With the Dems poised to regain control of the House, I’m wondering to what extent they will flex their investigatory powers. Any number of possible issues come to mind including Bush’s energy policy, the decision to go to war, corporate profiteering from the war…
-On one hand, I’m worried that any efforts to investigate wrongdoing will not by themselves be a substitute for a coherent affirmative policy agenda. I hope the Dems work hardest on getting positive things done, standing for something/anything other than essentially just calling the Repubs names.
-On the other hand, I wouldn’t be exactly heartbroken for some of the folks who formed (and profitted from) these policies being made uncomfortable. And the small part of me wouldn’t mind a little payback for Repub efforts in the past.
-On the other hand, I’d like to encourage the Dems not to stoop to that level just for some fleeting revenge. But I’m not sure “taking the high road” ever conferred significant political benefit.
-The Dems have historically had far more trouble presenting a united front than the Repubs in any number of respects. If investigations would unite the party, that might be sufficient justification.
-And, before I run out of hands here, I guess the argument could be made that if it appears as though something improper was done, the public is owed an investigation.
Any thoughts?
If they do it at all, they need to be careful about it. A very limited number of investigations, and only into things they can make stick. If they just go nuts, and try to impeach Shrub, or inestigate every possible issue, they’ll be out of power again next election–and it may take longer than 12 years to get another shot.
The Dems have a fairly narrow majority–razor thin in the Senate if VA holds up. Now is NOT the time to introduce something like “The Omnibus Gay Marriage, Gun Control, Abortion on Demand and Tax Raising Bill of 2006”. They have to pick their spots. I’d focus on popular proposals that will be hard for Shrub to veto without giving Dems more ammo in 08–like raising the minimum wage. I’d like to see some sort of windfall profits tax on Big Oil as well, but I’m not sure that would be wise. The Dems have to be smart enough to understand that what happened last night was not a liberal revolution. Many of the Dems that won did so as conservative Dems. I think, and sincerely hope, that extremism is dead on both sides of the aisle. The Fundie crowd is no different from the Loony Left in that both sides hold views way out of the mainstream of the country. Moderates are in power now, and could remain so for the forseeable future.
Very well put, Oakminster. These thoughts were going through my mind last night. Moderates do indeed seem to have the reigns of power. A lot of democrats were elected in former “red” districts that are not flaming liberals. If the democrats stay sane and hug the middle, it will make it possible for them to regain the White House in 2008…unless they nominate Hillary Clinton or another Dukakis/Kerry clone.
They will also have to actually BE firm on terrorism and not just talk about it to maintain their credibility with the people who elected them. If Bush manages to finish his term without a major terrorist attack and then an attack comes on the watch of a Democratic successor, the effect will be long-lasting and catastrophic for the Democrats. On the other hand, if they manage to preserve the peace it will go a long way toward dispelling the “soft on defense” albatross.
Also, if the Democrats can resist the impulse to spend and get the deficit under control, they will gain huge credibility on the fiscal responsibility front.
The bottom line: If they take a moderate road and offer their left wing a steaming cup of STFU, they will be able to stay in power for the foreseeable future.
Not sure whether I read it here or heard it elsewhere, but someone described the Repubs error as winning slim majorities in a couple of close elections, and acting as tho they enjoyed an overwhelming mandate. Helped me make a bit of sense out of what has been happening lately. Hope the Dems don’t make a similar mistake.
Most importantly, I hope the Dems decide upon something they actually are for! The won yesterday basically because they weren’t Repubs. Who you aren’t and what you oppose is not enough in the long run.
Finally, that old saw - I’m not a member of any organized political party. I’m a Democrat! - generally has held pretty true. The Dems cannot be all things to all people, and pandering to their most extreme elements risks offending other segments. It will be interesting to see whether the Dems can craft - and support - a coherent platform.
I think investigating the process that lead to this war could reap benefits. Could play to the public’s dislike for the war, while appearing forward looking in that it is aimed at avoiding repetition of such mistakes in the future. One problem, tho, is that too many of the Dems rolled over and played dead when the Repubs started beating the wardrums.
Investigating energy policy could also pay dividends, as it can be presented as relating to the future, instead of just being punitive.
If the Democrats spend their limited political capital on investigating wrongdoing, they will have proven themselves unworthy to have been elected, IMO. There is too much work to be done fixing things. Congress – both houses, and on both sides of the aisle – has always been far too good at focusing on items that sound good but aren’t really important, all the while paying insufficient attention to the critical issues that should be the core of their job. What solutions do we currently have for the problems with Social Security or Medicaid? What solutions are being actively proposed? None.
I’d love to be able to take the entire House and Senate aside and say: There’s a mountain of work to be done. Get to it.
