acorn registration drive were paid on a quota system, providing them a clear incentive to fabricate registrations. Across the country, registrars have flagged thousands of acorn forms as suspect. In Florida, "Mickey Mouse" tried to register with an application stamped with the acorn logo. The starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys signed up to vote in Nevada. But there's a difference between registration fraud and voter fraud; the latter has not been documented on any significant scale in decades. Phony registrations are difficult to translate into fraudulent votes. Under federal law, new registrants still have to provide election officials with identification before casting their first ballot. Unless Mickey Mouse has an ID, the chance that he'll vote is slim.

Democrats complain that trumped-up charges of voting fraud could scare people from the polls. On the other hand, the acorn effect makes elections suspect — and that's bad for everyone. Republicans in several key swing states have argued that the false registrations make it necessary to monitor polls and challenge suspect voters. If that happens on a grand scale, the voting process could become more like running a gauntlet than exercising a right, with polling-place delays and confrontations that could scare people off or just lead them to conclude it's not worth the time.

_________________

So what is the bigger problem, Voter Supression or Voter Fraud? Blog here. And do you think it threatens Tuesday's vote?

Executive Branch & the Bureaucracy Study Guide

Executive Branch & the Bureaucracy -- Patterson, Chapters 13/14

Roles of the president -- Chief Diplomat, Chief Legislator, Commander-in-Chief, etc.
Presidential Leadership Style -- pyramid, circular, ad hoc
Presidential Veto Power -- Line Item Veto
Stewardship Theory, Whig (or Strict Constructionalist) Theory
President's role in foreign policy v. domestic policy
Two presidencies thesis
Bully Pulpit
Coattails
War Powers Act
Executive Agreements
President's power to influence legislation
Impeachment procedures
Executive power in a presidential system vs. a parlimentary system
Executive office of the President "umbrella-like"
Imperial Presidency
Constitutional (Formal) Requirements
Informal Requirements
Formal (Expressed) Powers of the Presidency
Informal powers of the Presidency
Power of Prez. in times of crisis
Presidential electoral systems -- primaries, electoral college
Cabinet -- selection process and roles
presidential approval ratings -- first term vs. second term
Lame Duck
prez. powers granted without consent of Congress
Executive Privilege
Signing Statements
Bureaucracy -- cabinet departments, regulatory agencies, independent agencies
Managing the bureaucracy --patronage, executive leadership, merit
Bureaucratic accountability
Public opinion on bureaucracy
ID -- president's current: Chief of Staff, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, Attorney General
FRQ -- Public Approval of President's over time

Broken Government? Your Assignment: Fix it

(This news from last year, reported on Political Warrior)

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration proposed new import safety rules that it said would give consumers new confidence and regulators new muscle in the face of a nearly $2 trillion annual flood of imports and a spate of troubling recalls involving tainted food and defective products.

The rules were announced even as the administration's top product safety regulator defended her agency's actions -- and her own controversial travel record -- before a congressional committee.

Devised by a presidential Cabinet-level working group on import safety, the rules will give agencies like the Food and Drug Administration new authority to order product recalls if manufacturers refuse.

The full Chicago Tribune story is linked here:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-safety_wednov07,1,5431870.story

The plan was applauded by critics of the bureaucracy under Bush. There have been calls by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Presidential Candidate John Edwards for the acting chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), Nancy Nord to resign. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer calls it a "national embarrassment."

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/338888_means09.html

Mike Adams,the creator of the above cartoon, thinks things are just as bad at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA):"Of all the cartoons we've ever done on the FDA, this is the one that people seem to like the best.

It addresses the issue of FDA conflicts of interest. The Food and Drug Administration, an agency that suffers under the hallucination that it protects the public from dangerous foods and drugs, has actually become the marketing department of Big Pharma. It actually takes money from drug companies in exchange for evaluating and approving their drugs, and the decisions concerning which drugs to approve almost always come down to a panel of "experts" who have strong financial ties to the very companies impacted by their decisions.''

Well, if it's "Broken Government" then your job to fix it.

