Government Executive - Authors - Jim O'Sullivan

Will Chuck Hagel clear the Senate? White House thinks so

Jim O'Sullivan, National Journal — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 14:40:01 -0500

The White House still thinks it has the Senate votes to put Chuck Hagel in the top job at the Pentagon, but concedes it would be a narrowly won victory.

After a confirmation hearing last week that did nothing to help Hagel's candidacy, the Obama administration counts about 57 senators as supporting his nomination to lead the Defense Department. A handful more have said they would oppose a filibuster.

Hagel is continuing his Capitol Hill courtesy calls this week, scheduled to meet with roughly 20 senators, which would push his total to about 72, a senior administration official said.

And those meetings are said to have gone better than his public berating at the Senate Armed Services Committee.

"They have a very different tone than that hearing had," the official said, adding that the administration was "very confident" Hagel would clear the Senate.

Last Thursday’s hearing, during which Hagel was grilled extensively over his support for Israel, his position on Iran, and his opposition to the Iraq War, reinvigorated Republican criticism of the former GOP senator. In a Meet the Press appearance on Sunday, former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs praised Hagel, but said he came off as “unimpressive and unprepared” during the hearing.

The administration official acknowledged that Hagel’s performance had not enriched his candidacy, but countered that Republicans had missed opportunities in dwelling on Pentagons past, rather than pose questions about how the department will manage the 66,000 troops still in Afghanistan when they come home, including veterans’ issues like post-traumatic stress disorder.

“It was probably the most political defense secretary hearing we’ve ever seen,” the official said, calling it “a new kind of hearing.”

Two Republican senators, Thad Cochran of Mississippi and Mike Johanns of Nebraska, have said they will vote for Hagel.

Administration officials acknowledged they were unsure whether Republicans would filibuster. They said they did not expect Republicans to pluck any Democratic votes.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told reporters on Tuesday he would like to learn more about his former colleague. “We asked him about going forward, but the best way to judge what a person will do going forward is to look at what he’s done in the past,” Graham said. “There’s some information about some speeches he’s given that I’d like to evaluate, in my view.”

Asked what he thought of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a close Graham friend and ally on national security issues, announcing that he would not support a filibuster, Graham replied, “Did he say that? I didn’t see that. I’m not there yet. But filibustering is something I do very reluctantly. But again, I hope the president and his team will reevaluate this nomination. We live in very dangerous times and we want to have as much bipartisan support as possible for important positions like this. And quite frankly give the public confidence that we know where we are going.”

Pressed on his filibuster stance, Graham said, “Time will tell what we should do.”

]]>

Need proof that Biden is running for president? Look at his staff.

Jim O'Sullivan, National Journal — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 15:11:27 -0500

Not since President Bush declined to pardon Scooter Libby has Washington chatter projected so much disappointment onto the vice president. But it was hard not to sympathize with Joe Biden -- and his inchoate 2016 campaign -- after the president’s hagiographic joint appearance on 60 Minutes with outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Biden, of course, made nothing of it. For the cameras, he is voluble and spry, trotting across Pennsylvania Avenue to mug and shake hands during the inaugural parade. The man who came on board as ballot ballast (wizened, steeped in foreign policy, noticeably white) has become an odd and perhaps enviable creature in the political firmament: a pop-culture totem and a sitcom punch line, yet somehow a senior statesman, too. But inside the White House, Biden is playing a quieter game, nudging into place the pieces he would need should he decide to run in 2016 -- Steve Kroft be damned.

Biden’s friends and advisers caution that the effort is nascent and informal, that no ultimate decision has been made. The effort, however, is unmistakable. And signs of it range from Biden’s strategic guest-list compilation for inaugural-week festivities to plans for firmer control of the Democratic Party machinery. “They’re leaving all their options open,” says one longtime friend who spoke on condition of anonymity so as not to jeopardize the friendship. “They just want to make sure they’re very viable, because Hillary might not run.”

Defined in the strictest terms, “they” are Biden’s family, a group that doubles as his political brain trust. Biden has long relied on the counsel of his sister, Valerie Biden Owens, and has come to lean on his sons, Hunter and Beau. Biden advisers universally name-check the family before mentioning other key figures.

Larry Rasky, who was Biden’s communications director in 1988 and 2008 and remains a friend and adviser, says, “There’s absolutely no reason why, given his service to the party, given his role campaigning around the country and his role in 2014 -- when he’s going to be a good surrogate -- that he won’t be in a good spot. He’s got a lot of cards to play.”

Those cards include chits Biden has accrued during four decades in national politics, and the executive-level and progressive credentials he has burnished as vice president. In a move many observers considered a classic bit of personal positioning, he preempted Obama in supporting gay marriage. He formulated the administration’s response to calls for stepped-up gun control.

And Biden already has a stable of long-serving horses ready to harness. Outside the family, the next circle includes veterans of his 2008 campaign, his Senate office, and, like Rasky, his 1988 run. Pollster John Martilla, also close to Secretary of State John Kerry, managed Biden’s 1972 Senate campaign and remains a top adviser.

Necessarily, much of the power is concentrated within Biden’s office, helmed by Chief of Staff Bruce Reed, who was chief domestic policy adviser to President Clinton. Insiders describe strategist Mike Donilon as the first among equals. His brother, Tom, is Obama’s national security adviser (and a former Biden hand himself). Mike’s sister-in-law, Catherine Russell, is Jill Biden’s chief of staff.

The vice president’s former chief of staff, Ron Klain, worked for him on the Senate Judiciary Committee during Clarence Thomas’s Supreme Court confirmation hearings, and Klain’s near-miss candidacy to be Obama’s chief of staff was viewed as emblematic of Biden’s growing influence in the administration. Tony Blinken’s elevation to deputy national security adviser reinforced the notion; Blinken worked for Biden on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

On the ascent in the inner circle, people close to Biden say, is Steve Ricchetti, a Clinton White House deputy chief of staff brought in despite controversy over his lobbying career. Another relatively new addition to the upper ranks is Sheila Nix, Biden’s campaign chief of staff last year. Ted Kaufman, who worked on Biden’s 1972 effort and succeeded him in the upper chamber, remains close, as does Alan Hoffman, the deputy chief of staff who left the vice president’s office late last year to work for PepsiCo and is expected to help with financing. Also on tap for fundraising muscle is Dennis Toner, a former top aide from the Senate days who handled much of the money side during the 2008 campaign.

