Is there ANYONE who pays their taxes correctly?
Seriously, can we do a study and see how many people in this country have unpaid or incorrectly filed taxes? How can it be that FOUR of Obama's nominees have tax problems? What the hell is this! Geithner, Daschle, that person from OPM, and Solis (well, her husband)? Come on people!
Then again, taxes are complicated as all hill-el. It's these darn TurboTax people.
Showing posts with label obaminet. Show all posts
Showing posts with label obaminet. Show all posts
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Obaminet: Daschle
I didn't really like Daschle when he was a Senate Majority (and then Minority) leader, but I was looking forward to his presence in the Obaminet. Then tax issues were raised--which really put him on par with Timothy Geithner, and I didn't think it would derail it. But then his speaking engagements began to be an issue, and I was torn. I still believe he would have been the best man for the job of creating health care, but as Matthew Yglesias pointed out, it would have pitted Obama's promise of health care against Obama's promise to clean up Washington. And as Lawrence Lessig points out in his Change Congress campaign, it is not enough to get rid of undue influence--we must also clean out the appearance of undue influence. Whether or not Daschle actually made different positions due to his speaking engagements is not the issue--it is bad enough that such implications could exist. Government is to be structured without trust.
I wish Obama was stricter about not putting forward these candidates with taint in the first place, but he hasn't been attempting to shield them (although it sounds like if Daschle hadn't withdrawn he would have defended him). Careful, President Obama.
I wish Obama was stricter about not putting forward these candidates with taint in the first place, but he hasn't been attempting to shield them (although it sounds like if Daschle hadn't withdrawn he would have defended him). Careful, President Obama.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Secretary Of The Arts
Barack Obama is going to put in place a new arts policy. Someone should oversee it. Hence, a Secretary of the Arts. Isn't that straightforward? For one of the first Presidents I've heard of with an actual arts policy, he should have a Secretary of the Arts. Or at least make the NEA chair a Cabinet-Level position.
As I've said before, this isn't a culture issue. This is an economic issue. Take this article, about how New York City's Broadway tax is allegedly going to hit AEA pensions. And not the billion dollar profits.
Now, one could argue that if the Department of Labor took arts issues to heart, a Department of Art wouldn't be necessary. But it clearly doesn't. Arts is a somewhat different industry--the way that Health and Human Services, or Agriculture are.
Also, what I like about the hypothetical Department of Art is what I like about the hypothetical Department of Food: although it's an economics oriented department, it keeps its goal in mind: producing art. If the FCC was made subject to this hypothetical Department of Art, it might behave differently. Or copyright law. The public radio/television organizations. They'd all be unified under one heading, working in conjunction with the Department of Education and the Department of Labor.
I think it's a good idea. And other than the increase in bureaucracy, there isn't much downside. Do it, Mr. Obama!
Sign this petition for a Secretary of the Arts.
As I've said before, this isn't a culture issue. This is an economic issue. Take this article, about how New York City's Broadway tax is allegedly going to hit AEA pensions. And not the billion dollar profits.
Now, one could argue that if the Department of Labor took arts issues to heart, a Department of Art wouldn't be necessary. But it clearly doesn't. Arts is a somewhat different industry--the way that Health and Human Services, or Agriculture are.
Also, what I like about the hypothetical Department of Art is what I like about the hypothetical Department of Food: although it's an economics oriented department, it keeps its goal in mind: producing art. If the FCC was made subject to this hypothetical Department of Art, it might behave differently. Or copyright law. The public radio/television organizations. They'd all be unified under one heading, working in conjunction with the Department of Education and the Department of Labor.
I think it's a good idea. And other than the increase in bureaucracy, there isn't much downside. Do it, Mr. Obama!
