Now that the GOP has control of the House, expect them to start issuing subpoenas against the White House. The Daily Beast notes:

One of the biggest consequences of the 1994 Republican Revolution was the wave of investigations the new GOP majority carried out against the White House, culminating in President Clinton's impeachment. Now that the 2010 midterm elections are over, many Democrats and progressive commentators are concerned the same fate will befall President Obama, given the intensity of conservative loathing for his administration. Here are five areas where investigations are likely.

Those 5 areas are: the Joe Sestak deal, the new Black Panther Party, the BP spill, the czars, and the inspector general.

What did The Daily Beast miss? And what should the House leaders target first in their investigations?

My pick: the czars.

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Aaron Miller
Joined
May '10
Aaron Miller

Who qualifies as an independent investigator when they do these investigations? How does one avoid Obama's influence over the DoJ?

If Republicans do this, they should limit themselves to the clearest examples of malfeasance. Too many investigations and many voters will dismiss it as political gaming (politics as usual). A weak case could call others into question in public perception.

The Black Panthers case might be best to pursue.

oleneo65
Joined
May '10
oleneo65

My list - in order of importance:

  • BHO's past -
  • New Black Panther
  • Who authored the HC bill
  • Who is on the other end of the teleprompter and BHO's Blackberry
  • The Czars
  • Joe Sestak deal
  • the inspector general
  • BP well
~Paules
Joined
Jun '10
~Paules

Aaron Miller: Who qualifies as an independent investigator when they do these investigations? How does one avoid Obama's influence over the DoJ?

If Republicans do this, they should limit themselves to the clearest examples of malfeasance. Too many investigations and many voters will dismiss it as political gaming (politics as usual). A weak case could call others into question in public perception.

The Black Panthers case might be best to pursue. · Nov 3 at 8:04am

I'm with Aaron on this one. The Black Panther case is so over the top that it's a win-win for conservatives. We'll need issues that keep the Tea Party motivated. This is certainly one of them.

Steve Manacek

My impression is that the post-1994 investigations ultimately did more harm than good. In the current environment, I think anything the Democrats can portray as a "vendetta" or primarily partisan in nature will have the same result. Any investigations should focus on things that can be easily framed as in the public interest -- the czars, for example, or inadequate accountability in regulatory agencies. Personally, I'd love to see DOJ taken apart lefty lawyer by lefty lawyer -- but I fear that the potential for the Dems to make charges of "partisan witch hunt" stick are too great. The BP oil spill might pass the "public interest" test, but you have to pick where to spend your political capital, and I don't think anything that could be perceived as undertaken in the interest of a giant corporation is the best place we've got right now. My own view is that the Left will shift immediately to trying to advance its agenda through the EPA and other loosely-regulated agencies -- and keeping this from happening against the will of the people is where we need to expend our capital.

Denise Moss

I think it's a mistake to start right off with investigations...it's business as usual in the eyes of the public and with our nation's economy in such dire straights, it think the lack of focus on jobs, taxes and Obamacare will backfire for the GOP. (Wasn't last night even a bigger repudiation of Obamamedicine than the Dems?) Sestek's gone. Reverse racism doesn't sell. BP has cleaned up its mess. If they have to go after anything, the czars seems the most egregious in terms of Constitutionality and useful in exposing the president to his own horrendous decision making.

Adam Freedman
Steve Manacek: My own view is that the Left will shift immediately to trying to advance its agenda through the EPA and other loosely-regulated agencies -- and keeping this from happening against the will of the people is where we need to expend our capital. · Nov 3 at 8:18am

I agree. I saw this emerging as a GOP talking point last night and I think it has real possibilities. First, it has the virtue of being true - the administration is aggressively relying on agencies to do what Congress will not do. There is a limit to how much power you can delegate to administrative agencies beyond the letter of the enabling legislation (though there are fuzzy edges). Secondly, it makes for good soundbites - Obama trying to rule through unelected bureaucrats, etc.

flownover
Joined
Aug '10
flownover

Czars are out of their reach. (1)Funding is the door there.

BP ? Just wait until you try subpoena on Jamie Gorelick !

(2) 16000 new IRS agents ? Why ?

(3) Pension guarantees for unions ?

(4) GM and Chrysler - can we get the contract/bankruptcy law back on track ?

(5) TARP

(6) Bernanke/Geithner policies or lack of them

(7) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - privatize now, close down the biggest trough in town, throw Mudd,Raines,Johnson in jail , Get the money back, they took over $200 million into their own pockets. see Gorelick above !!

(8) Push SEIU investigation, Bank of America loans to same


Joined
Jul '10
Your Grace

The climate change racket seems like a good one.

Good Berean
Joined
Oct '10
Good Berean

I agree with all three contributors. The Republicans need to be gracious in victory. They should do some investigating of these various situations but keep it low profile.

The leadership needs to prioritize developing their team (and that includes effectively mentoring and integrating freshman legislators into that team) and a team strategy that will be supported by the conservative electorate.

This is not a time for sharpening knives. It is a time of shoring up the foundations.