Trip King, a longtime home-state power broker for Democratic former Sen. Fritz Hollings of South Carolina, was the vice president’s political director during the reelection campaign. King helped arrange the inaugural festivities, inviting what one attendee called the “crème de la crème” of Democratic politics -- with an emphasis on early-voting states. Another former Judiciary Committee staffer, Mark Gitenstein, has just returned from serving as ambassador to Romania.

Recent arrivals and longtime denizens of the Biden orbit all say they are clear-eyed about his hurdles, among them the recently departed secretary of State. And, always now, there is the matter of age. At 74, Biden would be the oldest newly inaugurated president. “Is the country used to ... a younger president? Is late 60s, early 70s too old now?” the longtime friend asks.

Martilla, though, says Biden “is probably in the best shape of his political life” and describes meetings of the veep’s high command as laughing, jocular affairs, with Biden spinning trademark yarns. “It’s a fun operation,” Martilla says. “It’s fun to be inside.” As Biden himself knows. Which is why the softball-batting-practice Obama/Clinton interview may not have sat well with the vice president. It’s better to be in the camera shot than outside it -- better to be ready to go than not.

]]>

Who might replace Hilda Solis as Labor secretary?

George E. Condon Jr. and Jim O'Sullivan, National Journal — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 09:36:39 -0500

Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis submitted her letter of resignation on Wednesday. Here's an excerpt from a Nov. 7 National Journal magazine story on potential replacements:

"[A] host of longtime Democratic officials are waiting in the wings, many of them holdovers from the Clinton era. Deputy Secretary Seth Harris worked in the department during the Clinton administration, and Maria Echaveste, cofounder of the Nueva Vista Group, was President Clinton’s deputy chief of staff. Olena Berg Lacy, a board member at Financial Engines, was assistant secretary for pension and welfare benefits under Clinton. Laborites say they would love to see Arlene Holt Baker, executive vice president of the AFL-CIO, in the post. Despite its public-policy beating of late, labor does not lack friends on the Hill among Democrats. Reps. George Miller of California and Marcy Kaptur of Ohio have long been staunch allies. Union members are still grateful to former Rep. David Bonior of Michigan and former Rep. Dick Gephardt of Missouri for their opposition to the North American Free Trade Agreement. Carrie Wofford, the senior Democratic counsel on the Senate Health Education Labor, and Pension Committee, also wins high marks. But a Democratic president, of course, signed NAFTA. The challenges that organized labor now faces come from Republicans and go far beyond free trade. Any Labor secretary in a second Obama term is likely to be playing more defense than offense."

(Image via Jose Gil / Shutterstock.com)

]]>

Obama calls for 'meaningful action' despite politics after shooting

Jim O'Sullivan, National Journal — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 15:32:41 -0500

An emotional President Obama on Friday called for unspecified “meaningful action” regardless of political consequences, after a school shooting in Newtown, CT, reportedly killed 27 people, including 18 children.

“We’re going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics,” Obama said during a brief address from the White House, where he repeatedly wiped away tears.

“We've endured too many of these tragedies in the past few years. Each time I learn the news, I react not as a president, but as anybody else would, as a parent. And that is especially true today,” said Obama, the father of two daughters.

Earlier, White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters that Friday was not the appropriate time to discuss gun control policy.

]]>

Obama strongly defends Susan Rice on Benghazi

Jim O'Sullivan, National Journal — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 15:04:14 -0500

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice won strong backing on Wednesday from President Obama, who dismissed Senate Republicans’ criticism of her initial handling of the fatal Benghazi attack as “outrageous.”

While declining to discuss possible upcoming nominations as he begins a second term, Obama ripped Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., for vowing to try to block Rice if the president should nominate her to replace Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. Obama said he would nominate Rice if he concluded she was best-suited for the post.

“If Senator McCain and Senator Graham and others want to go after someone, they should go after me,” Obama told a news conference in dismissing criticism that Rice inaccurately described the attack on the Benghazi diplomatic compound, declining to call it a terrorist attack as the administration later did. "And I'm happy to have that discussion with them. But for them to go after the ambassador who had nothing to do with Benghazi, and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received, and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous."

“She has done exemplary work,” Obama added. “She has represented the United States and our interests in the United Nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace."

]]>

What Romney's Cabinet might look like

Jim O'Sullivan, National Journal — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 09:58:50 -0400

The day after his election as governor of Massachusetts in 2002, Mitt Romney welcomed reporters to his transition headquarters in the People’s Republic of Cambridge, informed his new constituents that managing the state’s pressing budget crisis would be his top priority, and began fleshing out the top posts within his pending administration.

A decade later, a President Romney would again face immediate fiscal problems. But a vastly different set of circumstances would shape the personnel decisions that Romney could make during his transition to the Oval Office. For one, Romney, despite a 1994 U.S. Senate challenge to Democrat Edward Kennedy, had few concrete ties to the state GOP back then. During this presidential campaign, he has consistently ridden at the front of the 2012 Republican field, is a favorite of the K Street and establishment types, and has become far more thoroughly wired into the party’s power centers.

That, for Romney, is both liberating and confining. In Massachusetts, he had a free hand to pick his top aides, and he won plaudits from Democrats for doing so with evident ideological blinders. And Romney was ruthless in restructuring the bureaucracy, collapsing, for instance, the silos of transportation, housing, and environment under one “supersecretariat.” That post went to Doug Foy, head of the Conservation Law Foundation, a liberal group that had spent much of the previous decade exerting legal pressure on the state to offset the environmental insults of the “Big Dig” tunnel project by investing in mass transit. Romney tabbed former Fidelity Investments Vice Chairman Robert Pozen to oversee a portfolio of economic development, consumer affairs, and labor.

In Washington, a Republican Party awaiting its restoration to the executive branch would have needs. And having been freshly elected as president of the entire nation, Romney would have to balance the party’s interests with the country’s. To help him navigate that terrain, Romney has turned to a longtime friend and political power broker, former Utah Gov. and Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt, to lead the effort, largely separate from the day-to-day campaign operation, to people a Romney administration.

“Leavitt has a good idea from an insider’s perspective, as someone who worked in the Cabinet and knows that relationship with the White House,” said Martha Joynt Kumar, a Towson University professor writing a book about the Bush-Obama transition after the 2008 election. “You have to know what you’re working with. You have to have the process nailed down.”

Early in the effort, Leavitt was joined by longtime Romney confidants: Beth Myers, his senior campaign adviser and Statehouse chief of staff; campaign Chairman Bob White, a friend from Romney’s Bain Capital tenure who led his gubernatorial transition; and Ron Kaufman, a veteran Washington lobbyist and former White House political director.

