Ambinder: Clinton's "Nuclear Option" More Of A Conventional Weapon?
06 May 2008 11:12 am
Wikipedia's history of the phrase "a nuclear option" would make Sen. Bill Frist proud, but in so far as historical references go, it's weaker than an aged dog. I more prefer the context of annihilation and obliteration over procedural gimmickry, but the latter is more apropos for today's politics. On Friday, Tom Edsall headlined his story about the upcoming rules and bylaws committee meeting of the Democratic Party, "Clinton Camp Says It Will Use The Nuclear Option."
THE OPTION Edsall refers to is an unspecified plan to somehow use the campaign's leverage on the committee to seat delegates from Florida and Michigan, thereby reducing the pledged delegate gap with Barack Obama by 55. Edsall's implication, derived, I assume, from his conversations with Clinton campaign allies, is that the Clinton campaign is currently debating whether to play this trump card; the "nuclear option" lingo makes it clear that Edsall believes that the card is improperly played -- that the process of delegation challenges does not comport with a spirit of fair play.
IN FAIRNESS TO the Clinton campaign, they've made no secret about their desire to seat the delegations from Florida and Michigan. And, absent new, DNC-approved delegate selection contests in those states, the RBC and then the credentials committee are the "legal" and appropriate forums to hear those challenges under DNC rules. RBC meetings are open and above-board; the challenges set to be argued will be argued. The Obama campaign does not believe that a majority of the RBC's members are Clinton supporters; the Clinton campaign is surely counting votes, but they're also not certain of the outcome. It seems indecent to suggest that RBC members, many of whom have the equivalent of tenure on the committee and are sticklers for DNC rules, would so eagerly and quickly jettison sound judgment in favor of politics. Some will, some won't. It further seems unfair to lump the cases of Florida and Michigan together, especially when it comes to what's fair and what's foul. In Florida, Clinton and Obama both appeared on the ballot; in Michigan, Obama's name (by his own choice, yes) did not.
THE DNC HAS told outside parties that the RBC is free to do what it wants with the challenges. That said, the RBC is not free from questions about its institutional politics. If it overturns its sanctions in their entirety, it puts into jeopardy its own legitimacy and that of the Democratic National Committee. (We were totally right until we were totally wrong. So, Michigans of 2012, don't worry about the calendar restrictions). If it accepts the logic of the challenges and awards to the candidates half of their Michigan and Florida delegations, it will face the opprobrium of the Obama campaign and its legion of supporters (and donors). If it turns down the challenges, it may be accused of kicking the can down the road. In late June, the credentials committee of the DNC takes jurisdiction over delegation matters, and when they do, everything litigated in May will be relitigated.
Fact Check: Hillary and OPEC
Today, Hillary said she would take on OPEC:
"We’re going to go right at OPEC," she said. "They can no longer be a cartel, a monopoly that get together once every couple of months in some conference room in some plush place in the world, they decide how much oil they’re going to produce and what price they’re going to put it at," she told a crowd at a firehouse in Merrillville, IN.
"That’s not a market. That’s a monopoly," she said, saying she'd use anti-trust law and the World Trade Organization to take on OPEC.
Hillary has supported legislative proposals in the Senate that would go after OPEC by amending anti-trust law. Specifically, she supported Sen. Kohl's NOPEC proposal as part of the Senate version of the 2007 Energy Bill. She reiterated her support for that proposal, as well has challenging OPEC through the WTO, when she introduced her plan to reduce gas prices last week.
Fact Check: Hillary Did Not Say 'Money Grubbers'
Many news outlets reported that Hillary said last night: "Why don't we hold these Wall Street money-grubbers responsible for their role in this recession?"
This is not true.
In fact, Hillary said: "I stood up to Wall Street, calling on them to take responsibility for their role in the home mortgage crisis. Work with us, I said, let’s have a moratorium on home foreclosures, let’s freeze interest rates. Isn’t it better to keep people in their homes paying what they can afford than to have vacant houses that stand next to houses where people are trying to raise their children and those houses become magnets for blight and crime? Why don't we hold these Wall Street money brokers responsible for their role in this recession?"
Listen to the audio HERE.
Audio: Hillary Did Not Commit To Lifting Teamsters Consent Decree
This morning's Wall Street Journal revealed that Sen. Obama unequivocally supports lifting the teamsters federal consent decree:
Sen. Barack Obama won the endorsement of the Teamsters earlier this year after privately telling the union he supported ending the strict federal oversight imposed to root out corruption, according to officials from the union and the Obama campaign.
…Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor confirmed the candidate's position in a statement to The Wall Street Journal, saying that Sen. Obama believes that the board "has run its course," because "organized crime influence in the union has drastically declined." Mr. Vietor said Sen. Obama took that position last year.
This morning on Good Morning America, Sen. Obama contradicted his campaign and said he had not made a commitment.
Today, the Politico published audio of Hillary speaking to the Teamsters. Hillary says that she'd be open to "looking at" the status of the consent decree but made no commitments.
This is consistent with what the Hillary campaign and the Teamsters said publicly before this audio was released. Phil Singer told the Wall Street Journal: "Sen. Clinton is making no promises about lifting the consent decree." The Teamsters described Hillary's position as "wishy-washy."
