Executive Order for Contract Disclosure

Democrat Rep. Anna Eshoo: both parties "...should oppose any Amendment designed to keep the public less informed..."

On July 7, 2011, viewable in the CSPAN Video Library, Republican Rep. Tom Cole rose to speak in favor of his Amendment No. 4, which would circumvent an April presidential order that would require companies bidding on federal contracts to disclose federal campaign contributions. Cole stated, "Companies wouldn't be judged merely by the merits of their past performance, by their capability to do the job, but would also be obviously considered on the basis of who they gave money to or against."  Cole said that disclosure would hamper a company's right to donate to political parties and campaign candidates that they choose.  


Democrat Rep. Norman Dicks rose in opposition to the Republican Amendment, "Our system has been improved by having public disclosure of political contributions.  The more the public knows about where the money is coming from, the better off the citizenry is."  He described the Amendment as an attempt to prevent disclosure of government contracts and especially contributions given to third party entities. The Republicans say the disclosure could be used nefariously.  Dick notes, "[Republicans] argue that companies should not disclose more information because people in power could misuse that information to retaliate against them.  Using the oppositions logic all campaign disclosures would be bad."  He countered that there are current laws which require disclosure and the Republican logic would need apply there too. His side, the Democrats, worry companies could make contributions secretly and notes it's what they're trying to avoid.  "... we already know, the Boeings the Lockeeds, the General Dynamics... they all make contributions and they are all disclosed. What's wrong with disclosure?" Dicks urges a "No" vote on Coles Amendment.  Republican Cole rises again and states, "The intent here is to make sure that we never link political contributions with the awarding of government contracts." 



Democrat Rep. Anna Eshoo rises and states that Cole's Amendment is an attempt to block disclosure, which is about "disinfectant" and "sunshine" to what's going on with contractors who do business with the Federal Government.  Eshoo reminds Republicans that the contracts are paid for with tax-payer dollars and asks that there be transparency and accountability for where their cash goes.  Anna says both parties "should oppose any amendment designed to keep the public less informed... We know who supports this amendment, the American League of Lobbyists."  Republicans had previously opposed contribution limits, stating they need disclosure instead.  Now that bills to promote disclosure are on the table, Republicans write Amendments to oppose them.  

Republican Rep. Tom Cole:

"The intent here is to make

sure that we never link political 

contributions with the

awarding of government contracts."

A verbal and recorded vote were taken. Republicans voted in favor of the Amendment to block disclosure.  Democrats voted against it in favor of disclosure.  With House Republicans outnumbering Democrats by 48 seats, Cole's Amendment to block the executive order for disclosure, that Democrats clearly oppose, passes in the House.  

Credibility of Budget Plans

The Labor Party's shadow chancellor of the UK, Ed Balls' blog on August 6, 2011 read, “As I said in my LSE speech in June, deficit reduction plans are only credible if they have political agreement and they deliver on what they promise." Balls questioned whether the US Congress's plans can be delivered with confidence.  

Ed Balls, British Labor MP

Watching the debt fiasco on CSPAN, it was clear that Republicans were the party facilitating the doubt - to say the least. The S&P press release singled out Republicans directly as reason for the downgrade, "Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act."  S&P had counted on the Bush tax cuts to expire and gave the Republicans stance on revenue as reason for the downgrade, whereas nowhere does the release single out Democrats.  

Republican Rep.

Tom Graves (grave digger)

There were talks of shutting down the government.  Republican representative Tom Graves said, "Let's put government in a box and shrink the box over five years."  Democrat Representative Anna Eshoo posted a message in her facebook notes on April 8, 2011 that in the event of a shutdown of the federal government, she would keep her offices in California and Washington DC open and that her staff would remain on duty without pay.  

A June 30, 2011 Bloomberg article noted, "S&P would lower its sovereign top-level AAA ranking to D, the last rung on its scale if the U.S. can’t pay its debt..." and "...Moody’s Investors Service said it will probably reduce its ranking if the government fails to increase the debt limit, leading to a default."  All the while  presidential candidate Michele Bachmann passed through media outlets vowing that she would not raise the debt ceiling.  Of  course FOX News was on board with Senate and House republicans including Republican Representative Bachmann along the way, downplaying the consequences of a downgrade to the creditworthiness of the county's debt or a US default.  When later, S&P did end up downgrading the country's rating to a AA+, even though the ceiling was raised.

Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann

Ed Balls alludes to the mirroring US budget plans of the British budget plans and how the Republicans have not learned lessons by observing the British austerity outcomes, "That is why I am fearful that Republican Congressional leaders have learned the wrong lesson from the British experience over the past twelve months."