Game-planning a Romney ascendancy to Washington has been divided between domestic and international issues. Glenn Hubbard, a former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, and Al Hubbard, director of the National Economic Council under President George W. Bush, helm the domestic side, while the international team includes former World Bank President Robert Zoellick.

That circle has expanded. Former Deloitte global CEO Jim Quigley, former Bush 43 White House liaison to Health and Human Services Jamie Burke, and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Steve Preston have all taken leadership roles. American Petroleum Institute CEO Jack Gerard has long been close to Romney. Also involved in plotting the transition are, among others, Patton Boggs partner and Romney campaign counsel Ben Ginsberg; Citigroup Managing Director and former diplomat Kent Lucken; George W. Bush’s Office of Personnel Management Director Kay Coles James; former Treasury Undersecretary for International Affairs Tim Adams; former Veterans Affairs Secretary and Republican National Committee Chairman Jim Nicholson; former Microsoft and General Motors CFO Chris Liddell; former Health and Human Services Deputy Secretary Tevi Troy; and RNC external-affairs adviser and former Ogilvy Government Relations CEO Drew Maloney. Campaign policy czar Lanhee Chen and foreign-policy Director Alex Wong would also likely figure in helping to staff a Romney administration.

For all the pressure on Romney to tend to the GOP erogenous zones, some still envision a transition that hews to his Massachusetts model: nondogmatic, the “best and brightest.”

“He was hiring on merit,” said Dan Winslow, now a Massachusetts GOP state representative who was among Romney’s first hires as chief counsel and who helped oversee the recruiting and vetting process on Beacon Hill. “His focus, when he developed his administration, was entirely on getting the best possible people to the table, and whatever got them to the table didn’t matter. I expect the same focus from President-elect Romney.”

Winslow said that a Republican Party grateful to Romney for parting President Obama from the White House would allow him flexibility. “The fact of the matter is,” Winslow said, “Republicans will back Romney.”

That may be. But if Romney awakes on Nov. 7 as president-elect, he’ll find himself a long way from Cambridge.

Here is a look at who Romney might place in several critical spots. For a full list, visit National Journal.

Secretary of Defense

When the Romney campaign named former World Bank President Robert Zoellick to head its national-security transition team, it set off alarms and prompted a firestorm among a national-security advisory community that runs the gamut from old-school Republican realists, to Israel-first neoconservative idealists, to hawkish nationalists. Coming from the realist wing, Zoellick is seen by the latter two camps as unduly moderate—someone who is too cozy with China and insufficiently pro-Israel. A circular firing squad quickly formed among the Romney team of rivals, who let loose in the press with volleys of non-attributable criticisms aimed at each other.

The incident speaks to the defining elusiveness of Mitt Romney’s worldview. That fundamental uncertainty makes anticipating his likely Cabinet a difficult exercise. However, a few consensus picks for Defense secretary stand out from the likely pack of wannabes.

Former Sen. Jim Talent, R-Mo., has emerged as the most likely choice. He has been a close adviser on national-security issues since Romney’s first run for the White House in 2008. In the current campaign, Talent’s profile has become even more prominent, as he has raised money and acted as a reliable surrogate for Romney on defense and national-security issues. Perhaps tellingly, when Romney met with British leaders in London on his overseas trip last summer, Talent was one of three advisers in the room.

Talent certainly came by his defense credentials the old-fashioned way. In his freshman year in the House in 1993, he formed a special congressional panel on the decline of military readiness, and he went on to serve on both the House Armed Services and Senate Armed Services committees, eventually chairing Senate Armed Services’ Seapower Subcommittee. He would be well positioned to implement Romney’s plan to enlarge the Navy and increase annual shipbuilding.

Since leaving the Senate in 2007, Talent has continued to focus on military readiness as a distinguished fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation. “Jim Talent has been with Romney from Day One, and even after being deeply involved in defense as a member of Congress, he has immersed himself in national-security issues at Heritage to the point of essentially earning himself a Ph.D. on the subject,” said James Carafano, a defense expert and the director of foreign-policy studies at the Heritage Foundation. “I don’t hear any other names mentioned as prominently as a likely secretary of Defense” in a Romney administration.

Secretary of State

Romney’s pick as secretary of State would likely signal which way his foreign policy is going to go: a harder-line, more neoconservative direction, reflective of his campaign rhetoric? Or traditional Republican realpolitik?

If he moved in the latter direction, as Romney’s recent speech at Virginia Military Institute seemed to indicate, then one could easily see as possibilities such prominent moderate Republicans as Rob Portman, the senator from Ohio and former U.S. trade representative who was on the short list to be Romney’s vice president (and is also in the running for Treasury secretary); Robert Zoellick, the former World Bank president who is now serving as coordinator of national-security transition for the Romney campaign; or Jon Huntsman, the former Utah governor, ambassador to China (under Obama), and GOP presidential rival. Two dark horses on the more moderate side are Robert Kimmitt, who was ambassador to Germany and undersecretary of State under George H.W. Bush and, most recently, deputy Treasury secretary under George W. Bush; and Richard Haass, who drew the ire of neoconservatives when he served as policy-planning chief in Colin Powell’s State Department in George W. Bush’s first term but who has been a prominent voice of restrained realism as president of the Council on Foreign Relations. Most of these candidates would likely stir anger in the hawkish precincts of the party, where they are generally viewed as too friendly to China and Russia and not friendly enough toward Israel.

Picks that would tend more toward the hawkish or neoconservative side include some of those within Romney’s inner circle today, in particular Richard Williamson, who has served in various senior-level foreign-policy positions going back to Ronald Reagan and, most recently, was special envoy to Sudan under George W. Bush. An outside possibility is John Bolton, a former U.N. ambassador and undersecretary of State under George W. Bush. But while Bolton is prominent, he proved too far right even for the Bush administration and would be a very risky pick for Romney. A favorite of Vice President Dick Cheney, Bolton ran afoul of senior officials, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, because of his sometimes lacerating rhetoric and extreme policy positions, and he failed in successive bids to be named Rice’s deputy and to take Douglas Feith’s place as No. 3 at the Pentagon.

Of course, even a moderate secretary of State might not tell us where Romney would go; consider the cautionary example of Colin Powell after Bush picked the retired general as his secretary of State in 2001. Powell was Bush’s first major Cabinet choice, just two weeks after the election. When he introduced Powell in Texas that fall, Bush called him “an American hero” and—as Romney did recently in a major foreign-policy speech—the president-elect evoked Powell’s personal role model, George C. Marshall, another retired general who graced the office in Foggy Bottom. But as it turned out, the hard-line axis of Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, along with a phalanx of neoconservative policymakers, marginalized Powell’s views during the Bush administration.

