In it, but not of it. TPM DC

I won't claim to know the precise reasons why Judd Gregg, who last week stood with President Obama, and vowed to work with him as Commerce Secretary is now withdrawing. But a couple of sources in New Hampshire politics chalk it up to the abuse Gregg was taking over the past few weeks, first from some on the right for going into the liberal Obama administration and then from all sides for being too cute about the stimulus package, abstaining from voting for or against it. Gregg was ridiculed in New Hampshire's most important newspaper, the Union Leader.

The situation creates headaches for everyone. Back home, Gregg might come to be seen as principled for staying in his seat but at the moment he looks weirdly indecisive and he still faces a tough reelection bid in 2010 if he chooses to run again. He's embarassed a popular governor, John Lynch, who took some political risks by nominating a Republican to fill Gregg's seat. But the biggest fallout is probably for the Obama administration which has seen two other cabinet nominations (those of Tom Daschle to be HHS Secretary and Bill Richardson to head Commerce) blow up on the launch pad.

It's hard to see why the differences with Obama had somehow become irreconcilable for Gregg. The stimulus package has moved in a conservative direction since the days when he was named to the Commerce post. And if he's feeling neutered over the decision to make the Bureau of the Census appointment, which I wrote about at the time, a White House-appointed position, surely he could have worked behind the scenes to make sure someone sufficiently politically independent got the slot. He didn't have to switch caree to guarantee someone who met with his approval got the Commerce slot.

The withdrawal would seem to be very different than that of Tom Daschle's in most ways. There was no hint of financial or personal misdeed about Gregg. But the two withdrawals are similar in the sense that the person's peer group started to come down on them. In the case of Daschle, it was the New York Times and the chattering classes who had begun to transform him from aw-shucks good guy to limousine villain. Likewise, Gregg's peer group was giving him crap back in New Hampshire and he, like Daschle, withdrew although Daschle at least gave the White House a few hours to scramble so they could release simultaneous statements of regret. This time, the White House had no heads up, so far as I have heard. You have to wonder what the president will think about his outstretched hand after its been slapped like this.

Late Update: Gregg has reaffirmed to the ABC affiliate in New Hampshire that he is not running for re-election in 2010. (e.k.)

In some key arguments just now before the Minnesota election court, lead Coleman lawyer Joe Friedberg has just advanced a novel argument: While he's until now been arguing ballot by ballot that certain rejected absentee envelopes really meet all legal requirements, he's now going much farther -- demanding that a large number of votes that don't meet the requirements be counted, anyway. And failure to do so is a violation of Equal Protection.

Friedberg's argument is that most of them must be counted -- though he was careful to say that this would not mean all of them --because there have already been documented cases of improperly-accepted ballots elsewhere in the count, where a voter clearly failed to properly fill out the required forms. "There's not a single type of malady in the ballot or application process that has not already been admitted one way or the other," he said.

And since he defines an Equal Protection violation as a failure to treat similarly-situated people exactly the same, this means it's a violation of Equal Protection rights to not count invalid votes, if it can be shown that a significant number of similarly-illegal ballots were counted elsewhere.

Read More →

It's a truism of Washington that the more your industry is regulated and influenced by the actions of the federal government, the more you're going to want to make your case in the halls of Congress and in the federal agencies that influence your business's fate. So at this important moment, when the federal government is preparing to overhaul the financial services industry, in all it's many parts, and when the largest bank bailout ever conceived is being rolled out, and the public is up in arms, it's worth stepping back and taking a look at how the affected industries will make their case and who they will make it to

First, it's worth keeping in mind that financial services are a diverse lot. The American Bankers Association represents the mainstream banks while the Credit Union National Association representes the nations credit unions. There's the Financial Services Forum that represents the largest financial institutions and others. The Independent Community Bankers of America have different interests, too. It opposes the merger of multiple banking regulators that's favored by larger banks. Then there are the divergent needs of semi-banks, represented by the Financial Services Roundtable which includes the likes of General Electric.

Private Equity has the Private Equity Council and the hedge funds industry as the Managed Funds Association, headed by Richard Baker, a former Republican Congressman from Louisiana which is most determined to stop a bill that would require them to disclose their holdings.

Not surprisingly, members of comittees that regulate the financial services tend to do quite well in terms of campaign contributions from the industry. Look at Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut. The Democrat represents a lot of constituents who work in the financial services industry and according to the Center for Responsive Politics collected more from those companies that have received TARP monies than any other member. The center's full listing of members of the committee and what they got from TARP recipients is here. In the Senate, Chuck Schumer has long been seen as a defender of the financial services industry, a point articulated at length in this New York Times story in December. As financial services reform makes its way through Congress keep an eye on Schumer and what happens to proposals that come out of Barney Frank's Financial Service Committee when they hit Chris Dodd's Banking Committee. Today, for instance, the Senate Banking Committee is holding a hearing on proposed credit card regulations. which is a very big deal to bankers and of no real consequence to hedge funds. In the coming days, we'll keep an eye on those fights that have a real impact on policy but that also illustrate larger points about Washington has and hasn't changed under Barack Obama.

