"Ultimate sovereignty (power) in the United States resides with the people. In an attempt to govern themselves better, the people adopted the U.S. Constitution. Those persons present for the writing of the Constitution at the Constitutional Convention of 1787, known as the Framers, feared the concentration of too much power in any one person or governmental agency. In an attempt to prevent such an accumulation of power, the Framers wrote a Constitution with a system of checks and balances." Myth from a government website [1]
On Monday, November 30, 2009, the day after the biggest shopping weekend of the year, when most Americans are busy with the holiday season (and might be distracted), our three branches of government worked tirelessly (but not for us) to increase government power:
- A Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimate said that the Senate healthcare "re-form" bill could significantly reduce costs for many people who buy health insurance on their own, and would not raise costs for the vast numbers of Americans who receive coverage from large employers. In other words, increased government involvement in healthcare would only be a good thing for everyone.
- President Obama (D) issued orders to send about 30,000 additional American troops to Afghanistan. The eight year war will continue.
- The Supreme Court vacated a lower court ruling requiring the government to release photographs showing the abuse of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan. We wouldn't want people seeing what's really going on over there would we? Especially US citizens who think they're being protected from terrorism.
The Legislative Branch at Work for You
According to a November 30, 2009 NY Times article, "No Big Cost Rise in U.S. Premiums Is Seen in Study," a CBO estimate of costs for Senator Reid's "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" reassured healthcare "re-form" supporters:
"Centrist Democrats like Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana, whose votes are vital to President Obama’s hopes of getting the bill approved, had feared that the measure would drive up costs for people with employer-sponsored coverage. After reading the budget office report, Mr. Bayh said he was reassured on that point."
Now the esteemed Senator can continue pretending he's taking good care of his constituents by voting for more government.
The 29 page letter (pdf) from the CBO to Senator Evan Bayh (D) was supposed to prove that individual insurance premiums wouldn't increase. According to the article:
"Before taking account of federal subsidies to help people buy insurance on their own, the budget office said the bill would tend to drive up premiums. But as a result of the subsidies, it said, most people in the individual insurance market would see their costs decline, compared with the costs expected under current law. The subsidies, a main feature of the bill, would cost the government nearly $450 billion in the next 10 years and would cover nearly two-thirds of premiums for people who receive them."
Earlier CBO estimates stated that the budget deficit wouldn't increase with healthcare "re-form" legislation. By successfully obfuscating healthcare "re-form" costs, the CBO accomplished its mission to confirm the benefits of increased government involvement in healthcare. Rahm Emanuel (D), White House chief of staff, welcomed the latest CBO estimate:
“The CBO has rendered a fundamental judgment that this will reduce the deficit and reduce people’s premium costs.”
Opposing Rs chose not to argue that socialized healthcare doesn't work and is just wrong. Instead Rs said the CBO estimate confirmed their concerns about premium price increases, which is about as relevant as arguing that they believe fewer angels can dance on the head of a pin than do Ds:
"...Republican senators like Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, said the report validated their concerns. They focused on the prediction that unsubsidized premiums in the individual insurance market, less than a fifth of those with health insurance, would rise an average of 10 percent to 13 percent."
On several pages of the estimate, the CBO said the analysis of premiums was extremely complex, so the experience of individuals and families "could vary significantly from the average.” On the final page, the CBO estimate explained the political nature of healthcare budget estimates (pdf):
"All of those considerations serve to emphasize the considerable uncertainty that surrounds any estimate of the impact of any proposal that would make substantial changes in the health insurance or health care sectors, given the size and the complexity of those sectors. That uncertainty applies to the estimated effects of proposals on the federal budget and insurance coverage rates, as well as to their impact on premiums."
Or to paraphrase: despite our pretensions of analysis, don't count on any of this to be accurate.
The Executive Branch at Work for You
According to another November 30, 2009 NY Times article, "Obama Issues Order for More Troops in Afghanistan," President Obama is trying to mimic two Presidents:
- LBJ (D) in his escalation of the Vietnam war simultaneous with his orchestration of a massive federal government intrusion in healthcare with the creation of Medicare in 1965, and
- GWB (R) on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln announcing "Mission Accomplished."
But in President Obama's case, healthcare "re-form" legislation hasn't passed yet, and apparently no aircraft carrier was available. Instead the President delivered a speech at the United States Military Academy at West Point Tuesday night.
The Obama administration also announced it was sending its special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, and former arms dealer to Suharto, Richard Holbrooke, to Brussels on Tuesday to brief NATO and European allies about the escalation.
The Judicial Branch at Work for You
In "Supreme Court Overturns Decision on Detainee Photos," the third November 30, 2009 NY Times article documenting the tireless work ethic of our rulers and our wonderful system of checks and balances, the robed wise men and women of the US Supreme Court issued a three sentence ruling to vacate a lower court ruling. The end result is that the secretary of defense can block the release of incriminating photographs of prisoner abuse in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Justice department of the Obama administration originally planned to release the photographs, but according to the article, the President, who is "committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in government" [2]:
"...overruled his lawyers, saying his national security advisers had persuaded him that releasing the photos would inflame anti-American sentiment abroad and endanger American troops. Some of the pictures, according to a government brief, showed 'soldiers pointing pistols or rifles at the heads of hooded and handcuffed detainees,' a soldier who appears to be striking a detainee with the butt of a rifle, and a soldier holding a broom 'as if sticking its end' into a prisoner’s rectum."
Justice for all: as long as they aren't American citizens. As with the equivocal CBO report, the wise men and women of the Supreme Court were equally adept at pencil-whipping an issue. According to the article:
"The Supreme Court’s summary order in the case, Department of Defense v. A.C.L.U., No. 09-160, did not address whether that ruling was correct. It merely said the new law required reconsideration of the case."
The new law to which the Supreme Court referred, is a special dispensation by Congress delegating responsibility to the Executive branch to decide whether or not to release the incriminating photographs. According to the article:
"The law applies to photographs taken from Sept. 11, 2001, to Jan. 22, 2009, showing 'the treatment of individuals engaged, captured or detained after Sept. 11, 2001, by the armed forces of the United States in operations outside of the United States,' so long as the secretary of defense certifies that disclosure 'would endanger citizens of the United States, members of the United States armed forces or employees of the United States government deployed outside of the United States.' ”
Would it surprise you to know that secretary of defense Robert Gates signed just such a statement certifying that disclosure of photographs of criminal behavior by employees of the US government would endanger citizens and government employees of the US on November 13, 2009?
So much for checks and balances.
Our rulers think that separation of powers means separating you from yours. Aren't you reassured knowing they're working overtime to do so?
______________________________________________
[1] U.S. Courts The Federal Judiciary Separation of Powers Background information. (Accessed on December 1, 2009 at http://www.uscourts.gov/outreach/resources/separationofpowers.html)
[2] Memorandum by President Barack Obama on "Transparency and Open Government," (Accessed on December 1, 2009 at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment/)
Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies
SUBJECT: Transparency and Open Government
My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.
Government should be transparent. Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing. Information maintained by the Federal Government is a national asset. My Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use. Executive departments and agencies should harness new technologies to put information about their operations and decisions online and readily available to the public. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public...
Posts
