Congress has lost its mind...

[Urbane Guerrilla]

I think they are being cagey with the money to avoid an inflationary effect. Might be the smartest thing they do, given the ease with which fiat-money can inflate.

Even hard specie can inflate like a sonuvagun; look at sixteenth-century Spain and the flood of Americas gold that poured into it. Prices got bid up so high that it became more economical to do anything at all anywhere else but Spain. Gold flowed into Spain and then flowed right back out as the rest of Europe found profit in servicing Spain. Lacking internal investment or development, when the bubble collapsed, Spain devolved into a backwater.

[TheMercenary]

And no one seems to think this is out of line?

Baucus Nominated Girlfriend for U.S. Attorney
WASHINGTON - Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus defended recommending his girlfriend for appointment as Montana's U.S. attorney, saying Saturday that his one-time staff member and the former state prosecutor is "highly qualified" but eventually withdrew her nomination.

Baucus said that he began dating former state office director Melodee Hanes after they were both separated from their spouses. The Montana Democrat said they did not have an affair, but began dating while she worked for him.

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele called Saturday for a Senate Ethics Committee investigation of Baucus' actions. Steele said the panel should determine "why Senator Baucus put his personal needs above those of the people of Montana."

http://www.billingsgazette.com/news/...cc4c002e0.html

[glatt]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

And no one seems to think this is out of line?

Sure it's out of line, but it's what I would expect from a pig like Steele. He's just throwing mud and hoping it will stick.

Nothing wrong with recommending a friend or even a lover for a job they are qualified for. The ultimate decision to hire wouldn't have been his, and he wouldn't have been supervising her. I've recommended friends for jobs. Wouldn't you?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by glatt

Sure it's out of line, but it's what I would expect from a pig like Steele. He's just throwing mud and hoping it will stick.

Nothing wrong with recommending a friend or even a lover for a job they are qualified for. The ultimate decision to hire wouldn't have been his, and he wouldn't have been supervising her. I've recommended friends for jobs. Wouldn't you?

Are there no standards for getting people jobs that you are romantically involved with? I do believe there are such rules in government. Anyone who was in the running might be able to file a lawsuit to say there was significant bias in the hiring. It just opens up a number of possibilities for putting the process under a microscope. This is much different than "recommending" a friend for a job.

It just seems to have an appearance of impropriety and that is not a good thing when talking about elected officials getting government jobs for people they are romantically involved with.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

appearance of impropriety

Based on my reading of your article, this is exactly the opposite of an impropriety. Did you read the article? She was working in his office for him. He fell in love with her. Because he wanted to avoid the appearance of impropriety in his office, they thought it would be best if she didn't work for him any more. So he recommended her for another job for which she was qualified. The US Attorney job would have taken her back to the state where she had formerly been a highly regarded state prosecutor. The same type of work she had done so well before, but in a different court system.

It all wound up being moot though, because she found an even better job without his help.

The thing this demonstrates is that the Republicans here are just throwing mud and hoping some will stick. There is nothing to investigate. The facts are all known, and they make Baucus look pretty good and Steele look like a pig.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by glatt

Based on my reading of your article, this is exactly the opposite of an impropriety. Did you read the article? She was working in his office for him. He fell in love with her. Because he wanted to avoid the appearance of impropriety in his office, they thought it would be best if she didn't work for him any more. So he recommended her for another job for which she was qualified. The US Attorney job would have taken her back to the state where she had formerly been a highly regarded state prosecutor. The same type of work she had done so well before, but in a different court system.

It all wound up being moot though, because she found an even better job without his help.

The thing this demonstrates is that the Republicans here are just throwing mud and hoping some will stick. There is nothing to investigate. The facts are all known, and they make Baucus look pretty good and Steele look like a pig.

I guess I read a few of the articles and they ran together. I did not read that, "Because he wanted to avoid the appearance of impropriety in his office, they thought it would be best if she didn't work for him any more." But you know that when someone with his power calls up the other guy and says, "hey I have a great person I think you should consider for a job", it appears that favors are being done and preferential treatment is being given for back door deals. If I was one of the other 2 people being considered for the job I would make a huge deal out of it.

