Executive Actions = End Run.  For that tiny handful of folks who read this blog, you realize I have been heavily critical of the manner in which Congress has deviated from rules of order.  Now if I can get this upset with Congressional inaction, one might ask, how can I criticize the Administration for taking executive actions to address the needs perceived by the President but not addressed by Congress?  Easy; my complaint is the same in both cases.  Executive actions exist, in my humble opinion, to address issues not addressed by Congress or in other cases, to address issues in an expedient fashion required by extraordinary circumstances.  Joe Biden today told a group of gun control advocates that given the Senate defeat this week of the gun control bill, the President would soon be taking executive actions to address the situation.  Now this, my friends, is what I call an abuse of executive action.

Whether the President is George Bush or Barrack Obama, taking executive actions that attempt to accomplish policy that has been rejected by Congress is not a proper application of power.  Had Congress failed to move a gun bill to a vote…that would perhaps be grounds for executive action.  Had Congress passed legislation that left certain critical areas of policy unaddressed… that would perhaps have been grounds for executive action.   But when executive actions are taken to impose (that’s right, it is imposition because it is not subject to Congress and…by the time the Judiciary reviews it, the damage is often done) policies that have been rejected by Congress, it is a perversion of the democratic process and an abuse of power.     Presidents should not supplant themselves in the place of Congress when it comes to making law. While it has clearly become out of fashion to adhere to any type of traditional order when legislating in this country, it is yet another sad commentary that the instrument of executive orders has become nothing more than a political flare that the President sends up when his boat begins to take on water.  The flare soars into the air, burns brilliantly for a few moments, and then falls helplessly into the water.  In the case of flares, they sink harmlessly to the bottom and are soon forgotten.  Unfortunately with executive orders, they tend to stay around for longer shelf life and create all manner of havoc.  If you can’t get the legislation passed that you want, do the heavy lifting and either convince others to buy into your ideas, change the substance of your argument, or compromise in such a way to get the required votes for passage.   Pitching hissy fits in the rose garden is a bit lame, don’t you think?

The Degree of Arrogance is Incredible.  In my time, I have had the wonderful opportunity to visit the House and Senate buildings on Capitol Hill and promote various issues to the Senators and Representatives.  After several trips in and around Capitol Hill, I remain in awe of the people and the process that governs our country; it is a truly magnificent model.  However, one comment I have always made to friends upon my return from WDC was that the Senate office buildings are the closest thing we have to royalty in this country.  I stand by that comment today.  It appears the members are being influenced by their surroundings.

The hubris and arrogance that comes from long-tenured Senators is absolutely off the charts.  Not to say that there is any shortage of narcissism in the House; but standing for election every two years does have a somewhat humbling effect on politicians and by necessity, they tend to “till” the home fields a bit more than their counterparts across the square.

I don’t know when it happened, but this ever-accelerating movement towards a “Gang of (pick your number here)” generating legislation as opposed to the regular order of business is really ruining our government.  Since when do repeated terms as a U.S. Senator make you a fount of all knowledge and wise enough to circumvent the rules that have ruled our legislative operations for decades?  Can these people really….really….believe that they know more than the other (100 less the “Gang Number”) Senators in the body?  Does the collective wisdom of the chosen few outweigh the collective wisdom of the elected many?  Is it any wonder that the quality of completed legislation is pathetic; rift with unintended consequences, errors, and plain stupidity?  Can any sane person question the wisdom in orderly committee hearings and the historically deliberate process of passing laws in this country?

As a child, I was always told that the House would brew the tea of legislation in a boil and the Senate would simmer that brew in the saucer.  I suppose the rule now is that any particular Gang of (??? can take over in the kitchen and dictate the drink of the day.  It is a sad day indeed when our most-seasoned members of Congress have fallen to convenient legislative short-cuts that forsake the heavy lifting of thinking, listening, researching, discussing, debating, and taking the temperature of the electorate for the far more chic mode of “Gang” legislation.

Perhaps They Are Afraid of What They Might Hear?  Even after all of the foolishness that we have seen out of this government (all three branches!) over the last decade or so, there are still occasions where I am amazed at the brazen cluelessness or shamelessness that Congress exhibits.  Specifically addressing the Schumer/Rubio drama on immigration reform, I pose the very simple question: Why in hell would they NOT want to hold hearings on this potential life-changing legislation?

If we have learned nothing over the past several years, it should be that sometimes no legislation is the best legislation and, at a minimum, careful thought and deliberation should take place before ever signing legislation into law.  The poster child for this principle is Obamacare; which famously had to be passed before we could discover what was in it.  Well, it has passed and we are discovering (much to our chagrin).  To a lesser degree, we are seeing the same drama play out in the arena of gun control; specifically, people with no earthly idea of what they are talking about entertaining the thoughts of passing monumental legislation that will hugely impact our society.  Isn’t  it time for legislation to be passed by the orderly process of the House or Senate and not by the political product of a “Gang of Eight…or Ten….or Six….or Twelve….”

