Dems Pledge Array of Investigations of Bush Administration

[Frodo]

Democrats Pledge Array of Investigations

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: November 26, 2006
Filed at 12:47 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The incoming chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee is promising an array of oversight investigations that could provoke sharp disagreement with Republicans and the White House.

Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., pledged that Democrats, swept to power in the Nov. 7 elections, would govern ''in the middle'' next year. But the veteran lawmaker has a reputation as one who has never avoided a fight and he did not back away from that reputation on Sunday.

Among the investigations he said he wants the committee to undertake:

--The new Medicare drug benefit. ''There are lots and lots and lots of scandals,'' he said, without citing specifics.

--Spending on government contractors in Iraq, including Halliburton Co., the Texas-based oil services conglomerate once led by Vice President Dick Cheney.

--An energy task force overseen by Cheney. It ''was carefully cooked to provide only participation by oil companies and energy companies,'' Dingell said.

--A review of food and drug safety, particularly in the area of nutritional supplements.

Meanwhile, the incoming chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee said his committee would not take on contentious issues, such as extending expiring tax cuts or overhauling Social Security, at the beginning of the year. Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., said Democrats do not want a fight with President Bush and want to prove they can govern.

''The first thing we're going to do is try to work together on things we know we can accomplish,'' Rangel said. ''Rather than have the committee against the president, it's not going to happen,'' Rangel said.

Rep. Barney Frank, set to lead the House Financial Services Committee, said issues such as raising the minimum wage will be popular, even thought the idea has been identified with liberals.

''In my own committee, the biggest difference you're going to see is we're going to return to try to help deal with the housing crisis that blights so many parts of our country socially and economically,'' said Frank, D-Mass.

Frank, who in 1987 became the first member of Congress to voluntarily make his homosexuality public, also said he wants to modify the military's ''don't ask, don't tell'' policy. The current policy prohibits officials from inquiring about the sex lives of service members and requires discharges of those who openly acknowledge being gay.

''One of the things I do want to address, yes, is discrimination based on sexual orientation,'' Frank said.

''In fact, what we have is a shortfall in the military. I think when you have people being fired who can read Arabic and understand Arabic, because of what they do when they're off duty, that that's a grave error. But that's not what we're going to begin with.''

A report in 2005 by the investigative arm of Congress estimated it cost the Pentagon nearly $200 million to recruit and train replacements for the nearly 9,500 troops that had to leave the military because of the policy. The losses included hundreds of highly skilled troops, including translators, between 1994 through 2003.

Mississippi Sen. Trent Lott, who will become the Senate's second-ranking GOP leader, said Republicans still have enough clout to block legislation ''if it's really bad, not in the country's best interest.'' But he also said he wanted to find areas where the two sides can compromise.

''The people, I think, sent us a message. I think we've got it,'' Lott said. ''We're going to be working hard together.''

The lawmakers appeared on ''Fox News Sunday.''

[MODU]

In other words, they don't really want to do anything until the 2008 elections are over.

[GOP = Terrorists]

In other words, they don't really want to do anything until the 2008 elections are over.

Yeah investigating the intentional destruction of the United States by the Bush regime isn't doing anything...

First on the list should be finding out exactly why the Bushies lied us into Iraq.

Then impeachment and trial for warcrimes but just because that is what SHOULD be done means it isn't what WILL be done. =(

[Deano963]

Good.

In other words, they don't really want to do anything until the 2008 elections are over.

I guess that's one way to interpret the fact that they are going to investgate no-bid contracts, Medicare part D and Cheney's secret energy task force right away. An incredibly moronic way to read it, but a way I guess.

[MODU]

There is nothing wrong with no-bid contracts nor Cheney's closed door meetings.  Waste our time/money investigating those things all you want.

[Rob]

I think MODU wrote this article.

[WalterMitty]

obviously investigating bush is much more urgent than health care and doing something about stagnant wages.

[Gabu]

I think MODU wrote this article.

I liked how they just took quotes from Bill Clinton and attributed them to Dubya.

[MODU]

I think MODU wrote this article.

hahaha . . . you only wish.

[jerusalemcar5]

MODU and Mitty-

You do realize the House is capable of doing more than one thing at once.  It's why they have committees.  Investigating possible crimes is slightly important I would think.  Other committees will be handling health care, the economy, and all the other fun stuff.