Office of Management and Budget Director

OMB director is a key job for any Republican who wants to wage major policy fights through the federal budget—an idea that Romney seems to embrace. He has promised to cap federal spending at 20 percent of GDP by 2016, and by picking self-avowed budget geek Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin as his running mate, Romney also seemed to signal that tough spending choices would be part of his first-term agenda.

Possible names being thrown around in Republican circles for the top budget slot include:

• Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the conservative think tank American Action Forum and the former director of the Congressional Budget Office. He’s as good at politics as he is at policy, having advised Sen. John McCain on his presidential run in 2008.

• Former Rep. Jim Nussle of Iowa, who was director of the Office of Management and Budget under President George W. Bush and was also chairman of the House Budget Committee. It’s unclear, though, if Nussle would want to return to OMB.

• Former Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, who chaired the Senate Budget Committee and remains part of the D.C. conversation through his work with the deficit-reduction advocacy group Fix the Debt.

• Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio, who also served as OMB director under President George W. Bush and who helped Romney prep for the presidential debates by playing Obama. Overseeing OMB would also be a repeat performance for Portman, and he might be more interested in becoming Treasury secretary.

Click here for a list of how Romney might fill other positions if elected.

]]>

Decision to move Obama's speech inside sparks scramble

Major Garrett and Jim O'Sullivan, National Journal — Thu, 06 Sep 2012 09:16:13 -0400

The decision to relocate President Obama’s acceptance speech tonight from Bank of America Stadium to the Time Warner Cable Arena left thousands of would-be attendees frustrated and hunting for other venues to watch what was expected to be a triumphant sequel to Obama’s outdoor address in Denver four years ago.

Convention officials and Obama aides rejected suggestions, gleefully pushed by Republicans, that fears of disappointing attendance had prompted a political calculation to move to the guaranteed-capacity indoor arena. The weather, organizers said, left them no choice but to cancel. One senior official said the Obama campaign had an overflow list of 19,000 who could not be seated in the stadium.

“Our goal from the very beginning was, how to make this the most open and accessible convention in history, and we decided as late as operationally possible,” Democratic National Convention Committee CEO Steve Kerrigan told Convention Daily, describing the decision as “heartbreaking.”

Instead, delegates and donors will be allowed inside, while the people expected to fill at least 50,000 of the stadium seats that were set aside for those carrying “community credentials,” including supporters from four surrounding states, have been encouraged to join a Thursday pre-speech conference call with Obama and to host watch parties in their homes.

“We spent thousands of dollars to come down here, and we can’t go. That’s really unfair,” said Gwendolyn Clarke, who said she had driven from New York City with her daughter to watch the stadium speech, hoping to defray the cost by selling water bottles outside the arena. “When you give money and time and don’t get in, that’s not fair. If you’re not famous enough, you don’t get in.”

Republicans were quick to impugn Obama’s motives.

“You can’t believe a thing this administration says,” said John Sununu, the former governor of New Hampshire and a top Romney surrogate, during a Charlotte press conference. “They promised you, rain or shine, the president would be speaking there. And then when they couldn’t get a crowd, they brought him inside.”

Aside from the obvious optical disadvantages and too-easy metaphors—Obama forced to downsize four arduous years after making history—the reelection effort, more critically, loses tangible electoral tools that will be important in swing states North Carolina and Virginia.

The Obama campaign’s methods were on display in the way tickets were distributed to the now-canceled outdoor event. The so-called community credentials were not handed out at offices and events. Instead, people had to apply for them and then go online to activate them. Campaign officials said that 65,000 had activated their tickets and an additional 19,000 were on what they called “a hard waiting list.”

Kerrigan said that the shut-out spectators were notified on Wednesday by e-mail that they could not attend.

Among those who had been given tickets to the speech were 6,000 North Carolinians who had signed up for the campaign’s “9-3-1” program. That meant they had to volunteer for nine hours over three shifts to get one seat. That represented 54,000 hours of registering new voters, calling other North Carolinians to sign them up.

Top officials made the decision around 8 a.m. Wednesday, after a conference call with Kerrigan, senior campaign strategist David Axelrod, campaign manager Jim Messina, and his deputies Stephanie Cutter and Julianna Smoot. A key organizer speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations said that officials had backup plans in place, but details remained unresolved. “They had the contingency plan; it was all mapped out. Now they have to execute it,” the organizer said.

Kerrigan said that organizers would need to do “a little bit of programmatic shifting,” including a downsized schedule. Stage events will now launch closer to 4 p.m., he said, rather than the previously planned earlier start. The stage, Kerrigan said, will be smaller than the stadium version.

Later Wednesday, convention officials said there would be no balloon drop inside the arena, a traditional staple of conventions’ final nights. Balloons typically are installed before a convention begins.

Until the announcement about 10 a.m. on Wednesday, the campaign had stuck with its full-speed-ahead intentions on keeping tonight’s show outdoors. Campaign spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters on Air Force One during the flight to Charlotte, “There were several weather forecasts that were calling for a 30-to-40 percent chance of thunderstorms tomorrow night—which, just to put that in real terms for you, what it means, we would have had to possibly evacuate the stadium if there were thunderstorms.”

Secret Service agents said that uptown Charlotte’s security and street-closures plan would not change from Wednesday because the Time Warner Arena is already secured. Several road and parking restrictions around the stadium set to take effect starting Wednesday evening and ending on Friday have been canceled because of the venue change.

The level of door security is not expected to change for convention-goers regardless of the venue—none of the prohibited items, including umbrellas, will be allowed into the arena during Obama’s speech. But the crowds are expected to increase dramatically, exacerbating already-clogged streets and long security lines.

“The checkpoints are already established, so what’s here is here,” said one Secret Service agent patrolling the perimeter of the arena on Wednesday morning, who would only speak on the condition of anonymity. But for Obama’s speech, the agent cautioned, “you can probably count on it being three times as busy.”

Catherine Christman, a media consultant leading a group of convention attendees from South Carolina colleges and universities, said she was sorry to lose out on watching the speech in person. “It’s a bit of a scramble, but it doesn’t look like logistically it’s going to work out,” she said. “Of course, we’re all disappointed.”

Whether the complications surrounding the speech muzzle its message or dent Obama’s aura of competence remains an open question. Democratic Sen. Robert Casey of Pennsylvania said, “In Washington, it’s an interesting thing to bat around, I think, but it’s not going to matter. People are going to listen to what he’s going to say.” For Gwendolyn Clarke’s daughter Courtney, though, the disappointment of being denied attendance had turned her off Obama altogether. She did not plan to watch the speech on television, she said, and went further.