Sign this petition for a Secretary of the Arts.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Obaminet: The Upcoming Eric Holder Fight
Brian Beutler, on the statements from the Republican Party that they will try to block Eric Holder's nomination:
I do think that blocking Eric Holder is crass and etc. But I don't think it's random. See, one of the very early questions that will face the Obama Administration is how to treat the crimes committed by the former Bush Administration. President Bush did not deliver any pardons, which means that an incoming Attorney General would be well within his rights to appoint a Special Prosecutor or in general open an investigation into, say, torture (along the Levin-McCain Report lines).
How can the Republicans in Congress possibly fight this? If they try to make a tough fight over Eric Holder, try and paint him as a partisan -- maybe leveraging his involvement in the Clinton Administration pardons -- they can then slander any attempt to bring President Bush or cabinet to justice as a partisan assault. They're hoping that they'll force Obama into the position of losing his mantle of bipartisanship, or forgetting any attempt to discipline the Bush administration.
It looks like the Republicans threw every name on Obama's roster of cabinet designates into a hat and drew Eric Holder. And so, he'll be the guy they try to block.
I do think that blocking Eric Holder is crass and etc. But I don't think it's random. See, one of the very early questions that will face the Obama Administration is how to treat the crimes committed by the former Bush Administration. President Bush did not deliver any pardons, which means that an incoming Attorney General would be well within his rights to appoint a Special Prosecutor or in general open an investigation into, say, torture (along the Levin-McCain Report lines).
How can the Republicans in Congress possibly fight this? If they try to make a tough fight over Eric Holder, try and paint him as a partisan -- maybe leveraging his involvement in the Clinton Administration pardons -- they can then slander any attempt to bring President Bush or cabinet to justice as a partisan assault. They're hoping that they'll force Obama into the position of losing his mantle of bipartisanship, or forgetting any attempt to discipline the Bush administration.
Obamadministration: Envoys
Via Andrew Sullivan, Marc Ambinder reports on Obama's new Envoys.
I was wondering where Richard Holbrooke got off to. If you look back at my original (and wildly inaccurate) predictions of the Obaminet, you'll see I predicted a higher prediction for Holbrooke. I've heard some criticisms of Holbrooke, but he still seems to me a highly competent--if perhaps controversial and sometimes big-mouthed--public servant. But chief envoy to South-East Asia is a very flexible, complex, and difficult role.
Think about it. On the one hand, he's going to be coordinating war between Afghanistan-Pakistan and Taliban-Al Qaeda. On the other hand, he's going to be preserving peace between Pakistan and India. And then on top of that, he's going to be dealing with the implications and trade policy of the new emerging India of which we've heard so much about.
So, not Secretary of State. But still crucial.
I was wondering where Richard Holbrooke got off to. If you look back at my original (and wildly inaccurate) predictions of the Obaminet, you'll see I predicted a higher prediction for Holbrooke. I've heard some criticisms of Holbrooke, but he still seems to me a highly competent--if perhaps controversial and sometimes big-mouthed--public servant. But chief envoy to South-East Asia is a very flexible, complex, and difficult role.
Think about it. On the one hand, he's going to be coordinating war between Afghanistan-Pakistan and Taliban-Al Qaeda. On the other hand, he's going to be preserving peace between Pakistan and India. And then on top of that, he's going to be dealing with the implications and trade policy of the new emerging India of which we've heard so much about.
So, not Secretary of State. But still crucial.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Richardson Withdraws From The Obaminet
Aw man. I liked Bill Richardson too. But if it's true, then Obama is correct: out the door with him.
Not much to say, really, except that I am crazy disappointed in the man, and I hope that the charges turn out to be untrue. Obama's ride very high in the polls are going to slowly draw to a close.
Not much to say, really, except that I am crazy disappointed in the man, and I hope that the charges turn out to be untrue. Obama's ride very high in the polls are going to slowly draw to a close.
Friday, December 12, 2008
A Quick Note About Patrick Fitzgerald
I saw somewhere today (don't remember where) the idea of Patrick Fitzgerald being appointed to Deputy Attorney General. I don't really like that, because I'm in favor of the ol' PF being made a special prosecutor to investigate war crimes under the Bush Administration (which a bipartisan Senate commission has laid the groundworks of accusing Donald Rumsfeld of). Although I understand the need to return an aura of non-partisanship to the Department of Justice, remember that the leadership of the Department of Justice is still, to some extent, a partisan position--even if less so than Gonzales.