[David S]

If they spend all their time investigating rather than legislating that would be OK with me.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

There is nothing wrong with no-bid contracts nor Cheney's closed door meetings.  Waste our time/money investigating those things all you want.

Yeah, every penny this investigation costs could keep us in Iraq another 3 microseconds!

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

obviously investigating bush is much more urgent than health care and doing something about stagnant wages.

That's right, no Democrats are thinking about health care. Please ignore the #1 recommend diary right now on DailyKos.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/11/27/114614/15

[MODU]

MODU and Mitty-

You do realize the House is capable of doing more than one thing at once.  It's why they have committees.  Investigating possible crimes is slightly important I would think.  Other committees will be handling health care, the economy, and all the other fun stuff.

And you seem to miss what my initial comment says.  Just as they ran their 2006 campaign, they will run the next year and a half in Congress . . . by doing nothing.  In the 2006 campaign, they didn't run much of an issues platform but rather just surfed the public unrest.  There is no urgency for them to do anything right now other than sustain that unrest through investigations and hearings.  Of course there will be minor things that come up which they will have to address, and the token piece of legislation (like raising the minimum wage) which they will work on, but beyond that, there is nothing which they will really tackle until the 2008 race is over since they do not want to rock the boat and lose any of their minor momentum gain.

[GOP = Terrorists]

obviously investigating bush is much more urgent than health care and doing something about stagnant wages.

Yeah it is.  Gotta find out why and how he lied us into the biggest foriegn policy disaster in the history of the United States to make sure that we don't let it happen again in the future.

[GOP = Terrorists]

And you seem to miss what my initial comment says.  Just as they ran their 2006 campaign, they will run the next year and a half in Congress . . . by doing nothing.

Yes they should instead waste a whole bunch of time passing bills that Bush will just veto instead of actually trying to clean up the mess that Bushco has gotten us into....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Compared to the GOP since Rove it was ALL ISSUES.  "We will change course in Iraq" "We will stop corruption."  Sound like issues to me.

[Deano963]

obviously investigating bush is much more urgent than health care and doing something about stagnant wages.

And I assume you have been saiyng that same thing for the past six years when Republicans were in power and they were spending all of their time on gay marriage and flag burning?

Your hypocrisy has no end Mitty.

[WalterMitty]

obviously investigating bush is much more urgent than health care and doing something about stagnant wages.

And I assume you have been saiyng that same thing for the past six years when Republicans were in power and they were spending all of their time on gay marriage and flag burning?

Your hypocrisy has no end Mitty.

yes i did say the same things.

[Nym90]

The administration has been sorely lacking in oversight for the last 4 years, so some degree of investigations are necessary and proper. It shouldn't distract from the positive agenda, but there are still some questions that need to be answered.

[Nym90]

There is nothing wrong with no-bid contracts nor Cheney's closed door meetings.  Waste our time/money investigating those things all you want.

Um, ok, so the investigations are a waste of money, but horribly overinflated no-bid contracts are a perfectly legitimate use of taxpayer dollars?

[MODU]

There is nothing wrong with no-bid contracts nor Cheney's closed door meetings.  Waste our time/money investigating those things all you want.

Um, ok, so the investigations are a waste of money, but horribly overinflated no-bid contracts are a perfectly legitimate use of taxpayer dollars?

I didn't say it was.  What I said is that it would be a waste of resources to investigate them.  No-bid contracts are short-lived and serve an immediate need of the government.  When their period of performance ends, or their next option period becomes available, they become eligible to competitive bids.  No-bids tend to be higher in initial cost, but they are also limited to cost-plus contracts, so the company that receives the award can only bill for what they spend, and not the full amount of the contact (like if it were a fixed price contract).  And with all government contracts, the reported expenses are reviewed and audited.  If purchases/charges against the task are not within the scope of the statement of work or addendums, then the performer must reimburse the government for those charges.  So, say if the contractor wins a $200Mill cost-plus contract, and they bill the government $187Mill during the period of performance.  They cannot receive the remaining $13Mill without a contract extension.  Those funds go back to the government (though these funds would most likely still be in the hands of the government since they rarely award the full dollar amount on large tasks).  Of the $187Mill that was billed to the government, if the auditors determine that $9Mill of the charges were not authorized under the scope of the contract, the performer would refund it to the government, leaving them with $178Mill in revenue.  The government auditors already do what any investigation by the Congress would recommend since they cannot go back and retroactively change the contract nor ask for money back from charges performed under the statement of work.