After our President’s six years in office, a White House official shocked the world with his statements.
"There cannot be enough accountability in the federal government," said Clay Johnson, deputy director of the Office and Management and Budget, which supervises executive branch agencies. "There is very little today. Very little real accountability."
Hmmmm, that seems to contradict much of Mr. Johnson’s prior Ask the White House talk. What happened to “the Federal government is developing the management skills it needs to be held accountable for delivering high levels of service” and “the President’s Management Agenda (PMA) is a clear and focused strategy for improving the effectiveness of the Federal government”?
After stating “very little real accountability” exists, Mr. Johnson spoke to looming Congressional oversight.
"We want things to work better and it begins with an honest, candid, transparent assessment of what we know now. And out of that comes the fact that a lot of really good things are going on here."
As a blogger for nearly two years, I have found the White House anything but honest, candid, or transparent despite the President’s longtime promises of such. (The OMB highlighted their transparency efforts in 2004.) President Bush wants to hold accountable schools, corporate executives, other countries, and public officials of other countries.
Accountability expert Clay had some fun interaction with Fed Chief Ben Bernanke in that “Ask the White House” session. Mr. Johnson produced one of his “management truths”.
I say that you can't have results without accountability, and you can't have accountability without a lot of transparency and candor about what we're trying to accomplish and how we're performing relative to our goals.
“No results without accountability” combined with “very little real accountability” equals very little real results. This explains why the Bush administration never answered my often submitted questions.
“Why did the White House’s Hurricane Katrina Lessons Learned report omit any mention of the hospital with the largest patient death toll? Why did The Carlyle Group’s LifeCare Hospitals 24 patient deaths receive not one citation in the President’s report? Does it help the company defend any looming civil suits by having the federal government silent on the issue?”
Isn’t the government accountable to individual citizens as well as the Democratic controlled Congress? According to Mr. Johnson, no they are not…
Friday, February 02, 2007
U.S. Warmakers Have Eye on Palestinian Territories
The U.S. State department is targeting Hamas for violent confrontation by asking Congress to give $86 million to President Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah security forces. This marks the evolution of a year’s strategies in the region. 2006 began with a surprise as Hamas candidates won free and democratic elections. The U.S. promptly ignored the people’s choice by declaring it would not work with a terrorist group (despite advice to the contrary from our Middle Eastern allies).
As the Palestinians have long been under a siege mentality, they endured the U.S. and Israeli withholding of funds. When “shock & embargo” did not work, the warmakers in the State Department pulled out their carrots for violence. Major funds are likely headed to one side in another American sponsored Middle Eastern civil war.
I want none of my tax dollars going to our violent tampering in the region. “Speak stupidly and carry a big stick” doesn’t seem to be working, unless our aim is to turn the Middle East into a huge war zone?
As the Palestinians have long been under a siege mentality, they endured the U.S. and Israeli withholding of funds. When “shock & embargo” did not work, the warmakers in the State Department pulled out their carrots for violence. Major funds are likely headed to one side in another American sponsored Middle Eastern civil war.
I want none of my tax dollars going to our violent tampering in the region. “Speak stupidly and carry a big stick” doesn’t seem to be working, unless our aim is to turn the Middle East into a huge war zone?
Texas CHIP Report Garners a D-
As the Texas legislature gathers in Austin to conduct the state’s business for the next two years, an important report hits the Senate Finance Committee today. The state of Children’s Health Insurance looks dire in the Lone Star State.
Does everything have to be bigger in Texas? We have the most uninsured children with over 20% without coverage. We took the biggest backslide on covering kids under CHIP. Once over 525,000 with low cost health insurance, it now stands around 325,000. How did we lose 200,000 kids?
Texas legislators employed the same strategies our President wants to use on Medicaid. Premium sharing, higher deductibles and increased co-pays drove many off the plan. Others failed new qualifying tests or didn’t have the stomach to re-apply more often.
States love to garner their share of available federal funding, whether it’s highways, schools or health care. Texas has never used its CHIP allotment, even with a three year window to draw down funds. The unused Texas money goes back in a pot to be shared with other states that covered more people.
During the time our country’s uninsured grew from 42 to nearly 47 million, Texas dropped 200,000 kids from their CHIP rolls. So much for Texans caring for their own…
Does everything have to be bigger in Texas? We have the most uninsured children with over 20% without coverage. We took the biggest backslide on covering kids under CHIP. Once over 525,000 with low cost health insurance, it now stands around 325,000. How did we lose 200,000 kids?
Texas legislators employed the same strategies our President wants to use on Medicaid. Premium sharing, higher deductibles and increased co-pays drove many off the plan. Others failed new qualifying tests or didn’t have the stomach to re-apply more often.
