Now that the tweets and chatter has digested former Senator Chris Dodd's statements about SOPA and PIPA, the response was crowdsourced and the result, a whitehouse petition to invetigate Chris Dodd for bribery. You too can sign it at this link. I did, for the simple reason that on page 18 of yesterdays New York Times there was this gem of an article:
Soon after he retired last year as one of the leading liberals in Congress, former Representative William D. Delahunt of Massachusetts started his own lobbying firm with an office on the 16th floor of a Boston skyscraper. One of his first clients was a small coastal town that has agreed to pay him $15,000 a month for help in developing a wind energy project.
Amid the revolving door of congressmen-turned-lobbyists, there is nothing particularly remarkable about Mr. Delahunt’s transition, except for one thing. While in Congress, he personally earmarked $1.7 million for the same energy project.
So today, his firm, the Delahunt Group, stands to collect $90,000 or more for six months of work from the town of Hull, on Massachusetts Bay, with 80 percent of it coming from the pot of money he created through a pair of Energy Department grants in his final term in office, records and interviews show.
It's time to stop the revolving door of politicians who abuse the trust of the American people to do the right thing for the public good. Dodd's implied bribery is just another form the the same old self-serving thing.
Word tricking accross the tuebs is that Harry Reid is pulling the vote on SOPA. But our former Senator Chris Dodd is showing temper tantrum on of all places foxnews.
"Candidly, those who count on quote 'Hollywood' for support need to understand that this industry is watching very carefully who's going to stand up for them when their job is at stake," Dodd told Fox News. "Don't ask me to write a check for you when you think your job is at risk and then don't pay any attention to me when my job is at stake."
Dodd, who became CEO of the Motion Picture Association of America after leaving the Senate in 2011, noted the movie "Avatar" was stolen by online pirates 21 million times. Such acts, he said, threaten to decimate his industry.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/
Retiring from the Senate shouldn’t be such a painful experience, but for Chris Dodd, a long farewell speech highlights why he needed to retire. Let’s hone in on Dodd’s defense of the filibuster.
I appreciate the frustration many have with the slow pace of the legislative progress. And I certainly share some of my colleagues’ anger with the repetitive use and abuse of the filibuster. Thus, I can understand the temptation to change the rules that make the Senate so unique—and, simultaneously, so frustrating.
But whether such a temptation is motivated by a noble desire to speed up the legislative process, or by pure political expedience, I believe such changes would be unwise.
Dodd supporters have been emphasizing the work he has been putting in on several major issues in Washington for the benefit of middle class consumers and taxpayers.
The Hill reports that, in a joint letter to President Obama, Wal-Mart and nemesis SEIU (the Service Employees International Union) have expressed support for passage of a legal requirement for employer provided health insurance.
Excerpt:
“It is significant that Wal-Mart, one of the country’s largest employers, and SEIU, one of the country’s major unions, have joined together to call for the enactment of health reform that will lower costs and assure quality and affordable healthcare for all Americans,” White House Office of Health Reform Director Nancy-Ann DeParle said in a statement. “The president is committed to signing health reform legislation built on those principles this year.”
This is significant on a number of facets, not the least of which is that SEIU is a principal “Partner Organization” of the advocacy group Wal-Mart Watch and has successfully unionized a number of Wal-Mart stores and forced major concessions from the country’s largest employer.
The Hill article offers a good brief on the debate over health care. The letter itself can be found here courtesy of WSJ.
Both worth reading. Continue reading
The Advocate has decided to lead with a story on how Senator Chris Dodd is looking old these days. Funny, I thought newspaper journalism was supposed to cover things like politics, policy and issues instead of succumbing to the People Magazine subjects of looks, likes and who wore what. But tellingly, buried in the article was this factoid:
At 64, Dodd falls in the middle of the Senate, where ages range from 42 for U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., to 91 for U.S. Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va. Three are in their 80s, 21 in their 70s, 34 in their 60s, 21 in their 50s and nine in their 40s.
Only 9 Senators are in their 40s? What’s the significance? It means that only 9 Senators, have lived in the post industrialized information age economy exclusively. It means that only 9 Senators don’t automatically insert the world new-fangled to describe tweets, blackberry, WIFI, or Tang. It means that GM gets bailed out with tax dollars while IBM’s money losing personal computer division got sold to a Chinese manufacturer.
Back to Dodd:
“He seems to have aged within the last several months,” said Gary Rose, a professor of politics at Sacred Heart University in Fairfield. “His face seems more stressed, and he just seems as if he doesn’t have that youthful appearance many have always associated with him.”
