US Politics: Competence Crisis?

[Guest]

I always thought Republicans should like Carter more than they do, after all, he's the one who really got the ball rolling on the whole deregulation thing. I'm sure Reagan would've gotten things started if Carter hadn't, but Reagan was only able to do as much as he did because of Carter.

And the great Paul Volcker was a Carter appointee.

[Mad Monkey]

Wasn't he the one who mobilized evangelical Christians as a voting bloc?

[Sixshells]

.

Hmm, that would require a lot of well-paying jobs, as well as even more slightly lower-paying jobs. It's not a bad idea even if we never do get any weapons systems up there.

As far as the park goes, as I understand it the bill doesn't actually cover the actual surface of the moon, just the NASA equipment left behind and things like footprints left behind. (Don't ask me how you can protect a footprint on the moon's surface without controlling the moon's surface).

According to the Outer Space Treaty, individual states retain ownership of objects they launched into outer space. So even if the terms of the treaty prohibit a state to claim ownership of the Moon or part of it, the US have scattered enough objects on it that they can base their park on.

I imagine their not signing (like most other countries) the Moon Treaty placing the Moon under the oversight of the international community helps too.

[DanteGabriel]

Wasn't he the one who mobilized evangelical Christians as a voting bloc?

I'd say that was more Pat Robertson and Ralph Reed. Carter has written numerous times, and quite movingly, about his dismay at the takeover and politicization of the Southern Baptists.

[The Progressive]

I'm predicting that the individual mandate under the ACA will be delayed as well.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/10/us/politics/house-gop-pushes-delay-on-individual-mandate-in-health-law.html

[Fez]

I'm predicting that the individual mandate under the ACA will be delayed as well.

http://www.nytimes.c...health-law.html

I could only see it happens if instead of a delay, the first year is just cancelled. The individual mandate is supposed to transition in slowly over 3 years, with the penalty being $95 in 2014, $325 in 2015, and $695 or 1% of income (whichever is greater) in 2016 and all future years. If they just skip 2014 and jump straight to $325 in 2015, I could maybe see that; but I can't see them pushing back the entire timeline by a year so that full implementation isn't until 2017. Its just too central to the bill working. If healthy young people don't sign up for coverage (and Massachusetts shows that they will, even if the penalty is cheaper than coverage for some) than premiums get out of hand and the whole thing just falls apart.

[Kouran]

I havent seen anyone post about this yet, but CBO estimates the deficet will come in lower than orginally projected.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323368704578594020152453486.html

I guess that sequestration was really a super bad thing eh? By the way how are the furloughs?

[Fez]

I guess that sequestration was really a super bad thing eh? By the way how are the furloughs?

Of course it was. Even if your only goal is deficit reduction, why would you pick a policy that only lasts for ten years and then allows the budget to shoot back up again in 2022?

And why don't you ask them? And then there's all this, outside the furloughs.

[sToNED_CAT]

I'm predicting that the individual mandate under the ACA will be delayed as well.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/10/us/politics/house-gop-pushes-delay-on-individual-mandate-in-health-law.html

I read something interesting in the article - how the fuck is Obama even able to unilaterally delay the implementation, when the law says it must go into effect after Dec 2013? Is there something included in that law that allows executive to do this?

[Fez]

I read something interesting in the article - how the fuck is Obama even able to unilaterally delay the implementation, when the law says it must go into effect after Dec 2013? Is there something included in that law that allows executive to do this?

It might not be there for the individual mandate, since it is so central, but almost every provision of the law has lines that are essentially "HHS Secretary has the discretion to do whatever s/he wants." That's why Sebelius is appointing people to that payment advisory board after Republicans refused to (it was supposed to be legislative appointments, half from each party), why she gets final say in approving all sorts of state Medicaid decision, why she gets to move funds around in ways that agencies aren't usually allowed, and why she can delay things so often.

Its also why everyone knew that Sebelius was going to remain during Obama's second term, there's just way too much stuff going on for anyone else to be brought up to speed.

In other news, the Pennsylvania Attorney General (which is a statewide elected office in PA, currently held by a Democrat) announced that she won't defend the state's gay marriage ban in a suit brought earlier this week. Its unclear so far if anyone else in the state government (nearly all Republicans) has standing, and considering what SCOTUS just decided in California's Prop 8 case, this may mean that the ban is dead; just as soon as a judge can issue a ruling that is.

Eta: the employer mandate is IRS, not HHS ofc, but they generally have the same discretion in the parts of the law they are involved in.

[TrackerNeil]

In other news, the Pennsylvania Attorney General (which is a statewide elected office in PA, currently held by a Democrat) announced that she won't defend the state's gay marriage ban in a suit brought earlier this week. Its unclear so far if anyone else in the state government (nearly all Republicans) has standing, and considering what SCOTUS just decided in California's Prop 8 case, this may mean that the ban is dead; just as soon as a judge can issue a ruling that is.

Interesting. Of course, Douchebag-in-Chief Tom Corbett will no doubt rupture himself to defend the law, which may change the calculus, but this is still a good thing. I could totally see Kathleen Kane being Pennsylvania's first female governor, assuming Allyson Schwartz doesn't get there first.

[Fez]

Interesting. Of course, Douchebag-in-Chief Tom Corbett will no doubt rupture himself to defend the law, which may change the calculus, but this is still a good thing. I could totally see Kathleen Kane being Pennsylvania's first female governor, assuming Allyson Schwartz doesn't get there first.