“You can rest assured, Courtney will be voting for Ryan and Romney,” Courtney said.]]>

Against Obama, Boehner backing 6-month plan

Jim O'Sullivan — Sun, 24 Jul 2011 00:00:00 -0400

As markets opened in Asia on Sunday with a generally limited reaction to the fiscal crisis in Washington, Boehner was preparing an authorization for the federal government to raise its $14.3 trillion debt ceiling - the type of extension Obama has promised to veto.

By 7 p.m. Sunday, after a weekend of top-level negotiations in Washington failed to yield fruit, the U.S. dollar trended downward and gold futures were rising.

In a conference call with rank-and-file GOP House members on Sunday afternoon, Boehner, R-Ohio, said the House and Senate were nearing agreement on a six-month solution, according to one participant. Democrats have consistently ruled out such time-limited agreements. Boehner said he was ready to proceed with that short-term deal, without Obama's sign-off, the participant said.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., met at the White House for a little over an hour Sunday evening. The meeting started shortly before 6 p.m., roughly an hour after the first of the Asian global markets opened. Boehner on Saturday had asked for a debt framework before then, intended to give the Asian markets time to process a last-ditch bid to ward off the market turmoil.

Reid said he brought to Obama a proposal for $2.7 trillion in spending cuts as part of a debt-ceiling deal, seeking Obama's approval, according to a statement. A White House official said Pelosi and Reid updated Obama on congressional negotiations and "reiterated" their shared opposition to short-term debt limit increases.

"Tonight, talks broke down over Republicans' continued insistence on a short-term raise of the debt ceiling, which is something that President Obama, Leader Pelosi, and I have been clear we would not support," Reid said. "Speaker Boehner's plan, no matter how he tries to dress it up, is simply a short-term plan, and is therefore a non-starter in the Senate and with the president."

Boehner's remarks were described in interviews with lawmakers following the call, which began at about 4:30 p.m. Some of the lawmakers said he left them with a sense that some type of plan for how the House will proceed could still be finalized Sunday night, because he told them details of a bill would be coming Monday when they return to Washington. Boehner has said he wants a bill on the House floor by Wednesday, which would require House Rules Committee review by Monday night.

Appearing earlier in the day on Fox News Sunday, Boehner jabbed at Obama's insistence on a long-term ceiling hike, "I know the president's worried about his next election, but my God, shouldn't we be worried about the country?"

Boehner said he would prefer a bipartisan pact, adding, "If that's not possible, I and my Republican colleagues in the House are prepared to move forward on our own … today," he said.

With Reid and Boehner advancing plans to raise the debt ceiling, there is the potential for the two chambers to have dueling plans on their respective floors, even as deliberations behind a joint solution persist.

The biggest difference is that the Reid plan would increase the borrowing limit through at least the November 2012 elections, while the Boehner proposal would mandate two stages -- with the debt ceiling increase coming early next year and contingent on matching spending cuts. Democrats have said that carrying the borrowing authorization past the election is a make-or-break provision. Republicans want two votes, saying they hope to wring more savings.

In the conference call, Boehner asked House Republicans, depicted by Democrats and large swaths of the media as obstructionists, to steady the ranks. He said compromises were necessary, but promised to use the "Cut, Cap, and Balance" amendment as a basis for any compromise, according to a source familiar with the call. Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., seen as playing a key role in reining in Boehner from earlier overtures toward a "grand bargain" with Obama, told members that Republicans were scrutinizing dollar-for-dollar cuts for future action.

"We've seen this coming all year long. But here's the challenge: to stop [Obama], we need a vehicle that can pass in both houses," Boehner said on the call, according to the source.

Pointing out that the Senate had brushed aside the Cut, Cap and Balance amendment, Boehner said: "So the question becomes -- if it's not the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act itself -- what can we pass that will protect our country from what the president is trying to orchestrate?"

According to the source, Boehner added: "And I think the leaders in both parties and both houses of Congress already agree that we need significant reductions. But if we stick together, I think we can win this for the American people ... because I do think there is a path. But it's [going to] require us to stand together as a team. It's [going to] require some of you to make some sacrifices. If we stand together as a team, our leverage is maximized, and they have to deal with us. If we're divided, our leverage gets minimized."

The more Boehner's plan relies on House GOP support, the less likely it would be to clear the Senate. Democrats in the House, Senate, and White House have all signaled unwillingness to sign off on a debt-ceiling hike that does not carry into 2013. Obama has vowed to veto an extension of borrowing authority that does not last into 2013 - after the presidential election.

The nation faces an August 2 deadline to boost its $14.3 trillion debt ceiling. Analysts have warned that even a short-term extension of the borrowing limit could still result in market turmoil. Standard & Poor's has placed the odds of a U.S. credit rating downgrade, resulting in higher interest rates and rattling investor confidence, at 50/50.

Obama, for his part, had been "absolutely" still actively involved in debt-ceiling negotiations with Congress, Geithner said Sunday morning on CNN's State of the Union.

Geithner laid out two paths: a two-tiered approach involving a savings package followed by a tax code and entitlement reform, and another option that hews to the one-swipe "grand bargain" that Obama and Boehner had been hashing over before talks fell apart late on Friday.

The first and more likely path could establish a powerful special committee to devise a blueprint for additional savings and revenues, fanged with deadline authority and tools to circumvent the traditional legislative byways.

Geithner said that Obama had remained engaged with congressional leaders on Saturday, even after the public talks had shifted to congressional leaders in the Capitol.

"Both sides are getting a lot closer," Geithner said.

On NBC's Meet the Press, White House Chief of Staff William Daley reaffirmed Obama's veto threat against a ceiling lift that doesn't extend into 2013. That stance drew scorn from Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., a member of the "Gang of Six" that has been working towards a debt agreement.

"I think that's a ridiculous position, because that's what he's going to get presented with," said Coburn, later adding, "I understand why they're saying they won't say a short-term [deal], but I think they won't have a choice."

Daley also blamed House Republicans for being intractable, summarizing their attitude as "You either come our way, or chaos may reign."

Major Garrett, Billy House, Dan Friedman, Katy O'Donnell, George E. Condon Jr., and Rebecca Kaplan contributed.

]]>

No debt deal in sight after White House meeting

Dan Friedman, Billy House, and Jim O'Sullivan — Sat, 23 Jul 2011 00:00:00 -0400

With no deal in sight for a resolution to the looming economic crisis, President Obama met with Congressional leaders in a brief session Saturday morning, a last-ditch effort to prevent default on the nation's debt.