The second paragraph of a Dodd story, is a professor of politics discussing Dodd’s facial features? It’s farcical!
Richard Hanley, a journalism professor at Quinnipiac, said that Dodd is not alone in feeling the stress of the times, pointing out that President Barack Obama is showing more gray hair just two months into his term.
“The weight of the economic collapse is falling particularly hard on him because he is in a pivotal position in the Senate, but he is not alone. Stories have already been done about the graying of Obama’s hair. It is a stressful time for a lot of people,” Hanley said.
For Dodd, who has had a headful of thick white hair for more than a decade, the stress may be showing in deeper furrows in his brow and darker circles under his eyes.
What no suggestions of botox? Don’t expect Allure to be calling with freelance gigs.
Dodd’s hair was salt and pepper when he was first sworn in to the Senate back on Jan. 5, 1981. It had long since turned fully white by the time he assumed the chairmanship of the Senate Banking Committee on Jan. 4, 2007. He replaced Alabama U.S. Sen. Richard Shelby, who remains the ranking Republican on the committee and is 74 years old.
Shortly after taking the committee’s reins, Dodd went on the presidential campaign trail. During that campaign, Dodd changed his hairstyle and seemed to have trimmed his weight. Dodd’s campaign employed a make-up artist on at least three occasions, including spending $225 for makeup application when he officially threw his hat into the ring.
Now what was it that Jon Steward said to Jim Cramer about Cramers penchant for not covering the financial news? Oh yeah, something like — cover the friggin news! Dodd is the chair of that Banking Commitee, which makes news on a daily basis when it doesn’t provide overight and regulations on how tax payer money is being used to bail out all these bansk. Instead:
Shaw, who runs a Web blog (http://bagnewsnotes.typepad.com) that focuses on the political and media use of visual imagery, said the perception may be the result of weight gain.
“He is carrying about 15 more pounds now than when he was running for president back in August and November 2007,” Shaw said. “When you look at recent photos — over the AIG hearings and the craziness of two weeks ago — you are looking at a guy with a lot more gobble under the chin and more skin under the eyes.” As people have focused in on Dodd, that extra weight has left an impression that he is somehow older looking than a year ago, Shaw said. Another factor is the media itself, which typically selects its images to match the story narrative.
What next, a recommendation that Dodd write a diet book on how to lose weight while being stressed over the economy?
source: Advocate, Does Dodd look old? Blame it on Hi-def TV, By Peter Urban , 04/11/2009
Just when the pundits thought it was over for Chris Dodd, Joe Lieberman rides to the rescue. Excerpt:
Lieberman’s embrace of Dodd is the latest indication that the once-icy relationship between the Independent senator and the Democratic Party is beginning to thaw. Lieberman’s endorsement of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for president last year, coupled with his speech at the Republican National Convention last summer, infuriated Senate Democrats and nearly cost him his chairmanship of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. …
“The 2006 election was a terribly awkward time,” Dodd told The Hill. “We’ve been great friends for 40 years, so this was one of those moments when two people who had had a great relationship ran into a very awkward moment. He had to do what he had to do, and I was sort of stuck with what I had to do … But we just have a longstanding, deep friendship that goes beyond collegiality.”During the 2006 campaign, Dodd was quoted saying his decision to back Lamont was “very difficult.” …
Today, Lieberman’s support denies the GOP the opportunity to drive a wedge between Dodd and Lieberman and feed a scenario that could split the vote against Dodd. It was just such a scenario that eventually defeated Lamont in the 2006 general election — he won 40 percent of the vote, compared to 10 percent for Republican nominee Alan Schlesinger and 50 percent for Lieberman. …
Simmons did not respond to a request for comment, and another possible opponent, CNBC host Larry Kudlow, would not comment, according to a CNBC spokeswoman.
A senior GOP Senate aide pointed out that it remains to be seen whether Lieberman will show enthusiasm for helping Dodd, such as by cutting advertisements or appearing with Dodd on the campaign trail.
Bit of GOP wishful thinking there at the end, and its interesting that Caligiuri isn’t on The Hill reporter’s screen.
This isn’t such a surprise. To the dismay of Lieberhaters, and the consternation of Democrats in general, Dodd was a member of President Obama’s whip team supporting Lieberman’s retention as Chairman of the upper chamber’s Homeland Security Committee a few months ago. Without it, Lieberman would have been relegated to back-bencher status and probably made an early and ignominious exit from the Senate.
