Tag Archive: George H.W. Bush

Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency with Elon Musk — failure or fearful?

Disciplined enough to run the federal government?

Earlier this week, Donald Trump announced that he would create a new Department of Government Efficiency when he gets into the White House next year. Trump stated that this agency would be led by Elon Musk and businessman turned Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy. First of all, it seems comically ironic that (a) an entire new government department would be created to show how to make government more efficient, and (b) it would need to be headed by two people instead of one. So much for Republicans claiming for decades that they are “the party of smaller government.”

Along with that funny part, if it were to be a true Cabinet-level department (Defense, Education, Justice, etc.), or a federal agency (Federal Communications Commission, Environmental Protection Agency, etc.), generally this Department of Government Efficiency would need to be created and funded by Congress. That could take a long time, and run into many objections and amendments. So more likely, it would be an “Office” or some other Executive Branch or White House creation well below the Cabinet Department level.

If that happens, some folks might not take this office seriously. However, a quick look at a similar office from a few decades ago might indicate that a Government Efficiency Office, Agency or Board could have real power and do real damage. Specifically, in 1989, President George H.W. Bush created the Council on Competitiveness, and put Vice President Dan Quayle in charge of it. This innocuous-sounding Council was described as having “responsibility for reducing the regulatory burden on the economy.”  Essentially it was a White House back door for Republican corporate executives and lobbyists to come in with deregulatory wish lists, from environmental rules to health and safety rules and more.

The council worked closely with the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget to carry out OMB’s regulatory review and the development of the regulatory program.

Not every destructive government action requires Congress to legislate. A lot of good or bad can be done in the process to implement, or repeal, rules and regulations that govern much of our lives. It is no secret that the incoming Trump administration seeks to repeal all kinds of regulations that Americans rely on for their safety and security, in areas such as the environment, transportation, workplace health and safety, food and drug safety, etc. Corporations obviously want such regulatory unburdening to reduce their costs and increase their profits. It’s a good bet that, as with the previous Council on Competitiveness, such corporate deregulation would be the principal function of the new “Department of Government Efficiency.” And if legislation is further required to allow companies to run amok, our Congress is about to be fully majority Republican, and no doubt will be standing by to serve their corporate overlords.

Perhaps the best we can hope for is that this new proposed government office fails to deliver due to the egos, incompetence and inattention of those in charge.

Photo by Steve Jurvetson, used under Creative Commons license. https://is.gd/xlJwF8

 

The speech that set off the MAGA terrorists — in 1992

Right wing terrorists erect gallows and noose at U.S. Capitol, Jan. 6, 2021

If you do not recognize the name Patrick Buchanan, he is the right wing Republican extremist who years ago helped motivate the MAGA types whose successors are harming America and threatening U.S. government officials today. Buchanan’s long background in Republican politics encompasses work for GOP presidents from  Richard Nixon to Ronald Reagan. This work included writing speeches filled with red meat for the Republican base, and coining the term “Silent Majority” for Nixon, a white power dog whistle. In between these White House stints, Buchanan was the co-host of CNN‘s Crossfire (note: the author worked on the Crossfire program), pioneering the “food fight” format that is so prevalent on cable TV news today, where Buchanan bullied many liberal guests. When Buchanan went to work for President Ronald Reagan, he caused controversy by criticizing Israel “and its amen corner in the United States,” and continued a long-running apology campaign for Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. The Buchanan Nazi apology tour reached its nadir when Buchanan encouraged Reagan to visit a cemetery in Bitburg, Germany where members of the Waffen-SS were buried, and to say that these Nazi soldiers “were victims, just as surely as the victims in the concentration camps.”

The difference between George H.W. Bush and Donald Trump

Former President George H.W. Bush

Former President George H.W. Bush, who died last Friday night at the age of 94, was a Republican through and through. Accordingly, Democrats would rightfully take issue with almost all of Bush’s presidential actions and policies. Yet, virtually all leading Democrats, including Bill and Hillary Clinton, Barack and Michelle Obama, Jimmy Carter, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Adam Schiff and others, have released messages of sincere and glowing praise for Bush. What’s going on?

