New at Reason

December 1, 2006

Katherine Mangu-Ward gets an early jump on flogging the new Congress.

Reason needs your support. Please donate today!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

← Kathryn Johnston Update 2 | Main | One More on the Johnston Case →

See all 33 comments | Leave a comment

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.

|12.1.06 @ 1:32PM|#

God, that Pelosi pic is horrifying!

Getting that close to a middle aged woman is not classy.

|12.1.06 @ 1:39PM|#

|12.1.06 @ 1:48PM|#

the dems might pass something libertarians don't like? *gasp*

|12.1.06 @ 1:55PM|#

Will the Democrats be worse?

Of course they will.

There has never been a Democrat administration that WASN'T worse.

|12.1.06 @ 1:59PM|#

Ahh, the Dems and their miracles cures. A flood of promises with a drop of details. Give them time to fuck things up, in 6-8 years, they'll be despised more than GWB.

|12.1.06 @ 2:00PM|#

joe,

Well played, old sport. I'll be interested to see if Dodd's bill actually passes, though (and of course, doesn't Bush have to sign it?).

Dan T.|12.1.06 @ 2:06PM|#

You know, I wasn't convinced by the article itself, but the unflattering video still of Nancy Pelosi in mid-speech really brought the issue home for me. Man, is she ugly. At least in this picture.

This is why Reason has really become a top-shelf serious political journal.

|12.1.06 @ 2:07PM|#

The government negotiating with Big Pharma over Part D pricing would presumably SAVE the government money in administering the program. I recognize the distortions caused by intervention in the market, but this is a two edged sword.

Additionally I think one could argue that a portion of the sales under this pricing arrangement would not have occurred without government extending the drug benefit to people who otherwise would not be insured.

|12.1.06 @ 2:10PM|#

Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-CT) submitted a bill to fix the Detainee Treatment Act. It would restore habeas corpus, exclude hearsay testimony, and exclude confessions obtained through torture (er, excuse me, "Alternate Interrogation Methods" - A.I.M.s), remove the President's ability to designate anyone he feels like an illegal enemy combatant (meaning that only those caught fighting agains the US in an illegal manner, and found to be doing so by a properly constituted tribunal, can be so designated), and otherwise requiring the government to follow the law when prosecuting accused terrorists.

Exactly why I voted for them.

Now, let's see if they actually stand behind this and "fight" to pass it (with, you know, their majority in two houses of Congress). Until they prove otherwise, there's no reason to think this is anything but a token effort that won't actually muster enough Democratic votes to pass.

(And if that happens, yeah, we'll see Democratic-leaning folks try to blame it on Republicans, even though not one damn Republican vote will matter with a majority in both houses. Or, to put it another way to Joe and any other Team Blue fans, the Republicans are a loss on civil liberties. No one will give a shit about your trying to blame them if your guys don't follow through and show themselves to be any better.)

ed|12.1.06 @ 2:20PM|#

God, that Pelosi pic is horrifying!

Gee, I used to think she was kinda hot.
Thanks, Reason, for spoiling my fantasy and my lunch.

|12.1.06 @ 2:24PM|#

"God, that Pelosi pic is horrifying!"

Gee, I used to think she was kinda hot.

As opposed to all those suave old studs in Congress?

|12.1.06 @ 2:48PM|#

Just a word of advice to Libertarians: don't come out against he minimum wage increase.

A. With 8 out of 10 people in favor of it, those against will seem like either heartless bastards to fringe kooks, something the LP already has problems with.
B. Raising it to $7.25 over 2 years won't really hurt much and may help in the long run. Most people already live in states with a higher minimum wage, or where the minimum wage is scheduled to rise. This will mainly affect the South and Midwest, and even then only on the lower income side of the scale. Save your energy for issues that you actually have a chance of influencing and that will do more damage.

|12.1.06 @ 2:52PM|#

Thank you, jf.

I'm not going to blow a bunch of sunshine up your skirts about "libertarian Democrats." We've got a lot of daylight between our camps.

Once the government in Washington is properly restrained from DISAPPEARING AND TORTURING PEOPLE, I imagine we'll have a great deal to argue about.

Until then, let's keep things in perspective.