The point is, obviously, we appoint people who represent the philosophy of the President to lead departments; we want someone honest and with a nonpartisan record to run the DoJ just like we want them to run each department, but Patrick Fitzgerald is beyond that--Fitzgerald is someone who should be left in a position where he can continue doing what he does best; prosecuting regardless of party, regardless of politics. As Deputy AG he'd be in a position of writing legal opinions etc. on behalf of the Obama Administration; the closer he gets to the top, the harder it'll be for him to maintain his utterly non-partisan reputation.
Leave Patrick Fitzgerald in the field; and get him on the case of what horrible crimes happened under the Bush Administration.
The point is, obviously, we appoint people who represent the philosophy of the President to lead departments; we want someone honest and with a nonpartisan record to run the DoJ just like we want them to run each department, but Patrick Fitzgerald is beyond that--Fitzgerald is someone who should be left in a position where he can continue doing what he does best; prosecuting regardless of party, regardless of politics. As Deputy AG he'd be in a position of writing legal opinions etc. on behalf of the Obama Administration; the closer he gets to the top, the harder it'll be for him to maintain his utterly non-partisan reputation.
Leave Patrick Fitzgerald in the field; and get him on the case of what horrible crimes happened under the Bush Administration.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Obaminet: FEMA As Stand-alone
Briefly: Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) has endorsed the concept of pulling FEMA out from the Department of Homeland Security. I personally disagree from a philosophical standpoint--the idea is to integrate all of the services that might be involved in any sort of an emergency, be they law enforcement or humanitarian--but as its a bureaucratic decision, I think that's best decided by the people in the federal bureaucracy.
Basically, it comes down to this: is the greater synergy of a larger more centralized department necessary, or can they streamline communications better as separate departments, each of which are able to tackle their own objectives more effectively? I can't answer that because I don't work there, and I don't think pundits should either. If the answer is the latter, than the Deparment of Homeland Security should probably be dissolved entirely. I think at the moment there's a clutter of folks with conflicting portfolios. Who is the person most tasked with national security--the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the National Security Advisor? But if DHS really does maximize synergy in a way that department separation restricts, then it should be preserved. Again: that's a bureaucracy call. We should just measure it by results. After all, FEMA's failure during Hurricane Katrina had less to do with the bureaucratic shape of things than simply the choices made by the management.
One more point, from a purely political (and therefore, hopefully, irrelevant from a decision-making standpoint) observation: Governor Napolitano's experience that supposedly prepares her to run the DHS is twofold: one is her efforts securing the border, and the other is her state's response to flash floods and fires. The latter half of her experience goes to waste if FEMA is taken away, and then Napolitano becomes a very ICE-based governor.
Basically, it comes down to this: is the greater synergy of a larger more centralized department necessary, or can they streamline communications better as separate departments, each of which are able to tackle their own objectives more effectively? I can't answer that because I don't work there, and I don't think pundits should either. If the answer is the latter, than the Deparment of Homeland Security should probably be dissolved entirely. I think at the moment there's a clutter of folks with conflicting portfolios. Who is the person most tasked with national security--the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the National Security Advisor? But if DHS really does maximize synergy in a way that department separation restricts, then it should be preserved. Again: that's a bureaucracy call. We should just measure it by results. After all, FEMA's failure during Hurricane Katrina had less to do with the bureaucratic shape of things than simply the choices made by the management.
One more point, from a purely political (and therefore, hopefully, irrelevant from a decision-making standpoint) observation: Governor Napolitano's experience that supposedly prepares her to run the DHS is twofold: one is her efforts securing the border, and the other is her state's response to flash floods and fires. The latter half of her experience goes to waste if FEMA is taken away, and then Napolitano becomes a very ICE-based governor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)