Democratic campaign theme for the 2018 midterm elections

Knotted Gun sculpture, New York City

Last month, the Democratic Party announced that it would run an anti-corruption campaign against Donald Trump and his administration in the 2018 midterm elections. We suggested that the Democrats also campaign on what they stand for, and, a few days later, the Democrats did something ingenious along those lines when they proposed that the Trump/Republican tax cuts be rolled back and the proceeds be used to fund teacher raises and school improvements such as new textbooks. Since we’ve gone through numerous special elections and primaries already, it’s time for the Democratic Party to roll out a specific, national campaign for the midterms that ties these ideas and actions together. We have the following suggestions:

The Democrats’ ticking time bomb

Hillary Clinton, 67, at Tom Harkin Steak Fry, September 2014

Hillary Clinton, 67, at Tom Harkin Steak Fry, September 2014

The post-election analysis of the Democratic Party’s massive losses has covered numerous factors, including Republican dark money, a lack of a unified Democratic message, and historic trends for the sixth year of a two-term incumbent president. Some pundits say “just wait until 2016” when the Democrats will make a stunning comeback, winning the White House and retaking the U.S. Senate. However, few of these analysts mention a potential time bomb that could spoil the Democrats’ 2016 election chances. That time bomb is age.

Messaging Maxim #4: Feed the Narrative

MSNBC’s Ed Schultz solved a 2012 election mystery on Wednesday, by featuring the man who shot the infamous Willard Mitt Romney “47% video” in a one-on-one interview. What made the video by bartender Scott Prouty so devastating to Romney’s presidential campaign was that Romney’s controversial “47%” remarks, as well as other statements, such as those regarding a brutal Chinese sweatshop that Romney visited with the purpose of purchasing for Bain Capital, fed into a narrative that already existed about Romney as:

Read their hips, not their lips

The best political communication in the world ultimately won’t help politicians if their actions don’t match their rhetoric. President George H.W. Bush learned this lesson when he campaigned in 1988 on “read my lips, no new taxes” and then lost both credibility with and votes from Republicans when, as President, he signed a tax increase. The Republican Party and President Obama each face similar challenges today.

Republican Politics of Projection

As a younger voter in 1988, I remember when then-Vice President and presidential candidate George H.W. Bush stood in front of Boston Harbor and slammed his opponent, Massachusetts Governor Mike Dukakis, for the pollution in Boston Harbor. I was shocked because the U.S. had just gone through eight years of a Reagan-Bush administration that had attacked and dismantled every environmental protection that it possibly could, including fighting the very cleanup of Boston Harbor.  This was perhaps the beginning of the modern Republican Politics of Projection — accusing your opponent of doing the very thing that you have been doing — as practiced by Bush’s campaign manager, Lee Atwater.

Atwater had a young protégé, Karl Rove, who perfected the Republican Politics of Projection during George W. Bush’s presidency. Thus, for example, we had Bush administration officials approving and abetting the kidnapping and torture of suspects and the illegal warrantless wiretapping of Americans at home, then turning around and accusing those who criticized such actions of “hypocrisy” and being “out of bounds”.

Today, the Republican Politics of Projection continues in full force. Republicans in Congress vote for Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget that would end Medicare as we know it, then raise phony objections about Democrats “cutting Medicare” when the Affordable Care Act cut funds from a private program called Medicare Advantage that is not part of the actual Medicare benefit. Likewise, Republicans raise the spurious charge of “voter fraud” in order to commit the true voter fraud of vote suppression via unreasonable and unfair voter i.d. laws. Or how about when Republicans carp about Democratic-appointed or “activist” judges who “legislate from the bench”, when it is the Republican-appointed, so-called “conservative” judges who do this, such as in the infamous Bush v. Gore and Citizens United cases, with Republican approval. If New Jersey Governor Chris Christie were running for president today, Republicans would probably call President Obama “fat”.

The Republican Politics of Projection can be stated with the Republicans’ own simple term: hypocrisy. It is a very popular and effective tactic in the Republican playbook, and Democrats and progressives need to identify it and speak out whenever they see it, in order to lessen its power.