Tag: aei
Kevin McCarthy Withholds His Secret Three-Page Deal Memo With Far Right

Kevin McCarthy Withholds His Secret Three-Page Deal Memo With Far Right

At 5:00 PM ET Monday the House will reconvene to vote on the rules for how the 118th Congress will operate – discussions which consumed now-Speaker Kevin McCarthy and his top lieutenants last week as they wheeled and dealed to get him the gavel. Few know all the details of what McCarthy gave away to win the coveted Speaker’s seat, but it took five days, 15 different votes, some last-minute begging, and a Republican-on-Republican near-fist-fight on the floor of the House of Representatives before he was able to cinch the deal.

But not included in that 55-page document, according to PunchBowl News, is a “secret three-page addendum that McCarthy and his allies hashed out during several days of grueling negotiations with the House Freedom Caucus.”

Punchbowl News’ John Bresnahan on MSNBC Monday afternoon told Katy Tur that the “really controversial” secret three-page addendum is being “circulated” among some House Republicans but none are allowed to keep a copy, and it is not being released publicly. Presumably no Democrat has been shown the document.

The secret addendum, PunchBowl News also reported, “includes the most controversial concessions McCarthy made in order to become speaker – three seats on the Rules Committee for conservatives, freezing spending at FY2022 levels, a debt-ceiling strategy, coveted committee assignments and more.”

Indeed, while some House Republicans have claimed they were not given anything to vote for or to not vote against McCarthy, Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL), who placed third in the race for Speaker, admits he traded his slim prospect of becoming Speaker for a seat on powerful House GOP Steering Committee. Indeed, his name is the last one on the list.

One of there most controversial parts of the rules package is the creation of a“select subcommittee on the weaponization of the federal government,” which would investigate the Department of Justice’s current criminal investigations into the January 6, 2021 insurrection.

Some familiar with the U.S. Constitution’s separation of powers provisions suggest they cannot do this.

“This idea of ‘reviewing’ criminal cases in progress is really about interfering with them,” tweets former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance. She notes, “it violates separation of powers. MAGA Republicans know this. They’re setting up a situation where the AG will properly refuse to provide info, which they’ll use as a pretext to impeach.”

Norman Ornstein, an emeritus scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), and a contributing editor for The Atlantic, calls it “a test for these so-called centrist Republicans. If they vote for this horrible rules package, they are complicit in radical, dangerous extremism. Never, ever call them moderates or reasonable.”

MSNBC’s Steve Benen reports some of the deals McCarthy made, presumably which appear either in the 55-page rules agreement or in the secret three-page addendum, include a “Motion to vacate the chair,” and three seats on the Rules Committee going to the far right.

More bad news, not just for McCarthy and the U.S. but the world economic system.

“McCarthy reportedly agreed to pursue a hostage crisis that would force the country into a possible default, while scrapping the so-called Gephardt rule, which allows the Congress to suspend, rather than lift, the debt limit.”

It’s not certain McCarthy will get the rules package passed, certainly not certain it will pass on the first round of voting.

“Republican @RepNancyMace told me yesterday that she’s considering withholding her vote on the Rules package until she gets more information about the handshake agreements that Speaker McCarthy made with members but hasn’t yet disclosed,” reports CBS News’ Margaret Brennan.

The Freedom Caucus, which is the beneficiary of many of these “really controversial” secret rules, is the most far-right caucus in Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA), reportedly under investigation by the FBI for his role in the January 6, 2021 insurrection. Perry refused to comply with a subpoena from the House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack. Perry on Sunday announced he would not recuse himself from serving on the House Judiciary Committee, which has oversight responsibility of the DOJ and FBI, despite being investigated by them.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

AEI Does Itself A Disservice With Obvious Lies

AEI Does Itself A Disservice With Obvious Lies

How many Americans think income inequality is our greatest challenge, as President Obama asserts?

According to what, at least until now, has been one of the most respected pro-business research organizations in Washington, the number of Americans holding this view totals just 315.

The figure of 315 comes from James Pethokoukis, a “scholar” at the American Enterprise Institute. It was published Monday without irony or even a hint that it was a poor attempt at humor.

Pethokoukis is a writer with a well-established reputation for pieces that events and the passage of time showed to be wrong in premise, context and specifics.

He began his AEI blog, which National Review Onlinereprinted:

Forget about the 1 percent versus the 99 percent. It’s really more like the 0.000001 percent versus everybody else. A tiny group — mostly comprising the Obama White House, a bunch of Washington Democrats, progressive economists, and the media elite — continues to fixate on income inequality as America’s greatest challenge.

Most everybody else, the 99.999999 percent, sees things differently. Surveys continue to show Americans most worried about jobs and economic growth, not the income gap between the top and bottom.

The idea that only 315 Americans think inequality is our top economic problem will not pass muster even with Fox News.

