Posts about "guest posts"

"And it's particularly the fear of outside money that drives what candidates and members do. You know, hundreds of millions of dollars handled by a few people that causes members to obsess about re-election and not so much about governance."

For an article in our November issue, which is currently available on newsstands, on the crippling dysfunction in Washington, I interviewed ninety members of Congress – from both houses, both parties, across the ideological spectrum – to find out what they think the problem is. Contrary to what you might expect of an institution with an 8 percent approval rating, I discovered many of them to be capable people of good faith who spoke with surprising candor about being stuck in a dreadful system. Some were particularly articulate or revealing about the state of things in Congress, and I will be writing individual posts about them between now and the election.

Representative Dan Kildee, Democrat, Michigan. The congressman from Flint, Kildee has spent most of his adult life serving the people of Genesee County in local office, and succeeded his Uncle Dale in the congress two years ago. So while he may be a freshman, he has the vantage point of a veteran. He very elegantly summarized the institutional problems facing members as “the 3 M’s – Miles, Money, and Maps.”

"I can't control what other House members do. But, for me, I just make sure that if I have disputes, I confine those to the issues. I'm not going to make personal attacks on other members of my party, or the other party."

For an article in our November issue, which is currently available on newsstands, on the crippling dysfunction in Washington, I interviewed ninety members of Congress – from both houses, both parties, across the ideological spectrum – to find out what they think the problem is. Contrary to what you might expect of an institution with an 8 percent approval rating, I discovered many of them to be capable people of good faith who spoke with surprising candor about being stuck in a dreadful system. Some were particularly articulate or revealing about the state of things in Congress, and I will be writing individual posts about them between now and the election.

Representative Gregg Harper, Republican, Mississippi. Harper’s district spans diagonally from Louisiana to Alabama and takes up 24 counties in all, meaning that unless he has votes in Washington, he’s home. “If you’re not home, then you subject yourself to being attacked for not being in your district more often. It’s tough to balance that.”

"Some people who are inconsistent – they’ll talk about compromise and bipartisanship, and then they’ll turn around and start throwing flames at the other side and calling them the devil. That actually has an impact on these relationships."

For an article in our November issue, which is currently available on newsstands, on the crippling dysfunction in Washington, I interviewed ninety members of Congress – from both houses, both parties, across the ideological spectrum – to find out what they think the problem is. Contrary to what you might expect of an institution with an 8 percent approval rating, I discovered many of them to be capable people of good faith who spoke with surprising candor about being stuck in a dreadful system. Some were particularly articulate or revealing about the state of things in Congress, and I will be writing individual posts about them between now and the election.

Representative Tulsi Gabbard, Democrat, Hawaii. Elected to the Hawaii House in her early twenties, Gabbard declined to run for reelection in favor of deploying to Iraq with her National Guard unit. Now 33, Gabbard embodies several firsts for Congress – first American Samoan ever, first Hindu ever, and a combat veteran in the bargain. She also is a freshman outspoken in her belief that her class has to fix the mess we’re in.

"I think media misses these efforts because they're always on the moment of the news cycle. And then, honestly, we have colleagues who love to get the one-liners in—the bumper sticker lines—because they think they have to cater to some primary deal, or, you know, some constituency group, and I think that also perpetuates this problem."

For an article in our November issue, which is currently available on newsstands, on the crippling dysfunction in Washington, I interviewed ninety members of Congress – from both houses, both parties, across the ideological spectrum – to find out what they think the problem is. Contrary to what you might expect of an institution with an 8 percent approval rating, I discovered many of them to be capable people of good faith who spoke with surprising candor about being stuck in a dreadful system. Some were particularly articulate or revealing about the state of things in Congress, and I will be writing individual posts about them between now and the election.

Senator Mark Begich, Democrat, Alaska. Former mayor of Anchorage and a Democrat in a state that has typically elected Republicans, Begich knocked off Ted Stevens in 2008, in an election that was closer than predicted, given Senator Stevens’ ethics problems. Up for reelection next week, he is one of the Republicans’ biggest targets. Senator Begich had a lot to say about the conflict media, and how productive work and problem solving most often get no attention.

"The reforms in the Housing Acts, those were getting done, until these last two Congresses. Particularly given the dynamics in the House, where there's just an attitude on the part of a block over there of people that we're not gonna do anything, we're not even doing that other tier of work that we used to do."

For an article in our November issue, which is currently available on newsstands, on the crippling dysfunction in Washington, I interviewed ninety members of Congress – from both houses, both parties, across the ideological spectrum – to find out what they think the problem is. Contrary to what you might expect of an institution with an 8 percent approval rating, I discovered many of them to be capable people of good faith who spoke with surprising candor about being stuck in a dreadful system. Some were particularly articulate or revealing about the state of things in Congress, and I will be writing individual posts about them between now and the election.