Eric X b/2,

If 2% of the Democrats in each house join 100% of the Republicans in defeating Dodd's bill, I won't conclude that the Democrats are worthless on human rights and civil liberties. I'll conclude that we need to have a larger Democratic majority.

ed|12.1.06 @ 2:55PM|#

As opposed to all those suave old studs in Congress?

Yep. Life ain't fair, and women age more disastrously than men. But with the right lighting and half a jug of Scotch...

|12.1.06 @ 3:00PM|#

Now, let's see if they actually stand behind this and "fight" to pass it (with, you know, their majority in two houses of Congress). Until they prove otherwise, there's no reason to think this is anything but a token effort that won't actually muster enough Democratic votes to pass.

I think it would present them with the perfect scenario of forcing W to veto it. Not that it will matter because I don't see the Dems keeping the name from being changed to Detainee Equalization and Encouragement Program to Supremely Help Islamist Terrorists Act.

|12.1.06 @ 3:12PM|#

I think many Dems understand perfectly well the consequences of raising the minimum wage - (higher consumer prices, higher unemployment, higher inflation) - they just don't give a damn.

They know they will never be linked with the consequences. And the political clout is worth much more to them then a few pennies for others.

|12.1.06 @ 3:16PM|#

I understand the consequences of raising the minimum wage, but where is all the innovation? If everybody raises prices, and I don't, why wouldn't I have a market advantage? Not only is the minimum wage bad for small businesses, it's also bad for outdated business models.

Xmas|12.1.06 @ 3:19PM|#

What I can't believe is that anyone thinks Canada won't come down hard on Canadian pharmacies if the US officially says, "Yeah, it's okay to import drugs from Canada".

The Canadian drug market is miniscule compare to the US market. Imagine the massive distortion of their drug market. It will totally wreck their price control scheme. What can they say when Pharma companies suddenly say, "Well, you only have 10 million people that could possibly be taking this one drug, why do you need 25 million units?"

R C Dean|12.1.06 @ 3:21PM|#

Once the government in Washington is properly restrained from DISAPPEARING AND TORTURING PEOPLE, I imagine we'll have a great deal to argue about.

Whoa there, big fella. I wasn't aware that the Bushbots were snatching people off the streets, never to be heard from again.

Or are we dumbing down and cheapening the rhetoric of "disappearing" the same way we did with "torture"?

I remain deeply skeptical of approaching Islamist terrorism as if it were on par with the Sharks v. the Jets, that is, with treating it as a police procedural. That was the Clinton approach that continued right through, well, 9/11.

The level of due process that should be afforded enemy combatants is the bare minimum necessary to confirm that they are, in fact, enemy combatants. Any more than that is not only stupid, it will cost lives. To the extent that Dodd's bill ensures that minimum level of due process and no more, I got no problem with it.

To the extent it ignores the lessons of history and pretends that these are mere criminals we are dealing with, it is a bad bill.

|12.1.06 @ 3:22PM|#

If 2% of the Democrats in each house join 100% of the Republicans in defeating Dodd's bill, I won't conclude that the Democrats are worthless on human rights and civil liberties. I'll conclude that we need to have a larger Democratic majority.

Alright, Joe. Tell you what - if every Republican votes against this bill and only 2% of the Democrats in each house also vote against it, causing it to fail, I'll conclude that the Democrats are not utterly worthless and might accomplish more with a bigger majority. Hell, I'll say 10%.

No! I'll go even further!

I'll give you any percentage of Nay votes under 50% on such a failed vote - just so long as this batch of Democrats never manage the discipline to throw more Blue-brand votes towards or against another bill than they do for this one.

Say, 51% of Dems vote to end torture but 90% of the asshats vote to raise the minimum wage or scuttle a free trade agreement? Well, damn - the priorities would be pretty obvious, wouldn't they?

|12.1.06 @ 3:41PM|#

RD Dean,

"Whoa there, big fella. I wasn't aware that the Bushbots were snatching people off the streets, never to be heard from again."

AFAIK, they are not doing so. However, they have given themselves the legal authority to do so, and the only thing preventing them from taking the next step is their own judgement and conscience - not an acceptable state of affairs, in my estimation.