Your Assignment:
go to: http://www.loc.gov/rr/news/fedgov.html

In groups (1-through-4) , you will be assigned a governmental agency (either executive departments, independent agencies, or a executive board or committee). Your group will research the agency and a major policy initiative. For next Thursday the group will have:

1. A Fact Sheet -- Who you are and what you do.

2. A policy proposal -- What is your big plan to make this country work better. What do you need from the appropriations committee to make it work?

3. A 5-minute pursuasive presentation -- Plan a pitch to get a piece of the pie.
_________________

2nd Hour --

Ones -- Department of Labor (DOL)/ Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
Twos - Department of the Interior (DOI)/Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Threes -- Housing & Urban Development (HUD)/Amtrak
Fours -- Department of Energy (DOE)/Social Security Administration (SSA)

3rd Hour --
Ones -- Department of Transportation (DOT)/Enviromental Protection Agency (EPA)
Twos - Health & Human Services (HHS)/Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)
Threes -- Department of Justice (DOJ)/NASA
Fours -- Department of Treasury/National Endowment of the Humanities (NEH)

So now what?

After the House voted no on the bailout plan, and blame was passed around both sides of the aisle. New York Times Op-Ed columnist and economic professor Paul Krugman wrote on his blog:

Ok, we are a banana republic

House votes no. Rex Nutting has the best line: House to Wall Street: Drop Dead. He also correctly places the blame and/or credit with House Republicans. For reasons I’ve already explained, I don’t think the Dem leadership was in a position to craft a bill that would have achieved overwhelming Democratic support, so make or break was whether enough GOPers would sign on. They didn’t.

I assume Pelosi calls a new vote; but if it fails, then what? I guess write a bill that is actually, you know, a good plan, and try to pass it — though politically it might not make sense to try until after the election.

For now, I’m just going to quote myself:

So what we now have is non-functional government in the face of a major crisis, because Congress includes a quorum of crazies and nobody trusts the White House an inch.
As a friend said last night, we’ve become a banana republic with nukes.

_____________

With the Dow falling 777 points, this is not just about Wall St., but about Main St. It will effect retirement plans and student loans as well as credit lines that become available on "Main St." (Wolak)

Who won the first debate?

So who won the first presidential debate in your mind? Blog here. Three hours before the debate started look to the right or on the link this on-line page from the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/images/26Sep_Friday_WSJ.JPG

Both John McCain and Barack Obama claimed victory in Friday's debate and are running ads touting their respective triumphs. Polling data suggests otherwise. A CBS poll using random sampling showed 39% saw Obama as the winner and 24% see McCain as the winner. An Inside Advantage poll reported a virtual tie, with 42% saying Obama won and 41% saying McCain won. An Opinion Research poll done for CNN gave Obama the win, 51% to 38%, with men splitting evenly and women going for Obama 2 to 1. However, the sample had a slight Democratic bias.

A poll on CNN's Website with 80,500 respondents gave Obama the victory 67% to 28%. An NBC survey, which drew 291,000 responses gave the victory to Obama 51% to 35%. Democracy Corps ran a 45-person focus group in St. Louis. The group was heavily tilted towards the Republicans, with 33% identifying as Republicans, 27% identifying as Democrats, and the rest independents. The group as a whole voted for Bush over Kerry by a 2-to-1 margin in 2004. Nevertheless, by a 38% to 27% margin, they felt that Obama won the debate.

In addition to all the polls reported yesterday yet another poll shows that Obama won the debate Friday. A Gallup poll showed that 46% of the people who watched it thought Obama won and 34% thought McCain won. When asked which candidate can best solve the country's problems, it is Obama 52% to 35%. Since this debate was largely about foreign policy, McCain's strongest suit, these results do not bode well for him in the coming debate, which is about domestic policy. But as the tracking polls start covering the post debate period, we will have a better idea of whether it changed how people will vote. After all, someone can say: "Obama is the better debater but I think McCain would be a better President." The next debate is between the Vice-Presidential nominees on Oct. 2 at Washington University in St. Louis, MO.

www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pres/Maps/Sep29.html

Blog here on your thoughts about Friday night.

Big Government is Back, To the Rescue?

Just when you thought the presidential campaign and its upcoming debates were the biggest show in town, the meltdown of some of the largest U.S. investment banks has stolen the spotlight…big time.Economists are still evaluating how we got into this current mess.