Yeah, Corbett would obviously want to, and he was named a defendant in the case (filed Tuesday). I'm just not sure of the legal structure of PA, and what role the AG has in defending the state government; whether its the only option or if the executive branch can step up.

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

$1.8 Million gets you a European ambassadorship

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/10/obama-donors-top-embassy-jobs-rewards

Barack Obama has rewarded some of his most active campaign donors with plum jobs in foreign embassies, with the average amount raised by recent or imminent appointees soaring to $1.8m per post, according to a Guardian analysis.

The practice is hardly a new feature of US politics, but career diplomats in Washington are increasingly alarmed at how it has grown. One former ambassador described it as the selling of public office...

..."It has the effect of diminishing perhaps the sense that the US is treating these countries with the respect they deserve," Pickering said.

[thecryptile]

$1.8 Million gets you a European ambassadorship

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/10/obama-donors-top-embassy-jobs-rewards

I thought they outlawed patronage/spoils system back in the 19th century.

[Fez]

$1.8 Million gets you a European ambassadorship

http://www.guardian....sy-jobs-rewards

Cheaper than I thought actually.

I thought they outlawed patronage/spoils system back in the 19th century.

There is a long standing tradition in the US that all ambassadorships to close allies and non-geopolitically significant nations that are fun to visit go to campaign donors and party faithful. Fairly small-time career bureaucrats get the ambassadorships to small countries that rich Americans don't like visiting, and its only important countries that aren't close allies that get what people generally think of an ambassador. Think Russia, China, Turkey, etc.

[Shryke]

ie - the ambassador to Antiga is largely irrelevant, so it goes to a buddy who likes caribbean weather

[Maithanet]

There is a long standing tradition in the US that all ambassadorships to close allies and non-geopolitically significant nations that are fun to visit go to campaign donors and party faithful. Fairly small-time career bureaucrats get the ambassadorships to small countries that rich Americans don't like visiting, and its only important countries that aren't close allies that get what people generally think of an ambassador. Think Russia, China, Turkey, etc.

Yeah I remember hearing on NPR about how much career diplomats hate this, and it is essentially saying that their job is irrelevant, because someone with no skills whatsoever can be placed as the boss of the entire embassy/consulate. In general the deputy ambassador (a career diplomat) does all the day to day work of the ambassador as well as holding the hand of the incompetant political appointee.

In addition, the report (it was maybe 6 months ago I heard this) said that the number of political appointments hasn't changed much from administration to administration, and that the Obama appointments were pretty standard in that regard. But it also said that we shouldn't assume that this is just tiny countries like Trinidad and Tobago that are getting these plush appointments. Even countries like France and Japan can have ambassadors be people who do not speak the language and have no diplomatic experience.

[The Undead Martyr]

Yeah I remember hearing on NPR about how much career diplomats hate this, and it is essentially saying that their job is irrelevant, because someone with no skills whatsoever can be placed as the boss of the entire embassy/consulate. In general the deputy ambassador (a career diplomat) does all the day to day work of the ambassador as well as holding the hand of the incompetant political appointee.

In addition, the report (it was maybe 6 months ago I heard this) said that the number of political appointments hasn't changed much from administration to administration, and that the Obama appointments were pretty standard in that regard. But it also said that we shouldn't assume that this is just tiny countries like Trinidad and Tobago that are getting these plush appointments. Even countries like France and Japan can have ambassadors be people who do not speak the language and have no diplomatic experience.

I wonder if this is a major contributor to how the world sees the US- that is to say: overbearing boorish pricks. Though I think drone strikes as the emblem of US's casually intruding upon foreign sovereignty, and the history of interfering in other country's affairs (to put it mildly) are the bigger beefs.

[Fez]

Yeah I remember hearing on NPR about how much career diplomats hate this, and it is essentially saying that their job is irrelevant, because someone with no skills whatsoever can be placed as the boss of the entire embassy/consulate. In general the deputy ambassador (a career diplomat) does all the day to day work of the ambassador as well as holding the hand of the incompetant political appointee.

In addition, the report (it was maybe 6 months ago I heard this) said that the number of political appointments hasn't changed much from administration to administration, and that the Obama appointments were pretty standard in that regard. But it also said that we shouldn't assume that this is just tiny countries like Trinidad and Tobago that are getting these plush appointments. Even countries like France and Japan can have ambassadors be people who do not speak the language and have no diplomatic experience.

Right. But countries like France and Japan are so close to us that numerous permanent lines of communication are open between high levels of our state department and theirs; thus largely negating the real need for an ambassador (as opposed to staff, who do many important things).

There's only a handful of countries where those channels don't really exist and that there's a need to have high level talks, and those are the ones where the ambassador is someone with extensive knowledge of the country, experience with foreign affairs, and has reached a high enough bureaucratic/political status that they aren't considered someone who can just be walked over. And outside of those few countries, ambassadors really don't need to do much, which is why they are a reward to people who want them.

[TrackerNeil]

Yeah I remember hearing on NPR about how much career diplomats hate this, and it is essentially saying that their job is irrelevant, because someone with no skills whatsoever can be placed as the boss of the entire embassy/consulate. In general the deputy ambassador (a career diplomat) does all the day to day work of the ambassador as well as holding the hand of the incompetant political appointee.

Oh, I totally need a job like this! (As the incompetent political appointee, I mean.)