Much as I addressed the two choices facing the Republican Party in my last post, this situation presenst Rubio with a very revealing decision.  As had been speculated on by minds far greater than mine, Rubio may have reached the point where appearing to want immigration reform legislation and failing in the process is superior to actually passing immigration that is not completely satisfactory.  Whatever the decision Mr. Rubio makes and how this influences his stock as a future presidential candidate is not my point.  My point is that our Congress has clearily, unequivocally, and in the most transparent fashion imaginable, demonstrated their inability to write legislation with any kind of forethought or anticipation of how it will collaterally impact our country.  The whole purpose of hearings is to address this particular area.  For heaven’s sake, HOLD THE HEARINGS!  Have the debate, line up the Dem witnesses and line up the Repub witnesses, go through the circus atmosphere of bloviating from elected officials with elevated opinions of their self-importance.  But the overarching point is this: TALK about what you are doing and how it might IMPACT the people of this nation. 

How long have we waited for serious immigration reform?  Is it not wise to take a few more weeks, listen to the people who actually deal with immigration issues on a daily basis, and try to get this thing right BEFORE passing it into law?  WHY ARE WE EVEN HAVING THIS DISCUSSION!

Have We Really Fallen This Far? Since the 2012 election, it seems a week cannot go by without some Republican leader coming forth with a new plan to “reinvent” the party.  Much in the same tone, we just as regularly see a Democrat decrying the downfall of the Republican Party.  I think what I see is this: Faced with a brutal self-examination following their loss to Obama and their failure to take control of the Senate (both instances where they had, at worst, decent prospects of success), the Republican party was faced with two choices.  One was to reshape itself in order to better appeal to the voters that many see as essential to any electoral victory; Hispanic, black, and female voters.  The other choice was to reopen the question on exactly what the party stands for; an honest and wide-ranging debate on the real principles that underpin the party.  Unfortunately, the Republican Party has apparently chosen the former; now desperately seeking ways to make it more attractive to the right demographic and trying to outbid the Democrats in the giveaway bonanza game called legislating. 

To its credit, the Democratic Party has always been rather shameless about its approach to elections.  Its simple rule is to win at all costs and it has always responded with a wink and a nod to anyone who comes in proximity of inquiring about this method.  If ever this practice was put to the test, it was in November of 2012.  The Republicans incessantly debated through the primaries the lunacy of Obamanomics.  Mitt Romney held forth that any reasonable, pragmatic person should recognize that his approach to executive administration was far more professional than that of Obama.  Alas, the results simply bore out the suspicions of many that the Republicans were bringing a knife to a gunfight.  Now, after decades of labeling the Democrats as shameless, the Republicans have thrown shame to the wind and themselves enthusiastically into the bidding war.

Oh, for the lack of a statesman.  Are there no individuals of either party who are willing to decide the merit of pending legislation based on merit and not on the size and source of campaign donations?  Can’t we have candidates who speak the speech to every crowd they address, without changing their speech patterns and without shameless pandering?  Why can’t we somehow find a media outlet that seeks to evaluate and present these candidates on their positions and principles rather than their ability to read teleprompters and wear tailored suits?

It is hard to see how any third party candidate could win a major election in our political system; the deck is simply too stacked against it.  However, with the Democrats and Republicans falling over each other to please each and every voter (on an individual and differing basis…let’s not be bothered with hypocrisy), the time would certainly seem ripe for that right person who can stand up for what they believe, relay that conviction to the voter, and manage to somehow strike the right tone for the moderates of each party to find some success in our political arena.  Is it time for a statesman (stateswoman) to come sweeping in out of left (or right) field?

A Perilous Journey, Indeed.  Fasten your seat belts, secure your belongings, check all the hatches…we are about to embark on a remarkable journey.  A journey that will answer the question: Can this nation ship survive a voyage with a fool at the helm?  Barely three months into the trip, the prospects are not promising.  Our navigator is merrily sticking his nose into the wind, boldly going where….well, actually, where no one with good sense would go.

This is a captain who compares the Israel-Palestine issue to USA-Canada.  This is a man who states repeatedly that our nation does not have a spending problem.  This is a man who sees executive branch leadership as annihilating the opposing party so that no negotiation is required.  This is man who will say anything, to anyone, at anytime, in any place, with absolutely no respect for what he has said before or for the passage of time since he said it.  This is man who lives like a king; he and his entourage taking royal trips and vacations while crying out to the masses for the wealthy to pay more lest the poor be trodden underneath it all.  Not bound by what he has said before, nor by the hard lessons of history, he charts a new path of promised prosperity based on the premise that a diminished few individuals, with the courage to risk all they have to build wealth and opportunity for others, will continue to do what they do while keeping much less and giving much more to others who choose not to try at all.  This is a man who faced with a momentous victory, chooses to continue the battle rather than make the peace.  This is a man who rewards his cronies and lackeys with positions of power or financial gain in order to keep them in the palace.  This is a man who thinks all people can have the best of medical care while only a handful pays the doctor bills.  This is a man who despite obvious gaffes, miscalculations, and blatant statements of falsehoods, has cast a magical spell over much of the media and helped them to diminish themselves to a point of near-irrelevance.  This is a man who was given an opportunity to accomplish great things and instead, chose to pursue petty conquests for personal gain. 