Yes, yes. We’re far to busy to worry about, you know, wrongdoing that gets people killed by the thousands. It’d be such a waste of time to do what we must to prevent such a thing from happening again, including punishing the culpable, if they are shown to be. What an unworthy exercise, what squandering of all the loving political goodwill we’ve striven so hard to build over the last twelve years.
I’d be satisfied with just one investigation: The NSA wiretapping of US citizens. This administration needs to be taken to task for it’s disregard of the law.
Loopydude, if I made it sound like I don’t care that this administration wrongly led us into war and costs appalling numbers of lives, I did not intend to. In case you didn’t notice in your haste to spew at me, I said that there is too much work do be done fixing things. That includes the war. Hateful as the decision to go to war was to me personally, I do not see that it is a prosecutable offense. Nor do I see the use of torture as prosecutable, given that congresspeople on both sides voted for a “compromise” that blithely let the administration define torture as it sees fit.
Now, the Democrats could go chasing after an impeachment and accomplish exactly nothing. Or they could try to tackle the war, the deficit, Social Security, and Medicare. Which do you think is more important?
Part of me really wants a thorough investigation into why we went to war in Iraq, but I don’t trust Congress to consider its own role in acquiesing to Bush objectively enough. The NSA investigation might be a good one, or perhaps the “extraordinary rendition” of folks like that guy from Canada who was sent to Syria.
The Dems will go for some easy legislative wins lik the Minimum Wage, but I wonder if they’ll try another embryonic stem cell research bill. Would Bush have the balls to veto it yet again, in light of the latest election results?
I’m not sure they should do new investigations, but I would love to see some of the stuff that got buried for the past few years see the light of day. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence phase II report as an appetizer. Abramoff for the soup/salad course. The NSA wiretapping for the main course. Finish up with some investigations into what’s up with detainees in Gitmo and other places for dessert.
I could sink my teeth into a meal like that.
Enjoy,
Steven
-
Remember, stem cell research is anathema to GeeDub’s religion, and that’s probably the last thing he’d “compromise”.
-
What does he care? He’s out in two years, and stem cell research isn’t, IMHO, a huge rallying point for the general populace, so he wouldn’t be too afraid to step on those toes.
Maybe it was, maybe it wasn’t. We certainly won’t know unless somebody investigates, right? I tend to think it’s quite possible the deception leading up to the war might constitute an offense worth impeachment. If no evidence can be found, it’s a very important issue anyway, and it won’t have been wasted time, IMO. And investigation doesn’t preclude progress on other matters, so I don’t see how it’s valid to portray this as an either/or proposition.
Like that never completed Report on Prewar Intelligence. With Chairman Roberts out of the way, we may actually learn whether the administration’s presentation of the threat posed by Iraq reflected actual intelligence information, or was a fabrication designed to trick the nation into supporting an unnecessary war.
Let’s not forget an investigation into that money hole in Iraq. I think the last time I saw a reference there were billions that had just disappeared, no records, no paper trail, no accounting, just gone.
Here is the most recent link I can find easily - Audit: U.S. lost track of $9 billion in Iraq funds
I considter this one a must-do.
I can just see the argument against: But $9 billion is just a tiny fraction of the trillion dollar cost of our freedoms. Why risk bipartisan progress over pocket change?
The Abramoff connections, A number one, first and foremost. Most especially the disgraceful crap over the Mariannas Islands and the Indian casinos. There are still quite a few Pubbies who need to spend more time with their families. Perhaps some Dems too, but people don’t generally spend a bunch of money to bribe people without power.
For my two bits, we can forgo the intelligence fixing stuff. It has become pretty close to common knowledge by now. We got a good idea how we got stuck in this fever swamp of a war, the only real issue is how to get out.
Investigate corruption, stupidity can wait.
Was there no corrupt handling of intelligence? Because, gee, I’d like to know.
What the Dems need to avoid is castrating a gelding. Bush is a featherless, wingless, lamest of all ducks. No need to do anything to make him look bad, he takes care of that quite nicely himself.
DO investigate the wiretapping, DO go to court over signing statements, DO investigate no-bid contracts from the Pentagon. Pelosi has shown great wisdom so far in saying impeachment is off the table. Focus on doing good for the people and power will come by itself.
Maybe a little multi-tasking is in order? Since the Abramoff stuff seems (so far) to be centered around the House, it is appropriate for the House to be the venue. The Senate could simultaneously investigate the “intelligence failures”.
To clarify, when I say “corruption”, I mean the ordinary, garden variety: bribes, stealing, family members on payrolls, that sort of thing.
'Investigate"? Screw that. Interrogate is the right word. And since waterboarding is now a legal method, dunk a few of them.