States love to garner their share of available federal funding, whether it’s highways, schools or health care. Texas has never used its CHIP allotment, even with a three year window to draw down funds. The unused Texas money goes back in a pot to be shared with other states that covered more people.
During the time our country’s uninsured grew from 42 to nearly 47 million, Texas dropped 200,000 kids from their CHIP rolls. So much for Texans caring for their own…
Thursday, February 01, 2007
Cheney’s Give Free Pass to Dobson & Co
Does anyone else find it odd all the anger over a question is aimed at the asker, not the people casting aspersions on Mary Cheney’s pregnancy in a committed same sex relationship? Wolf Blitzer takes it on the chin while James Dobson et al skate away unscathed.
Dick Cheney became testy last week when CNN's Wolf Blitzer asked him what he thought of conservatives who are critical of his daughter's pregnancy. Cheney told Blitzer he was "over the line."
In a brief interview with The New York Times after Wednesday's panel, Mary Cheney said she agreed that Blitzer had crossed a line. "He was trying to get a rise out of my father," she said.
When pressed, the mother-to-be finally weighed in on her detractors.
Glamour editor Cindi Leive asked Cheney during the panel discussion if she had anything to say to conservatives such as James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, who have criticized her pregnancy, asserting that children should be raised by heterosexual married couples.
She responded, "Every piece of remotely responsible research that has been done in the last 20 years on this issue has shown there is no difference between children who are raised by same-sex parents and children who are raised by opposite-sex parents. What matters is that children are being raised in a stable, loving environment."
Now why couldn’t Grandpa Dick say that instead of taking a shot at a reporter? I guess he didn’t want to hit another big Republican heavyweight in the face…
Dick Cheney became testy last week when CNN's Wolf Blitzer asked him what he thought of conservatives who are critical of his daughter's pregnancy. Cheney told Blitzer he was "over the line."
In a brief interview with The New York Times after Wednesday's panel, Mary Cheney said she agreed that Blitzer had crossed a line. "He was trying to get a rise out of my father," she said.
When pressed, the mother-to-be finally weighed in on her detractors.
Glamour editor Cindi Leive asked Cheney during the panel discussion if she had anything to say to conservatives such as James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, who have criticized her pregnancy, asserting that children should be raised by heterosexual married couples.
She responded, "Every piece of remotely responsible research that has been done in the last 20 years on this issue has shown there is no difference between children who are raised by same-sex parents and children who are raised by opposite-sex parents. What matters is that children are being raised in a stable, loving environment."
Now why couldn’t Grandpa Dick say that instead of taking a shot at a reporter? I guess he didn’t want to hit another big Republican heavyweight in the face…
Bush’s International Game of RISK Goes Boardless
As a college kid George Bush loved to play high stakes games of RISK, the game of global domination. The older version finds himself moving real blocks of military assets around the Middle East in his “New Way Forward” in Iraq.
Meanwhile the game threatens to jump off our earthy stage, into the final frontier of space. Recently the U.S. got its undies in a wad over China’s newfound ability to take out space satellites, something America achieved in the mid 1980’s. The Red Scare responded to world outrage by suggesting an agreement outlawing weapons in space.
"Since other countries care about this question and are opposed to weaponization of space and an arms race in space, then let us join hands to realize this goal," said Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu when asked to respond to criticism of the test by the United States and Japan.
But is the President in any mood for hand holding? Past efforts indicate George Bush wants space to be America’s exclusive domain for defensive weapons.
President Bush signed an order in October tacitly asserting the U.S. right to space weapons and opposing the development of treaties or other measures restricting them.
In recent years, China and Russia have called for an international space treaty but encountered strong opposition from the United States. The two countries presented a draft outline for a treaty to prevent the deployment of weapons in space to the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva in June 2002. The U.S. objected at the time, saying the 1967 Outer Space Treaty provided sufficient guarantees against the weaponization of space.
Given this pattern, it looks like President Bush wants to take his game of international domination off the board and into space. At what RISK for future world peace?
Meanwhile the game threatens to jump off our earthy stage, into the final frontier of space. Recently the U.S. got its undies in a wad over China’s newfound ability to take out space satellites, something America achieved in the mid 1980’s. The Red Scare responded to world outrage by suggesting an agreement outlawing weapons in space.
"Since other countries care about this question and are opposed to weaponization of space and an arms race in space, then let us join hands to realize this goal," said Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu when asked to respond to criticism of the test by the United States and Japan.
But is the President in any mood for hand holding? Past efforts indicate George Bush wants space to be America’s exclusive domain for defensive weapons.
President Bush signed an order in October tacitly asserting the U.S. right to space weapons and opposing the development of treaties or other measures restricting them.