Pilgrim
Joined
Jun '10
Pilgrim

Czars - these should be the confirmation hearings that the Senate was denied, coupled with a through exploration of the czar's view of their authority. This is a clear congressional responsibility to determine what legislation needs to be clarified, amended, or repealed.

There are too many racial mine-fields in going after the Voting Rights Section of the DOJ given the hostility of the media and the usual inability of Congress-persons to avoid making fools of themselves in public hearings. DOJ would respond to subpoenae by sending smart, articulate, confrontational African-American lawyers to paint Issa's committee as white guys looking down from an elevated platform jumping ugly.

Edited on Nov 3, 2010 at 8:52am
Michael Tee
Joined
Jul '10
Michael Tee

Adam Freedman

Steve Manacek: My own view is that the Left will shift immediately to trying to advance its agenda through the EPA and other loosely-regulated agencies -- and keeping this from happening against the will of the people is where we need to expend our capital.

I agree. I saw this emerging as a GOP talking point last night and I think it has real possibilities. First, it has the virtue of being true - the administration is aggressively relying on agencies to do what Congress will not do. There is a limit to how much power you can delegate to administrative agencies beyond the letter of the enabling legislation (though there are fuzzy edges). Secondly, it makes for good soundbites - Obama trying to rule through unelected bureaucrats, etc.

The problem, such as it is, is that cutting funding of these agencies can be a political loser in most cases.

"Sean Duffy is cutting EPA funding! He doesn't want clean water!"

"Pat Toomey wants to cut funding for the DoE! He doesn't want us to be energy independent!"

It takes better communication skills than the GOP currently possesses to win the argument.


Joined
Oct '10
Lo Fon
Denise Moss: I think it's a mistake to start right off with investigations...it's business as usual in the eyes of the public and with our nation's economy in such dire straights, it think the lack of focus on jobs, taxes and Obamacare will backfire for the GOP. (Wasn't last night even a bigger repudiation of Obamamedicine than the Dems?) Sestek's gone. Reverse racism doesn't sell. BP has cleaned up its mess. If they have to go after anything, the czars seems the most egregious in terms of Constitutionality and useful in exposing the president to his own horrendous decision making. · Nov 3 at 8:19am

Denise, you're exactly right. It's the economy stupid. If it is perceived that the Republicans are playing political games, we're in trouble. Any changes/defunding should be framed in the context of its benefit to economic growth. The economy should be the tip of the spear of anything the Republicans do.

Just in Time
Joined
May '10
Just in Time

The main thing that needs to be investigated is the HC Bill. (I'd also like them to look into how Harry Reid got re-elected.

Publius
Joined
Oct '10
Publius

The Republicans need to make their primary focus on the economic issues and health care, but keep in mind that they're not going to have a lot of legislative success given that the Senate is still being run by Harry Reid and Obama is likely to be unrepentant and aggressive with his veto pen.

One of the key functions of Congress is providing oversight of the federal government and the investigative process is part of that role. The Republicans should not play political games with their responsibility in this area, but they should take it very seriously. Making sure the Justice Department is as unpolitical as possible should also be a priority for Congress.

One of the biggest losers last night? Charlie Rangel. Sure, we was re-elected, but now he won't have Pelosi to protect him from the Congressional ethics process. I don't expect him to be removed from office or even face any significant punishment, but there might be a better and brighter light on him now.

G.A. Dean
Joined
May '10
G.A. Dean

I'm not a big fan of Congressional investigations, but it would be nice for someone to dig a bit deeper into voter and election fraud. ACORN may be gone but the players remain and the impulse that drove it along for years also remains. That issue can be positioned as a "reform" rather than a vendetta.

Tommy De Seno

How the heck did Crystal Bowersox not win American Idol? I want answers! ANSWERS!!!!

Other than that, I'm with those who don't dig congressional investigations unless it's a truly meaty issue.

Legislate, don't investigate.

And by legislate I mean repeal prior legislation ;-)

Pilgrim
Joined
Jun '10
Pilgrim

In early comment I plunked for going after some of the czars. On further thought, the actual title/position of these officials are variants on presidential assistant, counselor to the presidient etc. This pretty much insulates them from the congressional subpoena power under executive privilege - unified presidency doctrine and all that.

Stokedonlife
Joined
Sep '10
Stokedonlife

Countless dead bodies under Fannie and Freddie, Pigford Settlements, Obamacare bribes, DOJ panther case, billions missing unaccounted for in Afgan/Iraq, Acorn, Charlie Rangle, Maxine Waters, Barney Frank, Audit the Fed, where do you even start. It may not be politically advantageous to be too aggressive too fast but they have got to do something about the unparalleled corruption

tabula rasa
Joined
Jun '10
tabula rasa

The number 1 thing I would do would have the hearing on Obamacare that never took place, with experts fully prepared to lay out in detail the true financial impact and the idiocy of most of its provisions. I'd also bring Dr. What's-his-name (the head of Medicare) and have the hearing on him we never got to have.

John Marzan
Joined
Oct '10
John Marzan

What to investigate:
1) the new Black Panther Party and corruption at DOJ
2) What deals were made with House members to get Obamacare passed (ambassadorships? Ben Nelson's kickbacks etc)
3) Investigate how the stimulus money is being wasted


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In