As we mentioned last week, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) offered a successful amendment to the stimulus bill preventing any of its dollars from going to zero-gravity chairs, saunas, and rotating pastel lights.

The comic value of Coburn's crusade aside, his amendment also barred any money for parks, museums, theaters or any other arts organization that is struggling to survive the current economic downturn. And it looks like Democrats have kept that limitation after final conference talks on the bill.

As New York magazine reports, that's distressing news for cultural groups that call the Big Apple home -- and they're laying blame at the feet of Chuck Schumer (NY), the No. 3 Democrat in the Senate. Alliance for the Arts Randall Bourscheidt tells the magazine that Coburn's blanket limitation was

very prejudicial and, I think, intended to appeal to a constituency of Senator Coburn's which finds the arts an easy target for things they don't like. The surprising thing is that Senator Schumer voted for it.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) is getting laudable attention for his call for an independent "truth commission" to investigate civil liberties and human rights abuses committed during the Bush years. But as I mentioned earlier this week, the commission may not be directly legislated by Congress -- and one reason is that not every Democrat thinks it's necessary to do so.

Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD) told me that the Obama Justice Department is already positioned to do the type of analysis that such an independent commission would perform, and he warned against investigating the Bush years "in a way that could impose partisan concerns."

Now Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), a trusted ally of party leaders, is the second Democratic senator to openly question the need for a formal panel to look back on the Bush administration's potentially illegal misdeeds. As Reed told MSNBC today:

Read More →

The Hill reports that there might just be something to a meme that's been floating around about the Minnesota Senate race: That the Republican Party quite likes the situation of Norm Coleman's lawsuit keeping the Democrats one vote short of what they would otherwise have.

GOP aides told the paper that there is not a specific desire to wage the lawsuit as a stalling maneuver on Franken's seating. But one anonymous leadership aide did say that "It's better for us to have one less member." The same person also admitted this about Franken: "He's got a very good shot at winning."

And Ron Bonjean, a former Senate Republican aide who now runs a public-relations firm, had this to say: "If Franken was going to vote on the stimulus package, they wouldn't necessarily need one of the Republicans. So yeah, it matters."

Even if the lawsuit isn't specifically being done as a stall tactic, the delaying effect does appear to be a nice fringe benefit.

TPMDC was the first to report on the Democrats' plans to remove Senate-passed limits on executive pay from the final stimulus bill.

Today the WaPo followed by reporting the same thing ... but as we mentioned yesterday, Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) aren't done fighting for their proposal to claw back $3.2 billion in bonuses paid out by banks after they got government rescue money last year.

"We are still having difficulty getting a straight answer as to whether or not it is still in the bill," Wyden's spokeswoman told me via e-mail. "Everyone we ask says that someone else is trying to kill it."

It ain't over till legislative language is formally filed -- but if you think they'll take up executive pay limits later this year, I have some worthless Fannie Mae stock to sell you.

Hmmm, Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) is lucky that her tough re-election battle came last year and not in 2010. Collins had pushed for $1 billion in stimulus money for LIHEAP, the government's program to provide home heating money for low-income residents -- and a major Maine priority, given the state's chilly winters.

But LIHEAP looks zeroed out, according to the summary of the final stimulus deal that we've received (read here). Did Collins lose a battle over heating money, or just not pursue one?

Late Update: N.B. Until legislative language is formally filed on the bill today, there's always the possibility that these numbers could change. What we're bringing you are the freshest details.

The House's original stimulus bill, as we've reported for several weeks, gave mass transit the short end of the stick in favor of $30 billion for highways with no requirement that repairs be prioritized over new road-building.

But according to a confidential summary of the final stimulus deal that we've just been passed (view it here), mass transit got some more attention in the end. Amtrak and high-speed rail programs got $9.3 billion, an increase of about $6 billion from the Senate's version of the stimulus.

Still, environmentally sustainable transportation didn't completely win the day. A $5.5 billion transit-modernizing grant program eagerly anticipated by environmental advocates, which senators at first wanted to open up to highways, was removed entirely from the final stimulus deal.

Congress did agree on $8.4 billion for general public transportation grants, however. Vice President Biden (D-Amtrak), if you had any role in this: thanks.

Late Update: N.B. Until legislative language is formally filed on the bill today, there's always the possibility that these numbers could change. What we're bringing you are the freshest details.

Late Late Update: The sun has set in Washington, but the town is still on pins and needles over the actual text of the stimulus deal. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) has issued a statement promising that the language "will be filed this evening, giving members enough time to review the [stimulus] conference report before voting on it tomorrow afternoon."

That means most rank-and-file lawmakers in both parties will have about 12 hours -- including slumber time -- to digest the bill, which is likely to run past the 300-page mark, before debate begins at 9am tomorrow.

We'll let you know first thing about the fate of executive pay limits and other remaining unknowns in the final stimulus, which is likely to be signed into law by President Obama before Monday. In the meantime, check out the details of the tax and health care provisions that made it in.