That decision by the new President and Connecticut’s senior Senator has already paid some measurable dividends on the Administration’s policy agenda. Now it may prove to be a meaningful factor in stabilizing Dodd’s flagging political popularity.
We shall see.
Source: J. Taylor Rushing, “Frenemies Dodd and Lieberman make nice” The Hill 11 March 2009. Continue reading
Awhile back I pointed out that there are a wealth of positions to be filled in the new government in Washington. One of the most sought-after appointments is the office of United States Attorney. This is the office that Dick Blumenthal occupied, positioning him to run for Attorney General. Kevin O’Connor, one-time candidate for Congress, is contemplating another run for office now that he’s left the position. The way this usually works is that the senior Senator from each state makes a recommendation to the Administration, which usually honors it and appoints the recommended choice.
The Hartford Courant reports today that Senator Dodd has formed a committee to vet potential candidates, including Senator Lieberman in the process. Excerpt:
The seven-member committee’s first task probably will be the screening of Connecticut’s next U.S. attorney. At least half a dozen lawyers already have expressed interest in the position, a relatively large and strong field of job-seekers compared with past years.
In addition to the U.S. attorney, Sens. Christopher J. Dodd and Joseph Lieberman said they will use the committee “to solicit, screen, and comment on candidates” for U.S. marshal and other “federal positions as appropriate,” perhaps including district judges.
Very interesting development. Devolving the power to appoint this way has a lot of implications. The report goes into some of them.
Worth reading.
Source Mahony, Edmund H. “Dodd And Lieberman Form Advisory Committee On Federal Appointments.” The Hartford Courant 06 March 2009 Continue reading
When the story broke last week that the Merrill Lynch rammed through executive bonuses in advance to merging with Bank of America, it set off a firestorm. Out of the $25 Billion that Merrill Lynch and Bank of America in TARP money last year, Merrill’s compensation committee voted to give nearly $4 billion in bonuses to executives. Talk about rewarding failure. Your company has just been taken over, you took taxpayer money to survive and here, take some taxpayer money home with you. As further insult, the now merged Bank of America and Merril Lynch will get another $20B in TARP money this year.
Then the story hit that overall Wall Street bonuses were at the same level as they were in 2004, that is to say sizable, but at least 44% less than last year, coming in at $18.4 million.
So then President Obama gets revved up at calls the practice shameful.
I saw an article today indicating that Wall Street bankers had given themselves $20 billion worth of bonuses — the same amount of bonuses as they gave themselves in 2004 — at a time when most of these institutions were teetering on collapse and they are asking for taxpayers to help sustain them, and when taxpayers find themselves in the difficult position that if they don’t provide help that the entire system could come down on top of our heads — that is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful.
While it’s a good thing that Obama addressed the issue, sort of, he missed the mark. Wall street firms that didn’t take bailout money, that are not teetering on collapse can dole out bonuses all they want. It’s the bailout grabbing firms that shouldn’t be able to grant bonuses with taxpayer money. And maybe a little bit more than that, because while I understand that divisions within these financial conglomerates can have profit centers, and those workers should be compensated, the issue is that the corporate management that holds the conglomerate together failed catastrophically and lost the money that was generated to pay those profits.
Instead of strings attatched to the money these firms are getting we get this platitude from Obama:
There will be time for them to make profits, and there will be time for them to get bonuses — now is not that time. And that’s a message that I intend to send directly to them, I expect Secretary Geithner to send to them — and Secretary Geithner already had to pull back one institution that had gone forward with a multimillion dollar jet plane purchase at the same time as they’re receiving TARP money. We shouldn’t have to do that because they should know better. And we will continue to send that message loud and clear.
Loud and clear? How about some specifics there? Is it so hard to say that any financial institution that gets fed bail out money can’t give out bonuses? Can we require the sell off of assets to help pay for the bailout funds? Things like carpets, and corporate jets and artwork?
Meanwhile Senator Chris Dodd, who has his own probles with coziness to Wall Street is out there with statements such as these:
“I’m going to be urging — in fact not urging, demanding — that the Treasury Department figures out some way to get the money back,” Dodd said. “This is unacceptable.”
As the chair of the Senate Banking Committee, Dodd was in a perfect place to put those strings on the bailout money in the first place. He didn’t. Now he wants to get the money back? How about the money going out now?
“Secretary Geithner already had to pull back one institution that had gone forward with a multimillion-dollar jet plane purchase at the same time as they’re receiving TARP money,” the president continued. “We shouldn’t have to do that.”
No we shouldn’t. But it starts with the legislation crafted doesn’t it?