The Administration

Never a favorite of anyone, leaders of the beleaguered Internal Revenue Service find themselves under media scrutiny and the microscope of Congress’s top investigators for apparently singling out conservative organizations for increased scrutiny in their attempts to form social welfare organizations. Since the buck stops in the oval office, President Obama is being blamed for the sins that the IRS may have committed. He shouldn’t bear the responsibility of this unfortunate episode. The IRS brought it on itself.

With the revelation that the Department of Justice secretly obtained two months of The Associated Press’ telephone records and used security badge access records to track James Rosen’s visits to the State Department, along with a warrant to search Rosen’s personal emails, there has been a rush in the mainstream media to declare the DOJ’s actions to be part of what they claim to be President Obama’s aggressive pursuit of those who would leak secret information to the press.

Read more...

The May 14 audit report of the Treasury Inspector General (IG) for Tax Administration has created quite a stir. Within days of the initial news of the report’s findings, the Acting Commissioner of the IRS resigned, the Justice Department launched a criminal investigation and the House Ways and Means Committee held the first of what promises to be a lengthy series of hearings. Only the further disclosure of relevant facts will tell us where on the spectrum of governmental misconduct this episode belongs.

Unfortunately, many people, including politicians in both parties, are not prepared to wait for the orderly development of the facts. They want swift and dramatic action, and explanations as to why such actions against those responsible have not already been taken. Already, condemnation by politicians has extended beyond IRS personnel to include high-level officials in the Treasury Department and the White House for their failure to intervene more quickly, and take summary disciplinary action against the IRS personnel involved.    

Read more...

Mike Froman’s nomination to be U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) is a good thing. The depth and breadth of his experience as well as his demonstrated ability to close deals all bode well for a successful tenure in a position that could use a few victories. It also suggests the president has become serious about trade – he would not have moved his top international economic adviser across the street if he didn’t want to accomplish anything. And a significant agenda awaits him:  two of the most significant trade negotiations in our history: the Transpacific Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). A USTR who can get both of those done will be one of the most successful in our history.

Read more...

Political pundits and other recent critical voices, even from supporters of President Obama, contend that this president’s inability to get even watered-down legislation passed that would expand background checks on gun purchases was clear evidence that he didn’t know how to use the power of the presidency.

Read more...

As someone who has spent much of his adult life in politics and journalism, I find the action by the Department of Justice in targeting The Associated Press and its reporters as utterly reprehensible and crying out for some dramatic response.

Let me set the scene.

It is one of the great myths of our political debate that we must choose between economic growth and environmental protection. Gina McCarthy, President Obama’s nominee to head up the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), has spent her career proving this a false choice.
 
McCarthy has been an advocate for crafting solutions to environmental challenges, while simultaneously increasing market certainties and creating opportunities. For the business community, certainty translates into confidence, and confidence leads to more investment, more jobs and more robust growth.

This week the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions will hear from Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez, the President’s nominee to serve as secretary of Labor. Having been in his position, I know he’s probably busy preparing his opening remarks and doing his homework to learn as much as possible about the new job for which he’s about to undergo a very public interview.
 
In 2003 and 2004 I was fortunate to work with Tom on my Commission on Diversity in the Healthcare Professions and found him to be an engaging, thoughtful individual dedicated to public service and able to work with all. 

The House of Representatives will vote this week on Preventing Greater Uncertainty in Labor-Management Relations Act (H.R. 1120), a bill which stops the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) from continuing to issue decisions in defiance of a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit holding that the board is without lawful authority to do so. The bill deserves bi-partisan support.
 
The bill serves three purposes: first, it eliminates the uncertainty that has arisen in the labor-management community that is being exacerbated by the three-member board continuing to issue decisions; second, it sends a message that Congress intends to protect the U.S. Senate’s role in the political appointment process; and third, it provides an example to other executive branch agencies who may think that the line has been crossed and that impertinent behavior toward a federal circuit court is now in vogue and can be copied.

This Thursday, when the Senate holds its hearing on President Obama’s nomination of Gina McCarthy for EPA administrator, attention is likely to be focused on the many costly rules that EPA has issued during the last four years, and the additional ones now planned. During the president’s first term,  the administration issued more than 200 economically significant new rules each involving more than $100 million in new annual costs -- a record high for any president’s first term -- and EPA alone accounted for more than 25 new economically significant final rules, with annual costs in the billions of dollars by EPA’s own estimates.