Category: Scott Brooks
Massachusetts Senators Oppose Bush Address
By Scott Brooks
WASHINGTON — Amid a barrage of Democratic assaults on President Bush Tuesday, both before and after he delivered his State of the Union address, the Bay State’s two senators sharply criticized the president’s speech.
While many Americans awaited evidence of a “smoking gun” in Iraq, John F. Kerry and Edward M. Kennedy separately said they were unconvinced of the merits of Bush’s war plan. Kennedy, who said Congress will oppose Bush’s “non-solutions,” said he will introduce a resolution to require the president to reappear before Congress and “present convincing evidence of an immediate threat” before sending troops to Iraq.
“The president had an opportunity tonight to change the direction of this nation, and he failed,” Kennedy said in a statement. “He identified the right challenges, but I didn’t here anything approaching the right solutions for America.”
Kerry, whose verbal assaults on the president have been central to his early White House campaign, was equally clear in his statement: “The state of our union is strong; it’s the state of President Bush’s leadership that’s been so weak.”
Tuesday night’s criticisms cap off a week that saw highly publicized criticisms of the president from an array of Democratic leaders, including Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) and former President Bill Clinton. Both Kerry and Kennedy spoke out against the president in several speeches leading up to Tuesday night’s address.
Their criticisms weigh against a president whose latest approval ratings are hovering around 60 percent — well below the 83 percent Bush enjoyed during last year’s address. While presidential approval ratings tend to increase just after a national address, Kerry said Bush’s war message will produce no spike in popularity over the long term.
“Any time the president gets to talk to 58 million Americans for one hour in prime time, basically unopposed, he ought to be able to pop it up a little bit,” Kerry said. “The question is, where are you in a week?”
Both Kerry and Kennedy were wide-reaching in their criticisms, faulting the president on his economic stimulus plan, his support of privatized health care for seniors and particularly on his policy on Iraq.
“The American people wanted the president to reassure them that war is still the last resort,” Kennedy said. “He did not make a persuasive case that the threat is imminent and that war is the only alternative.”
Speaking before Bush’s address, Kerry said the administration has failed to educate Americans and their allies. Instead, he said, the administration has insulted other governments and alienated allies, noting Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s recent reference to Bush critics France and Germany as “old Europe.”
Saying the administration has handled its international role in a “unilateral, overbearing, high-handed way,” Kerry said the administration needs to be “a little less confrontational, a little less insulting” in building its case for war. He did not question the president’s threats against Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, but complained instead of Bush’s weak show of respect for the United Nations process.
“It’s not whether you do it; it’s how you do it,” he said. “I think this administration has made this road much more difficult by doing it in not a very effective way.
“If the administration had worked harder these past months at bringing people on board – and frankly, showing a little more respect to the process – we wouldn’t have as many allies as angry at us as they are,” Kerry said. “Clearly there is a gap here in compliance. “That puts him in breach.”
While leveling harsh words at the Bush camp, Kerry singled out Secretary of State Colin Powell as a voice of reason within the administration. Kerry said Powell’s recently elevated rhetoric should be an indication that Hussein is “on the wrong road.”
“If the rest of the administration had behaved the way Colin Powell has, people would have a greater sense of credibility in what they’re doing,” Kerry said.
Published in The New Bedford Standard Times, in Massachusetts.
Frank Takes Absence From Judiciary Committee Post
By Scott Brooks
WASHINGTON -- Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), who recently became the senior Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, was forced to step down from his other committee post Tuesday to make room for a freshman party member.
In an afternoon vote, the House Democratic Caucus turned down Frank's request to remain on the Judiciary Committee, where he has held a seat since entering Congress in 1981. Frank was granted a leave of absence, meaning he will retain his seniority on the committee should he return.
Looking to spread committee assignments among Democrats, new House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) rejected Frank's request for a waiver to keep his Judiciary seat. Frank had submitted the waiver request earlier this month in hopes of being excused from a Democratic Caucus rule that would keep him from holding his two committee slots.
Under the rule, a ranking member may not serve on certain secondary committees, including Judiciary. Frank was named ranking member of the Financial Services Committee Jan. 6.
