Mullings: An Americanl Cyber-column By Rich Galen

�

Click here for the Secret Decoder Ring to this issue!

Click here to keep up with Galen's Speaking Schedule

Looking for a back issue of Mullings? They're in the Archives

Click here to see the amusing Atlanta Travelogue:
Parts I, II, & III: The Trip to Reagan National, Getting Through
Reagan National, The Flight to Atlanta
Part IV: Atlanta: The Home of the Braves and the Land of the
Free Local Calls
Part V: I Find the Lines
Part VI: The Plane to Washington

Click here to see the exciting Car Tax Adventures

Family Feud

Wednesday, October 17, 2001

Click here for an Easy Print Version
Your Nation's Capital was abuzz Monday and Tuesday with the word that there was a rift between the White House and the Republican majority in the U.S. House over the size of the tax cuts included in the economic stimulus package approved by the House Ways and Means Committee last week.

Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle and House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt were the first to lash out at House Republicans over the tax cuts, about $100 Billion, significantly higher than the President's request, which was in the $60 to $75 Billion range.

Adam Clymer, of the New York Times, and Washington post writers Glenn Kessler and Juliet Eilperin jumped on the comments of Daschle and Gephardt to point out that the number of days of bipartisanship in the Congress might have ended at about 30.

The Democrats' position appeared to be strengthened on Monday when Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill said, according to Reuters, "that a $100 billion fiscal stimulus package approved by the Ways and Means Committee last week was too generous."

Thems were fightin' words according to a member of the House Republican leadership staff. "That was not helpful," Mullings was told of the O'Neill remarks. "In fact the White House had promised us there would be no public reaction like that."

According to another staffer, the bill is going to the House floor tomorrow, Thursday, and will likely sail through in spite of Democratic opposition.

By midday Tuesday, the White House was working to smooth ruffled feathers and soothe ruffled feelings. White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said that the President was "confident that, in the end, this will become a bipartisan product." Fleischer also said the President "calls on Democrats to be open-minded about this as well."

Indicating there was more troweling to be done before anything was set in concrete, according to Curt Anderson's AP reporting, "Treasury officials [on Tuesday] said O'Neill's statement was not intended to signal administration opposition the House plan."

To bolster that, Secretary O'Neill met with members of the Senate Finance Committee late Tuesday afternoon to make certain they understand, as an Administration official told Mullings, "The White House doesn't have a problem with the [House] bill."

A Senate staff familiar with the position of Iowa Senator Chuck Grassely, senior Republican on that Committee said that Grassley thought the President's number was probably adequate but that Grassley "was not rushing into" a firm position at this point.

A long-time Congressional observer pointed out to Mullings that while Senator Daschle was complaining about permanent tax cuts he was certainly not above proposing permanent additions to the federal employee rolls.

On that front, Labor Secretary Elaine Chao was sent to the Hill where she warned against dealing with the loss of jobs in the private sector by expanding the federal workforce: "Our workers need to get back to work not just get lost in a bureaucracy of dead-end social services," Chao said at a House Education and the Workforce Committee hearing.

By Tuesday night, all parties had appeared to have recovered their equanimity. O'Neill, speaking to reporters after his meeting with the Senators, said that the House and Senate would work this out: "As they come over here [to the Senate] and get the will of the good members of the Senate, we have a high degree of confidence we're going to end up with something that's within reach of what the president has asked for.''

The shorthand for this in Washington is: "We'll fix it in Conference."

The AP reported yesterday that "passengers flying into Reagan National Airport cannot stand or leave their seats during the last 30 minutes of the flight, airline officials said Monday. Pilots have been told not to land if a passenger refuses to sit."

This was a full week after Mullings, apparently, had a WORLD EXCLUSIVE when the Travelogue of my trip to Atlanta was published. In that I wrote:
[The ticket agent announced] there are some additional security items we needed to know: On flights departing from DCA passengers and crew are required to remain in their seats for 30 minutes after take off.
Hmm. Ok. If everyone is supposed to stay in their seat then anyone who is in the aisle is probably a bad guy at whom the Sky Marshals have a clear shot. Good idea.
Wait. Wait. There is something I generally do in the first thirty minutes of flight. Especially after a Grande Mocha and a regular cup of coffee. I trotted down the hallway to the men's room.

-- END --
Copyright © 2001 Richard A. Galen

Current Issue | Secret Decoder Ring | Past Issues | Email Rich | Rich Who?