In recent years, China and Russia have called for an international space treaty but encountered strong opposition from the United States. The two countries presented a draft outline for a treaty to prevent the deployment of weapons in space to the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva in June 2002. The U.S. objected at the time, saying the 1967 Outer Space Treaty provided sufficient guarantees against the weaponization of space.
Given this pattern, it looks like President Bush wants to take his game of international domination off the board and into space. At what RISK for future world peace?
Bush’s World Clashes with Reality
As the President speaks rosily of the American economy, the key savings rate statistic remained negative for all of 2006. It sunk to its lowest level since the Great Depression. In a speech yesterday on Wall Street Bush said:
"Workers are making more money. Their paychecks are going further. Consumers are confident. Investors are optimistic"
Later he blamed people’s failure to notice the good news, as they fail to utilize V.P. Cheney’s obvious "glass half full" mentality.
"I'm not surprised that some of the good economic news is overshadowed by the difficult news out of Iraq," Bush later told Fox News that same day.
Maybe people are reporting from their own pocketbook, Mr. President. The Commerce Department shared the savings rate for 2006 was a negative one percent. This means people spent more than they earned either by dipping into savings or taking on additional debt.
America had a negative savings rate in only 4 years since the statistic has been gathered. Two of those years were during the Great Depression, 1932 & 1933 while the other two occurred under the Bush administration, 2005 & 2006.
Are workers making more money? The Census Bureau’s median household income went up 1.1% between 2004 and 2005, the first increase since 1999.
What about the President’s greater buying power assertion? If their paychecks are going further why do people need to dip into savings? Is it to help Exxon/Mobil reach their astronomical profit figures? Or are they covering medical debt, the number one cause of bankruptcies (unaddressed in the Republican bankruptcy bill)?
Someone may figure out the answers to these questions, but I’m confident it won’t be President Bush. While Dick Cheney sees the glass half full on Iraq, most people see a half empty pint of blood. While George Bush sees the economy chugging along, many folks hear the glug, glug of their savings account emptying down the drain.
"Workers are making more money. Their paychecks are going further. Consumers are confident. Investors are optimistic"
Later he blamed people’s failure to notice the good news, as they fail to utilize V.P. Cheney’s obvious "glass half full" mentality.
"I'm not surprised that some of the good economic news is overshadowed by the difficult news out of Iraq," Bush later told Fox News that same day.
Maybe people are reporting from their own pocketbook, Mr. President. The Commerce Department shared the savings rate for 2006 was a negative one percent. This means people spent more than they earned either by dipping into savings or taking on additional debt.
America had a negative savings rate in only 4 years since the statistic has been gathered. Two of those years were during the Great Depression, 1932 & 1933 while the other two occurred under the Bush administration, 2005 & 2006.
Are workers making more money? The Census Bureau’s median household income went up 1.1% between 2004 and 2005, the first increase since 1999.
What about the President’s greater buying power assertion? If their paychecks are going further why do people need to dip into savings? Is it to help Exxon/Mobil reach their astronomical profit figures? Or are they covering medical debt, the number one cause of bankruptcies (unaddressed in the Republican bankruptcy bill)?
Someone may figure out the answers to these questions, but I’m confident it won’t be President Bush. While Dick Cheney sees the glass half full on Iraq, most people see a half empty pint of blood. While George Bush sees the economy chugging along, many folks hear the glug, glug of their savings account emptying down the drain.
Exxon’s Profits Alone Could Cover U.S. Hospital Uncompensated Care
Exxon/Mobil announced record profits of nearly $40 billion for 2006. Their cash flow from operations and sales stood at over $52 billion.
The company could write a check and cover hospital bills for all people with coverage. In 2005 this amounted to $28.8 billion.
While our country is fairly concerned about rising health care costs, energy profitability is celebrated, at least by the current occupant of the White House. In 2002 Exxon/Mobil averaged $2 billion in profit per quarter. By 2006 this grew fivefold to roughly $10 billion a quarter. In between a Republican Congress passed an Energy bill with $6 billion in subsidies to Big Oil.
What does it say about America that one corporation’s profits could easily pay the hospital bills for its citizens without health insurance? Do the President's free market solutions for containing health care costs inspire you as these same policies gave Exxon its gargantuan profits? You tell me…
The company could write a check and cover hospital bills for all people with coverage. In 2005 this amounted to $28.8 billion.
While our country is fairly concerned about rising health care costs, energy profitability is celebrated, at least by the current occupant of the White House. In 2002 Exxon/Mobil averaged $2 billion in profit per quarter. By 2006 this grew fivefold to roughly $10 billion a quarter. In between a Republican Congress passed an Energy bill with $6 billion in subsidies to Big Oil.
What does it say about America that one corporation’s profits could easily pay the hospital bills for its citizens without health insurance? Do the President's free market solutions for containing health care costs inspire you as these same policies gave Exxon its gargantuan profits? You tell me…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)