"The level of due process that should be afforded enemy combatants is the bare minimum necessary to confirm that they are, in fact, enemy combatants." It's the process of confirming that status that's the rub here. If someone actually is a terrorist, I'm certainly willing to entertain arguments that they should not be afforded the same rights as a convicted shoplifter. But that suggests to me that the process of so designating someone an "illegal enemy combatant" - someone who could well be you, me, or that poor bastid in Oregon - needs to be harder, not easier, than convicting him of shoplifting. It shouldn't be easier to throw someone into Gitmo indefinitely than to throw him in the county pen for 30 days.

Eric,

I understood there would be no math. ;-)

|12.1.06 @ 3:42PM|#

To emphasize:

Joe said:

Once the government in Washington is properly restrained from DISAPPEARING AND TORTURING PEOPLE, I imagine we'll have a great deal to argue about.

And if the Dems flake on this issue, then serious libertarians and them have nothing to talk about, just as they do with the Republicans.

|12.1.06 @ 3:47PM|#

I understood there would be no math. ;-)

Wah, wah. The math's easy enough for even a former government employee. ;)

Graphite|12.1.06 @ 4:07PM|#

Card & Krueger shibboleth in 3... 2... 1...

|12.1.06 @ 5:49PM|#

pedanticism alert. everyone except kmw can safely ignore this.

item #9. harry reid isn't in the house.

Mike Laursen|12.1.06 @ 5:54PM|#

Andrew G.,

You touch on one of my big frustrations with the Libertarian Party. The culture of the party is very much against doing the type of "pick your battles" analysis you did in your comment.

|12.1.06 @ 8:49PM|#

Good breakdown but I can't get worked up over number 8.
8)Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) recently declared that the new Democratic Congress will mandate that a quarter of new vehicles sold in the use flexible fuel technology by 2010.

With modern fuel injected engines, the only difference in FlexFuel and gasoline only engines is a friggin' sticker. Automobile manufacturers reformulated the gaskets and engine parts to withstand ethanol when it became a common fuel additive in the 1990s. In certain cases larger fuel injectors or a broadband O2 sensor may be necessary. For a list of vehicles that already qualify this list is a good start as is this one. Sorry, but this is one law that will be useless before it ever comes to vote.

Paul|12.2.06 @ 3:45AM|#

Sorry, but this is one law that will be useless before it ever comes to vote.

Kwix:

You just described the larger Congressional legislative agenda over the last 45 years.

|12.2.06 @ 3:45PM|#

"You touch on one of my big frustrations with the Libertarian Party. The culture of the party is very much against doing the type of "pick your battles" analysis you did in your comment."

It's funny. That's my favorite thing about the lp. If a party wants to comprimise on something like the minimum wage in order to stop people from being tortured, that sounds great. But if the topic is the minimum wage, and you think increasing the minimum wage is a mistake, why would you take any other position than to say that it is a mistake? It's exactly that mentality that allows politicans to lie to their constiuents. Why anyone would ever vote for someone that doesn't have clearly definied positions on the issues listed on their campaign websites is beyond me. Politicians will keep getting away with not telling you what they think only as long as you let them.

Sade|12.4.06 @ 6:26AM|#

To all you deluded Libertarians who actually believed that voting for terrorist-coddling Dhimmicrat whackos was going to improve anything for you, I'd just been waiting for my chance to say this when your buyers' remorse set in, and now's my chance.

Squeal, Libbies, squeal! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

|12.4.06 @ 9:29AM|#

"I'd just been waiting for my chance to say this when your buyers' remorse set in, and now's my chance. Squeal, Libbies, squeal! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!"

Sounds like the "Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Bush" bumper sticker people had right before the boom of the 1990's. We're a month out of the elections. Why don't you wait until the Democrats actually do something before your declare victory?

|12.4.06 @ 10:12AM|#

Lamar,

"Sounds like the "Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Bush" bumper sticker people had right before the boom of the 1990's. We're a month out of the elections. Why don't you wait until the Democrats actually do something before your declare victory?"

I hear that a lot, how do we get the dems to initiate another boom? Oh, wait, the two had zero to do with each other....

|12.4.06 @ 12:44PM|#

We all know that the two had zero to do with each other, which is why the "Don't blame me" bumper stickers are stupid. Ditto for Sade's comment. We can agree on that, no?