The bursting of the real estate bubble combined with over investment in risky mortgages mixed with a shortage of capital added to an enormous loss of confidence in what we thought were our steadiest financial institutions.

While most economists agree that government must play a role in helping to alleviate this banking mess, take caution! History has shown that making the wrong move can exaggerate an already bad economic problem.In the early 1930s after the historic crash on Wall Street, the Federal Reserve Board actually increased interest rates to get cash out of the system.

In retrospect, economists note that it was the worst decision at the worst time and probably exaggerated our dire economic situation at the beginning stages of the Great Depression.In this current scenario, the Feds have already orchestrated the mergers of huge institutions like Bank of America and Merril Lynch. It has effectively taken over mega mortgage guarantors Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and infused capital into the struggling AIG, one of the world’s largest insurers.

Now comes a plan from President Bush that would give the Treasury Department the power (and $700 billion) to buy bad-mortgage assets to essentially begin bailing financial institutions out of the mess they created.Ardent free-marketers gasp at the scope of this government intervention and the reality that such a bailout could inflate our national debt to $11.3 trillion. Liberal critics contend that these large government bailouts (like the 1980s bailouts of hundreds of mismanaged Savings and Loan at the cost of up to $500 billion) are just corporate welfare that do little to address the needs of common investors.Congress is filled with representatives of both these perspectives plus a whole lot of opinions in between. Capitol Hill will certainly be buzzing this week as the Democratic majorities of both chambers decide just how to deal with the bold plan put forth by a Republican President with abysmal approval ratings.

Whatever their answer, rest assured that history and the markets will judge just how well—or how poorly-- government was able to intervene in this massive financial mess.

The 2 Regular Guys at CBS 2 School have their take on Government and Free Markets.

VIDEO: Government And Free Markets

Newsweek's Fareed Zakaria reports on how government needs to be interventionist in markets that cannot be totally (or almost) free of regulation. "If you want to be truly free of regulation, try Haiti or Somalia. The real trick is to craft good regulations that allow markets to work well. No regulatory structure will be perfect, none will eliminate risk, nor should they. At best they can tame the wildest gyrations of the market economy while maintaining its efficiency," Zakaria writes.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/160068?tid=relatedcl

We put government regulation is business on the political spectrum, (liberal v. conservative), but liberal publication like The Nation and conservative magazines like US News & World Report are expressing concern. This is all the more reason that can be made for "The Real American Poltical Spectrum," where the question of this government intervention will be more on the Economic Eltist or Populist position.

So far the populists in polls don't like it, but will they need it if it has a medicine that helps heal all?

Politics is Easy, Governing is Hard

Two days after his administration announced a $700 billion bailout policy for Wall St. banks burrdened by the current mortgage crisis, President George W. Bush on Wednesday said the United States was in a serious financial crisis as he tried to convince Americans to support a $700 billion financial rescue plan.

"We are in the midst of a serious financial crisis and the federal government is responding with decisive action," Bush said in a televised national address.

Bush called for non-partisan support for a plan that have polls saying the public is leary of. (See Big Government Post above). Many questions face us in this many governing and politics face us as we examine what's going on.

First, the proposed policy plan, with AP gov't. terminology.

Question: What is the difference between fiscal and monetary policy?

Answer: Fiscal = budetary choices of taxing and spending

Monetary = federal reserve decisions on interest rates and monetary supply.

So...The bailout plan proposed, but likely to change as it met resistance in Congress, by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, would be a fiscal policy. Aside from Paulson was Fed. Chairman Ben Bernacke. If the Federal Reserve lowers interest rates or increases money money in cirrculation, it would be a monetary move.

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/risky-business/2008/09/24/the-bailout-plan-hank-paulson-and-ben-bernankes-bogus-journey.html

Meanwhile, the Politics? With the first presidential debate scheduled for Friday, John McCain wants a postponement. Is that because he wants to get back to Capitol Hill to govern (hasn't been there for many key votes like the GI-Bill this campaign season) or because he is playing politics?

http://www.0telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/johnmccain/3075493/John-McCain-wants-to-postpone-presidential-debate-with-Barack-Obama.html

Other questions, can a lame duck president, with an approval rating of 19 percent, get Congress to get behind his plan? And, how much can a president really do about the economy, anyway?