How this nation weathers this trip is yet to be determined.  How history will reflect this captain is certainly an open question.  How long can the weight of this nation’s responsibilities to those who finance it be supported by empty promises and foolish rhetoric?    Time will tell, my friends; time will tell.

Change on the Cheap.  Many of us make humble attempts at giving back something to our communities by serving on committees for support organizations.  It is one of the great things about America that people try to reach out and help those that need it, without being paid to do it or directed to do it by our glorious and all-knowing government.  One of the maddening experiences in serving these organizations is when you have members on the committee that seem to want to make the cause at hand the center of their universe.  They are impassioned agents of change and want to talk the subject to death at every opportunity.  It is as if they want to fill up their empty lives with this cause and never turn it loose.  They want to plan eternally and put off doing something until the next meeting.  I place these kinds of people in a category I call “change on the cheap”.

These folks are pleasantly surprised that through a convergence of circumstance, they are suddenly empowered to speak for many and have the opportunity to influence something larger than themselves.  However, they fail to connect the dots between planning and doing.  They will sit at the table and talk until the group is exhausted.  They are deeply infected with mission creep and constantly come up with new ideas about how to do everything so much better.  Their enthusiasm is never-ending and becomes as annoying as the bubbly blonde host on the morning television or radio show.  And then (now here’s the rub), when the time comes to roll up the sleeves and actually accomplish something, they are nowhere to be found.  Either they are still consumed by the master plan or they have moved on to the next project.  They start a fire, feed it until it is flaming wide open, and then move on.   They don’t want to chop the wood, tend the fire, or clean up the ashes.  Their infinite wisdom moves them on to start the next fire before the preceding fire is even burning well.  They are talkers, not doers.  They are all hat and no cowboy.  They are as shallow as a water puddle.  They waste the time of the majority of other folks who are ready and willing to do the heavy lifting necessary to effect positive changes.  They drain the energy and resolve from organizations that are fueled by donations of time and money given by the goodness of the heart.  They are people seeking “change on the cheap”.  They never miss the photo op, but they are never around to clean up the tables, put away the chairs, and take out the trash.

Our president is such a person.  Even with his “signature” piece of legislation (Obamacare), he talked it to death, pleaded passionately for its passage, but never submitted an actual bill to Congress.  Instead he farmed its framing out to Reid and Pelosi and their fellow minions.  With a method that makes sausage making look like brain surgery, is it any wonder it has turned out to be the bureaucratic nightmare that it is?  He has spent his entire term as president either starting fires or campaigning (one and the same?), but he is never around at the front end to write the law, nor is he around at the backend to worry about the implementation.  Once he senses the sleeves being rolled up, he takes his cue to move on to the next fire; such a pity that one so capable is so very lazy.

Obama: The Sequester Jester.  What kind of a leader proposes a plan to alleviate a crisis and then later, when the same crisis re-emerges, viciously attacks his original plan as irresponsible and reprehensible?  An Obama type of leader; that’s who.

I am a retired federal employee.  While I anxiously point out that many of the popular characterizations of federal employees as lazy, uncaring, overpaid bureaucrats are blatantly false and unfounded, there is absolutely no doubt in mind that our federal government is rife with waste, inefficiency, redundancy, and small minded elected officials and administrators who feel it is their role in life to periodically “reinvent the wheel” for the betterment of all.  The vast majority of federal workers are in fact paid about what they’re worth, have benefits better than much of the private sector and worse than most union employees, and are quite simply the part of the tire that meets the road.  They are good soldiers.  It cannot be stated often enough or loud enough…..FEDERAL EMPLOYEES ARE NOT THE PROBLEM.  Now, it is true that the number of federal employees is a big part of the problem.  And it is also true that many of the programs that the federal employees administer are a big part of the problem.  And it is exceedingly accurate to say that the manner in which federal employees administer federal programs is a huge part of the problem.  In this particular argument, the old saying about not shooting the messenger is quite applicable. 

Sequestering federal program allocations is a dumb way out of our financial mess.  It is irresponsible, it is not compassionate, it is not effective nor is it efficient.  It is, however, the best and only authentic solution that anyone has come up with in years to BEGIN the massive challenge of addressing our bloated government machine.  So let us understand completely that the world will not stop spinning on March 1 if sequestration comes into effect.  Yes; we will have thrown the baby out with the bath water.  But…the baby can be recovered.  The baby will be wiser for the experience.  Our government will have demonstrated that it is indeed capable of actual cuts in spending, as comparatively small as they might be.  It will show that our government is capable of taking the dose of medicine that is being presented to them, as distasteful as it might be; medicine that will begin to move our fiscal house in the right direction.  Somehow, someway, sometime…..we as a nation must begin to understand that all debts must be serviced and the collection man will cometh.  Perhaps that day will arrive on March 1.