It was business-casual at the White House, even as both parties looked to brainstorm stopgap solutions to prevent default. Vice President Joe Biden, House Speaker John Boehner, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi attended this morning's session. The meeting, requested by the president yesterday, began at 11:08 a.m and concluded at 11:58 a.m., a White House official said.

House and Senate leaders have said they are prepared to undertake the final push to reach a compromise before the August 2 deadline. Friday's breakdown of talks between Boehner and Obama created the immediate prospect of a faceoff between the House and Senate, with each pushing separate fallback plans. Both parties have said they will be working throughout the weekend in attempts to reach consensus.

"The President wanted to know that there was a plan for preventing national default," McConnell said in a statement. "The bipartisan leadership in Congress is committed to working on new legislation that will prevent default while substantially reducing Washington spending."

House Republican leaders planned to hold a conference call with rank-and-file members after Saturday's meeting.

Pelosi, after the meeting, said she "certainly would hope" that there could be a deal reached this weekend. But she outright rejected the possibility of any short-term agreement, saying that was "absolutely, positively not" going to happen.

"If we're going to do it by August 1, you've got to engineer back. We've got to make every moment count," she said.

Obama, at a White House press conference Friday night notable for his palpable frustration, ruled out any short-term debt limit increase. He said he wanted congressional leaders to present alternatives on Saturday, pressing for a proposal that lasts until 2013-after the presidential election.

Boehner's office on Saturday morning chided Obama for opposing any proposal that does not raise the $14.3 trillion plan by enough to resolve the issue until after the November 2012 election, accusing the president of playing politics. "We do not know what size or shape a final package will take, but it would be terribly unfortunate if the president was willing to veto a debt limit increase simply because its timing would not be ideal for his re-election campaign," a Boehner aide said.

The Boehner aide said the speaker would "reiterate again today that in order for a bill to pass the House, it must include cuts greater than the debt limit increase."

That argument could lay groundwork for the speaker to move forward with a bill that incorporates $1.5 trillion in spending cuts identified in talks led by Biden. That would require raising the debt ceiling again before March 2012. The measure could include two years of spending caps. It would be the first piece of a two-part process that Boehner proposed to Obama before their grand bargain talks collapsed. McConnell has encouraged House GOP leaders to consider this course.

But Obama and Reid, worried the House would try to pressure them into passing the bill just before the August 2 deadline with the suggestion the must accept it or risk default, have said they would reject it.

Reid could start floor action Monday by filing cloture on a joint proposal with McConnell to allow Obama to raise the debt ceiling by $2.5 trillion himself if, ultimately, more than two thirds of both chambers did not stop him.

That measure would also create a special bicameral congressional committee of 12 members that could recommend cuts that would receive expedited consideration and it could include a mechanism to give the deficit reduction plan from the so-called Gang of Six a vote. Reid has suggested the House could then add the same $1.5 trillion in cuts it is eyeing after Senate passage.

But Boehner aides on Friday called this option as good as dead, insisting talks with Reid were starting anew with a clean slate.

Of the potential paths ahead, the McConnell-Reid option has remained deeply unpopular for most House Republicans, and would likely require a good number of House Democrats to join fewer Republicans to pass the House.

But Boehner has stopped short of shutting the door. He said at a press conference July 14 that, "Mitch described his proposal as a last-ditch effort in case we're unable to do anything else… And what may look like something less than optimal today, if we're unable to get to an agreement, might look pretty good a couple of weeks from now."

Major Garrett contributed to this report.

]]>

GOP lawmakers accuse Justice of gunrunner coverup

Jim O'Sullivan — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 00:00:00 -0400

Two high-ranking members of Congress are accusing the Justice Department of a cover-up related to a federal operation that reportedly sent American guns to violent Mexican drug gangs.

Citing private testimony from the acting head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, told Attorney General Eric Holder in a letter dated Tuesday that acting ATF director Kenneth Melson met with the House panel's staff on July 4 and reported that Justice had concealed information about the operation, including the involvement of the FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration.

The operation, Project Gunrunner, has drawn scrutiny amid allegations that, rather than stanch the export of guns from the U.S. to Mexico, it has instead facilitated sales to traffickers. Issa and Grassley are raising the prospect that the purported scandal could have spread much wider and higher than the Obama administration has acknowledged.

Melson has reportedly been under pressure to resign. ATF agents told the Oversight Committee last month that they received orders to allow small-time dealers to operate in efforts to ensnare major operators, which led to drug cartels across the border receiving firearms unfettered by U.S. law enforcement.

The controversy flared in December when authorities tied two weapons at the scene of a border patrol official's shooting death to Operation Fast and Furious, an initiative under Project Gunrunner.

According to the letter, obtained Wednesday by National Journal, Melson took part in the interview with his personal counsel, instead of the Justice and ATF counsel who was originally scheduled to accompany him on July 13.

Department officials, Issa and Grassley said, "sought to limit and control his communications with Congress.

"Knowing what we know so far, we believe it would be inappropriate to make Mr. Melson the fall guy in an attempt to prevent further congressional oversight," Issa and Grassley wrote.

"The evidence we have gathered raises the disturbing possibility that the Justice Department not only allowed criminals to smuggle weapons but that taxpayer dollars from other agencies may have financed those engaging in such activities," they said. "While this is preliminary information, we must find out if there is any truth to it."

The DOJ had not yet responded, the aide said Wednesday morning.

]]>

Military no longer protected from budget knife

Jim O'Sullivan — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 00:00:00 -0500

cut funding for an F-35 alternative engine over Speaker John Boehner's objections was hailed for the unlikely political federation it convened between Democrats leery of expanded defense spending and Republicans leery of, well, spending.

But the larger implication of the 233-198 vote is that it hints at the existence of something that arises only infrequently in Washington: an appetite to reduce the defense budget. Even though the continuing resolution vote only excised $450 million, it bespoke a potential glimmer of cooperation between the parties in a politically dangerous pocket of the largely bipartisan consensus over fiscal restraint.

Cutting Pentagon spending, an uncertain undertaking in even comparatively harmonious Congresses, is made even more so by the historic polarization in today's. Consider that, according to National Journal's 2010 vote ratings, the Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., ties as the chamber's most liberal member. Its ranking minority member, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., slots with seven others as its most conservative.

The chasm is slimmer in the House, where the Armed Services Committee is chaired by Rep. Buck McKeon, R-Calif., tied as the eighth-most conservative House chairman. Its ranking Democrat is Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., who qualifies as a centrist and one of the party's most conservative ranking members.