The latest Fox News poll finds (at page 10) that 12 percent of Americans rank inequality as “the most important economic issue facing the country.”

If you count everyone, using the standard Pethokoukis did, that means 37.8 million of us, not 315. But, hey, Pethokoukis’s unsourced figure is only off by a factor of 120,000. Close enough for AEI, evidently.

And, of course, Pethokoukis cited no source because he just made it up. In that he is like too many on the right in America, who mix fact and fantasy and thus sow confusion on all sorts of issues that degrade our civic debate. (The left and center have people who do this, too, but they are not sponsored by the likes of AEI.)

Two years ago Jonathan Chait deconstructed one particularly egregious piece of nonsense on inequality by Pethokoukis. Chait’s New York magazine piece was titled “Inequality and Bullshit.

Chait drew on the brilliant and hilarious short book by Harry Frankfurt, a retired Princeton philosophy professor, titled On Bullshit. In 7,000 words Frankfurt lays out a theory of commentary that does not rise to outright lying, but bears little connection to truth, which describes Pethokoukis’ writings quite well.

Chait noted that Pethokoukis, in a piece on a new official report on income inequality, “doesn’t directly challenge any of these facts, though he wants his audience to think he does. He cites a bunch of figures that pick away at pieces of the general picture…”

Why should progressives care about the bullshit that AEI spreads when it publishes Pethokoukis?

To improve America so it can be a shining light of what the human spirit can accomplish, our nation needs a thoughtful conservative movement, one that argues for holding on to the tried and true, not just holding on to what is, as some conservatives have always done (see slavery, arguments for its economic necessity).

America needs constructive and serious conservative thinkers because their work will promote public policy debates rooted in facts and reason, as those sons of the Enlightenment, the Founders, intended.

And this, in turn, will foster better-reasoned arguments and more effective policy solutions from those whose vision is of what America can in time become rather than what it is. That is because they will have to address serious critiques, not bull.

In previous columns about a David Brooks column on inequality and National Review’sMark Steyn on climate research, I showed how failure to do basic reporting produced nonsense in both cases and a lawsuit against Steyn and National Review that may doom that publication.

The tolerance for low-grade reporting, or none at all, by writers on the right does not help our democracy endure, but instead tears at its fabric.

Since Pethokoukisian-type bull is not just tolerated, but profitable and voter-energizing, we get politicians, pundits and primetime personalities who consistently spout provable nonsense. This continues even when as time passes and facts emerge from events, their comments are repeatedly shown to be false or misleading and, sometimes, calculated lies (see G.W. Bush, tax cuts will make everyone better off.)

It is one thing when the Fox News channel gives a home to people who either just make it up or distort facts beyond reason.

After all Glenn Beck, who used to work there, and Sean Hannity who still does, say they are not journalists but entertainers, at least when it is convenient to do so. Yet no disclaimer appears on the screen when their style of entertainment is broadcast, just the logo for the Fox News channel, which is among the reasons I mock it as Faux News.

By melding entertainment and news, Rupert Murdoch and his Fox chief, Roger Ailes, grow ever richer, a powerful incentive. Unlike Jon Stewart, they are not upfront about any of it being a joke or, in the case of many Fox broadcasts, a joke on the audience.

But Pethokoukis holds forth at a nonprofit organization that declares itself allied with truth as best as it can be discerned, not profit. He is listed as a “scholar” at the American Enterprise Institute, a nonprofit pro-business research house whose website says it is “dedicated to research and education.”

AEI is a big deal in Washington policy making. Its studies, reports and expert commentary carry weight with both Democrats and Republicans. AEI is treated respectfully and its actual experts are often featured by serious news organizations like PBS, NPR, The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal.

It also has a reputation for the integrity of its numbers. I often find fault with AEI interpretations (and sometimes agree with them), but I always have treated its reports with respect, at least until now.

AEI annual reports disclose only a summary of its finances, which is considered poor practice for public charities, and gives some hint of how a lightweight like Pethokoukis got in at AEI.

The summary shows that AEI took in $44.4 million last year, earning a surplus of $11.2 million after expenses, a remarkable figure given how many public policy nonprofits struggle just to keep the lights on.

AEI’s tax return, available at Guidestar.org, shows revenues are growing fast. It took in $38.8 million in 2012 and $34.6 million in 2011.

Pay at AEI is very good. Resident scholar Christopher DeMuth made a base salary of $303,247 in 2012 plus other compensation that brought his total pay to just under $1.5 million – four years after he retired as AEI president.

That makes AEI somewhat like the top 1 percent of individuals, who captured 94.5 percent of the income growth between 2009 — when the Great Recession officially ended — and 2012. During those same years the bottom 90 percent had negative income growth of almost 16 percent.

Those figures show AEI has the resources to hire first-rate talent. The question, then, is why the American Enterprise Institute sullies its good name by calling Pethokoukis a “scholar” and publishing his drivel.

Photo: mSeattle via Flickr