Senator Mark Udall, Democrat, Colorado. Son of legendary representative Mo Udall, second cousin of conservative Utah Republican Senator Mike Lee, Senator Udall shouldn’t be vulnerable in a state that has been trending Democratic, but he is, and next week Republicans feel good about their chances to take Udall’s seat in the Senate. Udall spoke candidly about what a Senator does when politics makes legislating all but impossible.

"The Senate has emasculated itself. By doing so, we have discarded our authorities and put ourselves at the whim of what is, in my view, a politically destructive president."

For an article in our November issue, which will be out next week, on the crippling dysfunction in Washington, I interviewed ninety members of Congress – from both houses, both parties, across the ideological spectrum – to find out what they think the problem is. Contrary to what you might expect of an institution with an 8 percent approval rating, I discovered many of them to be capable people of good faith who spoke with surprising candor about being stuck in a dreadful system. Some were particularly articulate or revealing about the state of things in Congress, and I will be writing individual posts about them between now and the election.

Senator Orrin Hatch, Republican, Utah. Of all the members of Congress I interviewed, none was more courtly, or angry, than Hatch. The contrast was startling. At 80, and in the Senate for almost half his life—the ranking member on the finance committee and the second most senior member in the institution—Hatch was nonetheless as disinclined to be conciliatory as anyone of either party, in either house, that I spoke with.

"And I've said that to them directly because some of the things that they have said are just absolutely offensive. And I was like, 'You guys can't really believe this.' And to be honest with you, I don't know whether they do or not. But they're rewarded for it."

For an article in our November issue, which will be out next week, on the crippling dysfunction in Washington, I interviewed ninety members of Congress – from both houses, both parties, across the ideological spectrum – to find out what they think the problem is. Contrary to what you might expect of an institution with an 8 percent approval rating, I discovered many of them to be capable people of good faith who spoke with surprising candor about being stuck in a dreadful system. Some were particularly articulate or revealing about the state of things in Congress, and I will be writing individual posts about them between now and the election.

Representative Donna Edwards, Democrat, Maryland. A lawyer, long-time community activist, and the first executive director of the National Network to End Domestic Violence, Edwards had worked in and around Congress for a long time before being elected to her first term in 2008. Although generally regarded as a very liberal member, she has proven her willingness to negotiate with anybody, on any subject, a rare trait now in both houses of Congress.

"You come into Congress, and in the orientation, pretty quickly, you're separated out by party. Which makes no sense, if you want to get a body that works as a body, that learns to be able to work as a body."

For an article in our November issue, which will be out next week, on the crippling dysfunction in Washington, I interviewed ninety members of Congress – from both houses, both parties, across the ideological spectrum – to find out what they think the problem is. Contrary to what you might expect of an institution with an 8 percent approval rating, I discovered many of them to be capable people of good faith who spoke with surprising candor about being stuck in a dreadful system. Some were particularly articulate or revealing about the state of things in Congress, and I will be writing individual posts about them between now and the election.

Representative Michelle Lujan Grisham, Democrat, New Mexico. Grisham, a freshman, is insistent on changing the partisan culture of Congress, particularly in her class, many of the members of which have made an extra effort to tamp down the partisan vitriol of its predecessor, the Tea Party class of 2010.

"We're a nation that asks 18-, 19-, 20-year-olds to go to war, to die for freedom, and to die on behalf of their country, or at least be willing to. And I think we have to have more people that are willing to give their careers for the same cause."

For an article in our November issue, which will be out next week, on the crippling dysfunction in Washington, I interviewed ninety members of Congress – from both houses, both parties, across the ideological spectrum – to find out what they think the problem is. Contrary to what you might expect of an institution with an 8 percent approval rating, I discovered many of them to be capable people of good faith who spoke with surprising candor about being stuck in a dreadful system. Some were particularly articulate or revealing about the state of things in Congress, and I will be writing individual posts about them between now and the election.

First up: Representative Adam Kinzinger, Republican, Illinois. Rare is the Republican who is as harshly critical of people and groups on his own side as Kinzinger of Illinois. A Republican who is this honest about big-spending conservative groups who can do him real harm is either heedless or very brave. Count Kinzinger among the latter.

Mounted on a plaque on the inside of the base of the Statue of Liberty there is a poem titled "The New Colossus." It was written as a part of the American side of the fundraising efforts to create a suitable foundation for Lady Liberty. It contains the words most often associated with her, although they appear nowhere upon the statue itself. Only in this lonely piece of bronze, inside the foundations, do the words appear. Yet somehow these words struck home, and the people, the immigrants from a hundred nations who made up the bulk of our population when Lady Liberty came to rest on our shores, decided that these words best described the hope, the spirit, the values of their new land. And so one part, in particular, was immortalized. These, gentlemen, are the words that our great-grandfathers, and great-great-grandfathers, believed epitomized the American spirit. These are the words that, for them, more than a century ago, encapsulated what was right about our country, and what made us unique, and magnificent.  