One other ranking Democrat, Rep. George Miller (D-CA), was also turned down Tuesday after requesting a waiver to keep his seat on the Resources Committee. Frank said he had spoken with Miller before the decision to remove them from their seats, and neither had expected to be approved.
"That's the nature of life," Frank said. "Anytime you do anything, you can't do other things."
With committee openings largely unavailable, Pelosi invoked the Caucus rule to free up slots for freshman Democrats. Under the recommendation of the House Democratic Steering Committee, Frank's Judiciary seat was turned over to newly elected Rep. Linda T. Sanchez (D-CA).
Frank said his party was faced with special circumstances this year, noting that there would have been no freshmen on the Judiciary Committee had he not stepped down.
"I don't think it's a big political deal one way or the other," Frank said. "That's the rule. It's a matter of fairness."
Sarah Binder, an associate professor of political science at George Washington University, said the decision is probably not aimed at punishing Frank, who shares many of Pelosi's liberal values. Rather, she said, it is in keeping with Pelosi's rhetoric since her election.
"She wants to open up the party across ranks," Binder said. "What she's saying is, I want to reach deep down the ranks to find folks to represent the broad interests of the Democratic Caucus."
Frank said the demands on his time have increased since he assumed his new role on the Financial Services Committee, which oversees securities, banking, insurance and housing. He said he currently spends "several hours" every day on committee work, which includes building a new staff.
Although a waiver would have kept him on both committees, Frank said holding the two positions would have stretched him too thin.
"Given the workload here, this is really probably the best thing for me," Frank said. "I would have had a hard time being involved seriously in Judiciary matters."
Published in The New Bedford Standard Times, in Massachusetts.
Kennedy Spurs Democratic Opposition to GOP
By Scott Brooks
WASHINGTON--With his party already planning for a comeback in 2004, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) Tuesday urged Democrats to defy the Republican majority's agenda in the new Congress.
While delivering jabs at the Bush administration's economic stimulus plan and affirmative action policy, Kennedy called for a stronger and more unified Democratic vision.
"The lesson of 2002 is clear," he said in a luncheon speech at the National Press Club. "We will not succeed if we fail to stand up and speak out."
Though suggesting that the party work toward a compromise with Republicans on the economy, Kennedy said there is no political safety in going along with the GOP agenda. In particular, he called for opposition to the administration's conservative judicial nominees, criticizing President Bush's choices of nominees who, Kennedy charged, are "plainly hostile to civil rights."
Also, taking the first step toward endorsing a candidate for president, Kennedy took time to praise the state's junior senator, Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry, saying he is "doing a great job."
"I expect to support him, and I expect he'll win," Kennedy said.
Among his many criticisms of the Republican administration, Kennedy repeatedly hammered at Bush's handling of the conflict with Iraq. He argued that the debate over an Iraqi war has distracted the administration from the "more immediate threats to our security" posed by terrorism and the North Korean weapons program. Kennedy warned that an assault against Iraq would antagonize the al Qaeda terrorist network and crack the international coalition the administration worked to build in the aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001.
Instead, Kennedy pressed the administration to let United Nations inspectors continue their weapons search, disputing the White House's assertion last week that the discovery of empty warheads is "troubling and serious."
"I continue to be convinced that this is the wrong war at the wrong time," Kennedy said.
By contrast, Kennedy referred to increased tensions with North Korea as an "urgent crisis," saying the Communist nation is "the country most likely to market nuclear material and nuclear weapons to terrorists."
Kennedy said Bush was "AWOL" on the North Korean threat for most of his first two years as president, then reacted inappropriately by initially refusing to hold talks until the North Koreans made immediate concessions.
Of pressing concern, Kennedy said, is the possibility of losing focus on the war on terrorism. He asserted that the United States is unprepared for a chemical or biological attack, saying the country's railways, subways and seaports are not secure. "Plainly," he said, "we are unacceptably vulnerable at home."
The senator waged further attacks on the administration for what he described as the underfunded No Child Left Behind Act, as well as the president's proposed tax cuts. On the latter, Kennedy proposed a bipartisan compromise, in which tax cuts would be balanced with Democratic spending priorities.
Published in The New Bedford Standard Times, in Massachusetts.