In the decade after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, for reasons both cravenly political and simply practical, military and national security accounts were held safe from whatever paring budget knives did exist, resulting in almost a doubling of the Pentagon's base budget. Now, the political climes have again blended with obligations and initiatives abroad, this time in the opposite direction.

For fiscal 2012, President Obama has prescribed $553 billion for defense spending outside the Iraq and Afghanistan war budgets, $13 billion below projections, a signal that the expansion has slowed. And Defense Secretary Robert Gates's blueprint for controlling health care costs, including incrementally boosting health care enrollment for troops and families, has met with some openness among House Republicans.

House GOP leadership aides say the totality of the spending reduction appetite overrides the party's traditional insistence on preserving the robustness of the Pentagon's budget. Defense cuts will not come as a first choice, though, they said. And, ultimately, whatever reductions are made won't delve as deeply as they do in other accounts. But, they acknowledge, broader budget disagreements between the House and Senate could throw up roadblocks to decisions on the Pentagon's checkbook.

If the cuts consensus does take hold of the Pentagon, it would mark the third such easing of growth in the last several decades, the post-conflict peace dividends. After its post-Korea atrophy, the defense budget swelled during the Vietnam era, topping out at 9 percent of GDP in 1967 and 1968, according to a Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments analysis. Those reductions were fueled by a transition to a smaller, all-volunteer force. During the presidency of Ronald Reagan, as the United States sought to break the Soviet Union, the spending buildup resumed; in 1985 it reached $538 billion in 2011 dollars and 7.1 percent of GDP. It went into a steady decline again, a 15-year comedown that bottomed out at 3.1 percent of GDP in both 1998 and 2000, before the recent upward trend to 4.9 percent of GDP. These latter expansions in the base budget are the ones Gates and others have labeled unsustainable.

Some analysts say the reductions can't come quickly or deeply enough.

"We have huge, fundamental problems that we're not facing and even though Gates has done some laudable things, but he's just picking at the edge of the paint here," said Winslow Wheeler, director of the Straus Military Reform Project at the Center for Defense Information.

"The things he's talking about do not address these fundamental problems," Wheeler said. "We are still nowhere in addressing either the budget deficit problem or the broader defense problem, and the two are connected … People measure defense by its cost, which is one of the reasons we have the disaster on our hands on our size."

Gordon Adams, associate Office of Management and Budget director for national security under President Bill Clinton and now a professor at American University's School of International Studies and a fellow at the Stimson Center, said even the cuts projected through 2015 represent "child's play." He said the defense budget had reached an "inflection point" that mandated more fundamental action.

"You can do this," Adams told National Journal Daily. "We've done it before, we'll do it again."

But while military spending, in total dollars, has never been this high, neither has Congress been so polarized in the modern era. With the political center having essentially vanished, the path to a reduction pact appears rockier.

It could be even more difficult because, some analysts said, the weightiest factors in the recent base budget growth have been personnel-related costs, including pay increases above the employment cost index and Congress's approval of both expanded and new benefits. With the recent influx of veterans from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, that cost share has grown increasingly unwieldy, as health care accounts for about 9 percent of defense spending, roughly $53 billion per year.

Todd Harrison, a senior fellow in defense budget studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, called the proposed $5 per month bump in premiums for working-age military retirees, to $520 for families, "pretty modest" but likely to further curb Pentagon costs by encouraging veterans to access health care through their current employers.

While the F-35 cut signaled some willingness to confront defense costs, the more treacherous exercise of pulling back on troop and veterans' benefits meets with far less enthusiasm on Capitol Hill, likely a firewall against a more drastic fiscal disarmament. "They seem to be in flux about it," said Wheeler.

"Some of them take seriously that defense is on the table. Some of them seem to sort of skate around it saying, 'Defense is on the table, let's take out that one military band in Hawaii, but make sure it's not in my state, thank you very much.' We're about to see a sorting exercise, where the true hawks are separated from the phonies."

]]>

Shutdown rhetoric carries risk, reward

Jim O'Sullivan — Tue, 08 Feb 2011 00:00:00 -0500

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's continuing resistance to rule out shuttering the federal government is winning him plaudits among Republican strategists, who hail it as the latest evidence of his negotiating acumen.

While Democrats have touted the prospect of a shutdown as a logical outgrowth of what they claim is a nihilistic GOP approach to government, few Republicans appear eager to embrace an actual shutdown. But that hasn't persuaded McConnell to publicly pull the plug on the idea, or stopped some party strategists from celebrating his strategy.

"Never underestimate Leader McConnell's savvy when it comes to negotiating," said Whit Ayres, the Republican pollster.

Of course, there are questions about whether pushing the ambiguity to its extremes represents good politics, let alone governing. But, as Ayres noted, "We're talking about negotiations at this point, not outcomes."

And McConnell has not approached a hard-line stance. During an appearance on NBC's Meet the Press ast month, he parried host David Gregory's thrusts at whether Senate Republicans would go all the way. Asked if a shutdown was a viable option, he replied, "We have two opportunities here to do something important on the issues of spending and debt."
Pressed again, he said again: "As I said, we have two opportunities."

Would he take it off the table?

"We have two opportunities."

Gregory relented, "Wish we had more time."

Some Republicans worry that any hint of a shutdown carries echoes of the disastrous 1995 shutdown, when the public turned away from the GOP and toward former President Bill Clinton. But both Speaker Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., have edged away from the hard line.

The party's general position is nowhere near the pitch Senate Democratic Policy and Communications Chairman Chuck Schumer of New York depicted Thursday, when he described a shutdown as one of the GOP's desirable outcomes.

And McConnell softened somewhat Thursday, when he said in a statement, "The only people talking about shutting down the government are a handful of Senate Democrats at a press conference today."

His spokesman, Don Stewart, said in an e-mail that Schumer appeared "strangely preoccupied" with the prospect.

"It is our hope that he soon realizes the only person talking about a shutdown is Senator Schumer. Most Americans and even many in his own party have come to realize that the gravity of our current fiscal problems calls for constructive dialogue that will lead to serious cuts in spending and debt. That's what Republicans are focused on," Stewart said.

Republican strategist David Winston said McConnell likely was not gaming out the shutdown blinking contest during his "Meet the Press" interview, but rather looking to drag Gregory onto the GOP's talking-point turf.

"All the discourse is: is government going to shut down? My sense of what McConnell is trying to drive home is we finally have the situation to actually get some things done," Winston said, adding that the upcoming debates over the continuing resolution and debt ceiling present "this unique bipartisan moment" that could remake the nation's fiscal outlook.

"What McConnell was trying to do was to get David Gregory to think differently about the opportunity," Winston said.