It’s No Secret: Florida and Michigan Count and Their Delegates Should Be Seated
The Huffington Post describes a "secret" plan that the Clinton Campaign has to seat the Michigan and Florida delegations. There is no secret plan. In fact, this story misrepresents the process laid out in the DNC rules for resolving the questions surrounding the seating of the Michigan and Florida delegations.
The Clinton campaign has been vocal in stating that the votes of 2.5 million people must be respected. Hardly a day goes by when a Clinton official doesn’t publicly declare that the votes of Michigan and Florida count and that the delegations from those states should be seated.
DNC members from Michigan and Florida have filed challenges with the DNC to seat the Florida and Michigan delegations. The process being followed to adjudicate these challenges is completely consistent with the DNC rules. The Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) is the DNC body charged with dealing with these challenges until the 56th day before the convention, and its process is public and transparent.
The membership of the RBC does not - in large part - turn over. A former Secretary of Labor, and the grandson of FDR who is a long time party activist and has been a co-chair of the committee for several election cycles chair it. Other members include a former chair of the party, Al Gore’s Campaign Manager (who is a former co-chair of the RBC as well), and an executive board member of the NAACP. Although the RBC is comprised of people who support both candidates, these people take their roles as party activits seriously.
The DNC process will decide the fate of the Florida and Michigan delegations. It is an open and transparent process -- unlike the backroom deals proposed by the Obama campaign that would disenfranchise the nearly 2.5 million people who voted in Florida and Michigan.
Obama Ad Misrepresents Krugman Quote To Attack Hillary
Sen. Obama has a new ad which claims that "experts" believe Hillary's plan for a gas tax holiday would "boost oil industry profits." Their citation is an April 28 column by Paul Krugman, which discusses Sen. McCain's plan, not Hillary's plan:
The impression that Mr. McCain’s tax talk is all about pandering is reinforced by his proposal for a summer gas tax holiday — a measure that would, in fact, do little to help consumers, although it would boost oil industry profits.
Hillary's plan differs from Sen. McCain's in that it is financed with a windfall profits tax on oil companies. Krugman, who does not support Hillary's plan, acknowledges that her plan will not increase profits for the oil industry.
Krugman adds: "Just to be clear: I don’t regard this as a major issue. It’s a one-time thing, not a matter of principle…Health care reform, on the other hand, could happen, and is very much a long-term issue — so poisoning the well by in effect running against universality, as Obama has, is a much more serious breach."
Fact Check: Hillary and the Windfall Profits Tax
Today on Meet the Press, Sen. Obama claimed Hillary was using the same windfall profits tax to pay for two proposals:
Now, Senator Clinton says that she's going to use the windfall profits tax to fill it. First of all, she's already said she's going to use that for something else, as I have, and that is to invest in clean energy and, and-- other important measures. So, that money she's already spending twice.
This is false and misleading.
To pay for the gas tax holiday, Hillary is calling for a windfall tax on the oil companies' 2008 profits. It's an immediate proposal. Hillary has never proposed a tax on 2008 profits previously.
Hillary would continue the windfall tax on 2009 profits and beyond, and that revenue would go to her strategic energy fund and for renewable energy.
The Facts Behind Obama's Gas Tax Attacks
“Considering that Sen. Obama voted to suspend the gas tax three times when gas cost less than $2 a gallon and has an energy lobbyist chairing his Indiana campaign, it's hard to take his latest criticisms very seriously. Senator Obama wants Americans to pay the gas tax but Senator Clinton thinks the big oil companies should pay it this summer.” - Clinton spokesperson Phil Singer
Today, Sen. Obama said: Now Senator Clinton is spending a lot of money on an ad attacking me for not supporting her and John McCain’s idea of a gas tax holiday for the summer...In fact, it is my understanding today, Senator Clinton had to send a surrogate to speak out on behalf of this plan and all she could find- get this, a lobbyist from Shell oil to explain how this was going to be good for consumers. [Laughter] It’s a Shell-game, literally.
Facts:
- Sen. Obama voted three times for a gas tax holiday in 2000 when gas prices were less than $2 a gallon.
- Kip Tew, the top advisor to Obama's Indiana campaign is an energy lobbyist. Tew said recently, "I'm not running away from the fact that I'm a lobbyist. I have a healthy client list, and I'm proud of it."
Kantor Clip Doctored
There is a YouTube clip circulating the internet of Mickey Kantor, a former Clinton advisor, allegedly saying derogatory things about residents of Indiana.
This clip is a total fabrication. The filmmaker confirmed that the video, which originates from the 1992 film War Room, has been doctored.
UPDATE: ABC News reports that the filmmakers behind the War Room documentary posted an official transcript, exonerating Kantor. The filmmakers Chris Hegedus and D. A. Pennebaker write: "We would like to respond to some erroneous statements made today about our film, THE WAR ROOM. These statements alleged certain remarks to Mickey Kantor that simply are not true. The transcript of the scene in question confirms this." Read the full transcript here.
Sen. Obama versus Hillary on Gas Tax Holiday
The choice is simple: Senator Obama wants the American people to pay the gas tax this summer but Senator Clinton thinks Big Oil should.
The Clinton gas tax holiday is financed exclusively through a tax on windfall profits from oil companies and keeps the Highway Transportation Trust fund intact. Hillary opposed a plan in 2000 for a gas tax holiday because it was financed with transportation funds.
Sen. Obama voted three times for a gas tax holiday in 2000 when gas prices were less than $2 a gallon.