[TheMercenary]

And the beat goes on...

Rules for Congress Curb but Don’t End Junkets

WASHINGTON — Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., a Wisconsin Republican, toured a prince’s vineyard and castle in Liechtenstein and spent an afternoon at a ski resort in the Alps — all at the expense of a group of European companies.

Representative Danny K. Davis, an Illinois Democrat, got the dignitary treatment when a big donor flew him to Inner Mongolia to lobby for a new medical supplies factory in rural China.

And Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Florida Republican, on another privately sponsored trip, stayed at the historic King David Hotel in Jerusalem and attended a gala party near the Western Wall as part of a weeklong conference that lobbyists and executives paid as much as $18,500 to attend.

Despite changes intended to curb Congressional junkets, some lawmakers and even their families continue to take trips hosted by private groups and companies that revel in their access to Washington power brokers.

An examination by The New York Times of 1,150 trips shows that some of them bent or broke rules adopted in 2007 to limit corporate influence in Washington. Others exploited glaring loopholes in the guidelines, enacted with much fanfare after scandals involving the disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/07/us...s/07trips.html


CHECK out this Graphic!

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2.../us/TRIPS.html

[lookout123]

So long he wasn't the "decider" then I see no problem in recommending qualified people for a job. Most high level jobs are filled through personal aquaintances and their networks IMO.

[TheMercenary]

Well it still smells fishy. And that statement was issued him, I would say something like that too if people started to ask questions. I think they call it cover your ass. I suspect he is being protected.

And here is another example of something similar that happened not to long ago.

Here's a poser: Suppose a public official is accused of recommending his girlfriend for a promotion, though he was the one who first flagged the potential conflict of interest and officials had refused to let him recuse himself from decisions about the woman. Should he lose his job?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...644974798.html

[TheMercenary]

Demoncratic Government Forclosure Repayment Help a complete failure. How much did that cost us?

[TheMercenary]

WASHINGTON — Drugmaker Merck's political action committee donated more than $572,000 to federal candidates in the 2008 election and racked up $4.6 million in expenses to lobby Congress and the executive branch last year, federal records show.

What federal records don't show is that Merck also spent millions on payments to the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America and several others that are lobbying intensely on a massive bill to revamp the nation's health care system. In all, Merck spent $6.8 million in 2008 to help underwrite the political activity of eight associations and trade groups, according to the company's website.

To date, 50 companies have voluntarily agreed to disclose payments to trade groups, and 24 have started doing so on the Internet, said Maureen O'Brien, the center's research director.

They include health-insurance firm Aetna, which reported $190,000 in political-related payments last year to America's Health Insurance Plans, the insurance industry's trade group, and Bristol-Myers Squibb, which reported $128,000 in such dues to the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.

The drugmakers' trade group has backed the Democratic efforts to revamp the nation's health care system and has successfully lobbied the Senate and House to give brand-name drug companies 12 years of exclusive rights to sell pricey biotech drugs before they face competition from cheaper generic versions. Ken Johnson, senior vice president for the trade group, would not say whether it has imposed higher dues on drug companies in 2009 to fund this year's lobbying battle on health care, but said "activity has been ratcheted up."

The group has pumped nearly $19.9 million into lobbying during the first nine months of 2009, up from $14.1 million during the same period last year, federal records show.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...ompanies_N.htm

[classicman]

What are you saying? Big business is buying political clout? Shock!

[TheMercenary]

No, just that anyone who thinks this Congress is looking out for them or the little guy has been fooled.

Insurance companies among others are going to make billions off this deal.

[classicman]

Of course they are, Merc. I don't think anyone here is under that assumption. The typical dwellar is much smarter than the average bear, ya know.

[kerosene]

Originally Posted by classicman

Of course they are, Merc. I don't think anyone here is under the influence. The typical dwellar is much smarter than the average beer, ya know.

Fixed for ya, classic.