I, for one, believe we should sustain the values of our forefathers. But read the words that moved them for yourself. This is Lady Liberty, herself, speaking to the nations of the world, on behalf of the American Dream:

"Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" 

I wonder if those opposed to America opening her doors to children have read these words, the words that represent the very sentiment that brought their own forefathers to our land. (If you had not heard, America is opening her doors to some unfortunate children, and some people do not like this. How cruel of us.)

What is playing out is that America is giving, at least for a time, refuge to poor, tired children, arguably the very "wretched refuse" who are "homeless" to whom the poem refers. What stuns me is that anyone at all is opposed to living up to the very ideals that made this country great. Do those who oppose helping children have any idea how many of their own ancestors were "undocumented"? It is likely, given early 19th-century record-keeping and immigration controls, that a huge number of those long-gone relatives of those opposed to our current act of compassion actually slipped into the U.S. without so much as a "How do you do?" Yes, this does reach the level of ironic.

And now we are reaching, as our host would say, new levels of stupid...

At 06:31 this morning the first Americans landed on the beach. Paratroopers had preceded them the night before, but well inland. These men, from the 8th Infantry Regiment were the first of the amphibious troops. With them came a little old man, short and wrinkled, he carried a walking stick. He had a bum shoulder and a dodgy ticker. His name was Roosevelt and he really should not have been there. His father had been the President, and now his cousin filled that same role. Somebody like that would have been a prize, if captured, so his presence was unexpected. But then his family had something of a history of being places where you really would not expect them to be, and the men of his Division had come to believe.

Utah Beach, the western-most landing spot for the Allied armies, was well away from the other beaches where American, Canadian, and British forces were arriving early this morning 70 years ago. And as it turned out, Utah Beach itself was not where it was supposed to be. Not by a long shot.

In the smoke and dust kicked up by the massive pre-landing naval bombardment, the markers leading the way into the beach were missed by the men piloting the landing craft. Sure, they were heading ashore, but unbeknownst to them they were heading for the wrong section of the shore. The place they were supposed to land was more than a mile, some 2,000 yards, to the north. With confusion created by smoke, dust, noise, and fear, the landing craft were well off-target. But time and tide wait for no man, and so when they grounded on the gently sloping sands and the ramps dropped, the men of the 8th Infantry Regiment, 4th Infantry Division, and the diminutive general accompanying them, stepped ashore...

If you think race is not an issue anymore and that America has dealt with the past and come through it, you are dead wrong.

A black man was told he could not use the water fountain because it is for whites only. He said, "Put your sign on the wall then, because I am feeling to drink it. What they do when they catch me drinking your water?"

His white supervisor responded, "That's when we hang you."

Think that exchange happened 40 years ago? Think again. That was in the news this week. In Memphis, Tennessee, at a cotton gin (yes, those still exist, and there is still a cotton industry), these exchanges were recorded on cell phones by two workers named Antonio Harris and Marrio Mangrum. I am guessing that the ignorant racist who made the comments was unaware that cell phones exist, because he is living in 1863, or maybe 1963. Tough to tell.

That bit about the water fountain, it started with this exchange...

This is it, the end of the line. Grant, with the Army of the Potomac, and Lee, with the Army of Northern Virginia have hit the edge of the dance floor. Constrained by topography there is no further they can go, and Richmond is just three or four miles away. At certain points of the line the Americans can see the taller steeples of Richmond's rising above the tree-line to the southwest. What they cannot see is the rebel army, but they know it is there. The entrenchments prove that.

What started in the chaos of the Wilderness then continued through the Mule Shoe of Spotsylvania Court House, has finally ended up here, near the unremarkable cross-roads at Cold Harbor, Virginia. For a month Grant has hammered at Lee, then repeatedly tried to break contact and slip between Lee and Richmond. He did this not to get at Richmond, but to force Lee out into the open for a smashing open-field battle where Grant could bring the weight of his numbers to bear and finally shred the remains of Lee's army. But Lee was having none of it...

George Washington had a problem as he tried to beat the British. Well, really he had a lot of problems, but central among them was the issue of prisoners. See, for the first four years of our Revolution, George Washington pretty much got his ass kicked by the Brits, four ways from Sunday. Along the way a whole lot of his men were taken captive. He needed them back. So he negotiated prisoner exchanges. That was pretty normal, and so a lot of Americans were exchanged for enemy prisoners.

In the War of 1812, President Madison faced the same situation. American soldiers were taken by the enemy in pretty large numbers. By the third year of the wars there were thousands of Americans who languished in captivity, but we had some of them too.  Trades were made. American privates and sergeants and officers were traded with the enemy. Indeed, our national anthem, the Star Spangled Banner, came from discussions about American prisoners...

The Grand Canyon Trust, an environmental group, has sued the operator of America's last conventional uranium processing mill, saying its vast piles of spent ore and radioactive waste emit dangerous levels of radon and other toxins that violate the Clean Air Act.

The group and other critics of the White Mesa Mill near Blanding, Utah say it is a poorly disguised nuclear waste dump that would have gone out of business long ago were it not propped up by a lucrative federal contracts...