Where McConnell seems to draw the line is at the saber-rattling that the more unrelenting in his party might prefer, said David Kendall, senior fellow for health and fiscal policy at Third Way, the center-left think tank. "I don't think he's appeasing anybody, because he's not saying, 'we're going to take this fight to the streets and shut the government down,'" Kendall said.

On the flip side, McConnell's positioning presents a problem for Democrats if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid , D-Nev., leads the fight against the GOP House majority's proposed $1.055 trillion cap on discretionary spending, $74 billion below President Obama's fiscal 2011 filing.

"The guy whose head rolls on this whole thing if this shuts down is Harry Reid, not Mitch McConnell," said GOP strategist Jim Innocenzi. "Last I looked, [Senate Democrats] still have the votes. He's pushing Harry Reid into a corner."

"Does he look like he's out there on the fringe if he's talking about this thing seriously? I think it's the context in which he says it," Innocenzi said.

Republican leaders profess to have learned the lessons of 1995, which put Clinton on the path to reelection a little over a year after the GOP's 1994 wave election. While the electorate vaulted true believers into the rank and file, both Boehner and McConnell have reserved for themselves the political realism bred from years in exile.

As the inevitability of some form of spending compromise grows, McConnell can likely use the leverage to wring from the Senate and White House some scale of the reductions Republicans have promised, then declare a measure of victory while continuing to blame Democratic intractability on outlays.

]]>

Peace Corps founder Sargent Shriver dies at 95

Jim O'Sullivan — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 00:00:00 -0500

Sargent Shriver, who helped found the Peace Corps and spearheaded a host of other enduring anti-poverty programs forged through the Great Society, passed away today after a long battle with Alzheimer's disease, according to a family friend.

Shriver, who was 95, was hospitalized over the weekend at Suburban Hospital in Bethesda, Md.

His political career traveled a dramatic arc of social justice, beginning with his isolationist views before World War II, through his desegregation work in Chicago and, later, as president and chairman of the Special Olympics. Shriver, who worked for Joseph P. Kennedy's business empire, married Eunice Kennedy in 1953 and became a trusted family adviser, eventually rising to become a political fixer for brother-in-law President John F. Kennedy.

The couple had five children, most famous of them Maria Shriver, the former NBC anchor and wife of Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Despite his early opposition to America's involvement in World War II, Shriver served Naval duty in the Pacific, winning a Purple Heart after a sea battle at Guadalcanal. After the war, he worked as an executive for the senior Kennedy's Merchandise Mart, eventually becoming a vital component of the family's political operation. In 1960, he helped Kennedy win in two crucial primary states, Wisconsin and West Virginia. After the election, Shriver helmed the talent search that culminated in "the best and brightest" coming to Washington.

Once his brother-in-law took office, Shriver was tasked with exploring the feasibility of an overseas volunteer program. His report became the cornerstone of the Peace Corps, and he was named its first director.

Almost alone among Kennedy's inner circle, Shriver proved durable through President Lyndon Johnson's administration. He was appointed as a special assistant to Johnson and then as director of the Office of Economic Opportunity, the headquarters of the Great Society's implementation: Head Start, VISTA, Community Action, Job Corps, Youth Corps, Legal Services of the Poor.

At Shriver's 1964 swearing-in, Johnson called him "the kind of a person that goes where his president leads him because he loves his country that much."

After growing impatient with Johnson over domestic funding, which had been increasingly constrained by the Vietnam War, Shriver accepted a two-year stint as U.S. ambassador to France. When he returned in 1970, Shriver formed Congressional Leadership of the Future, a forerunner of modern political action committees, putting Shriver on a busy schedule packed with national travel and fundraisers for local candidates.

In 1972, after Thomas Eagleton resigned from the Democratic ticket over revelations about his treatment for depression, presidential nominee George McGovern asked Shriver to be his running mate. Four years later, Shriver launched his own ill-fated presidential campaign.

"It's different being a Kennedy brother-in-law than being a Kennedy," said Martin Nolan, the political journalist who grilled Shriver over the role his marriage played in his success during a 1976 "Meet the Press" appearance.

"He wasn't a bad candidate, but it was just time for somebody totally different, and that was Jimmy Carter," Nolan said.

After ending his political career, Shriver returned to his law firm and served as president of the Special Olympics and later chairman. He held a minority ownership in the Baltimore Orioles from 1989 to 1993.

Well into his 80s, Shriver remained a force within the family, Kennedy associates said, overseeing the Joseph P. Kennedy Foundation along with Eunice. Known in the family for his meticulous attention to his wardrobe, Shriver continued daily exercise even after the disease had taken hold of his mind, according to family associates.

Diagnosed in 2003, Shriver's Alzheimer's had advanced to the extent that he did not recognize his wife, Schwarzenegger said in 2007. Eunice died in August 2009, two weeks before Sen. Edward Kennedy.

]]>

Voters back steep cuts in federal payroll

Jim O'Sullivan — Mon, 22 Nov 2010 00:00:00 -0500

The presidential debt commission's recommendation to downsize the federal payroll by 10 percent during the next decade wins a landslide two-thirds approval from voters, according to a poll released Monday.

The proposal, which the commission's draft plan claimed would eliminate roughly 200,000 positions and save $13.2 billion, garnered 66 percent of respondents in favor, with 22 percent opposed and 12 percent unsure, according to the Rasmussen Reports poll.

The results both echo the insistence on renewed fiscal conservatism that voters sounded in the November 2 midterms and fuel momentum behind the commission's bitter prescriptions-unveiled earlier this month to criticism from across the spectrum, but met with approval from constituencies whose backing showed the perceived gravity of the problem.

Rasmussen asked 1,000 likely voters about cutting the payroll either by slimming the ranks of federal employees or cutting their pay. Earlier surveys have pointed to public opinion that government workers earn more than their private sector counterparts.

A crusade for smaller government became one of the major anthems of the 2010 midterms, and proved a winning strategy in many states, as tea party-backed candidates rode a pox-on-both-their-parties message that held both Democrats and Republicans responsible for inability to check spending, reduce the deficit, and control the national debt.

Spending cuts weren't the only prescription unfurled by the panel, co-chaired by former Clinton Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles and former Sen. Alan Simpson, R-Wyo. Along with domestic and military spending cuts and curtailed Social Security and Medicare growth, the preliminary plan calls for stripping tax deductions while lowering rates and elevating the gas tax.

Final recommendations are due December 1, with support from 14 of the 18 members required to hand Congress an up-or-down vote on the package. More likely is the re-emergence next year of selected provisions of the report.

The poll was conducted November 19-20, with a 3-point error margin.

]]>