When Vice President Dick Cheney held secret meetings for his energy task force in the early days of President George W. Bush’s first term, he was excoriated by the left and even some on the right. Both Judicial Watch and the Sierra Club sued, but the Supreme Court found the proceedings were protected by executive privilege.
President Barack Obama came into office pledging to end such secrecy, saying, “The way to make government accountable is to make it transparent.”
On his own energy agenda, however, the president has been as opaque as Cheney, repeatedly holding closed-door meetings, anonymously courting lobbyists, dodging Freedom of Information Act requests, and ignoring subpoenas from Congress.
When Solyndra CEO Brian Harrison warned the Energy Department that the company’s financial problems were “starting to leak outside Solyndra,” Obama’s “accountable, transparent” administration helped cover up the failure — telling Solyndra executives to postpone any layoffs until after the 2010 elections. Even after the solar energy company went bankrupt and the FBI launched an investigation, the administration has refused congressional subpoenas to hand over documents about the Solyndra loan approval, calling the oversight an “unreasonable burden on the president’s ability to meet his constitutional duties.”
Solyndra is only part of a larger pattern of backroom deals designed to push the president’s environmental agenda. Take the negotiation of the new Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards, for example.
Then California Air Resources Board Chairman Mary Nichols and Climate Czar Carol Browner organized a series of closed-door negotiations to get manufacturers on board. Nichols and Browner gave no updates to the press, held no group meetings, and wrote nothing down.
“We put nothing in writing, ever,” Nichols later remarked, ostensibly to protect “everyone’s ability to talk freely.”
However, off-record negotiations are forbidden under the Federal Advisory Committee Act and Presidential Records Act, which require documentation, minutes and records to be kept for the public. Nichols noted that, “It was an astonishing thing that on something of this magnitude, there were no leaks.”
But if there were leaks, this administration has made clear how it treats leakers — as criminals. Obama’s Department of Justice, in conjunction with United Kingdom authorities, is pursuing a criminal investigation into the Climategate leaker(s). In December, DOJ sent a search-and-seize letter to the host of three blogs that released the Climategate emails, while U.K. police raided the home of a climate skeptic blogger.
The Climategate emails were already subject to Freedom of Information Act requests in both countries. The Obama administration has refined dodging FOIA requests into a science. Examples are endless. Administration officials have met with environmental lobbyists at a coffee shop near the White House to avoid standard record keeping. Only after Solyndra emails were subpoenaed did the public learn that administration officials met with Solyndra investor George Kaiser to discuss the Solyndra loan — the White House had claimed the opposite for months.
This lack of transparency is more than a pattern — it’s policy. President Obama is simply too committed to his green agenda to bother upholding the transparency he promised. Somewhere, Dick Cheney is smiling.
• Murray is a vice president and Bier a research associate at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, 1899 L Street NW, Floor 12, Washington, D.C. 20036; website: www.cei.org.
Comments (24)
Add commentYawn.
Is this the best you can do, to criticize two people discussing energy policy over coffee at a coffee shop and call it a pattern of secrecy?
To compare Obama to Cheney is really a stretch. Obama's energy policies center around a genuine concern for the American people while Cheney and his satanic minions' policy centered around corporations poised to profit from his manufactured wars and energy policies.
Cheney was/is one of the most corrupt and evil politicians ever to be in American politics. His sector of hell awaits him. He will likely replace Satan when he gets there. Thank God he is gone.
Vice Devil
Cheney will have the #2 spot. Obama will succeed the High Potentate of the Lake of Fire.
Jo will be there singing his praises.
I don't understand the ire
I don't understand the ire you people have for Obama. He's a Rockefeller Republican who has consistently tried to compromise with the GOP.
Maybe it's because he's black. That's the only factor in play here. Clinton was more liberal than Obama, and he didn't get this kind of guff. But he was white.
It would make sense that the south and those south-minded would resent a black man in office, though. It would represent the complete failure of the Confederacy.
Leave it to the resident BO
Leave it to the resident BO bootlicker to play the race card - again. You're pathetic, p. You just lost whatever tiny trace of credibility you had.
Poor Dick Cheney being slandered this way! He's nowhere near Obama when comparing secrecy and corruption.
It's amusing to watch the left try to justify everything wrong that's right in their face about this president. It's laughable.
I particularly enjoyed Juan Williams being slapped down by Gingrich last night as he was schooled on the ethics of hard work - no matter the color of your skin.
Best that the left put the race card away because it's not working anymore.
We don't care what color BO is - we do know that he's rotten to the core by his past and present actions.
I've figured out what you do
I've figured out what you do for a living, Calypso: satire.
Thank you:
Thank you PP. I didn’t realize it was his color for the reason I don’t like or trust this president. I thought it was the fact that this economy is in the tank, unemployment is still hovering at 9%. The price of fuel, food the things we need to live from day to day is costing Americans more then ever. The way he is dividing the American people "class warfare." And also the fact that he has done nothing to improve the conditions that are effecting this country. And all at the same time he and Moochie are taking these elaborate vacations at our expense. Thank you, I stand corrected.
Call it whatever you want. p.
Call it whatever you want. p. Anything for deflection, huh?
Well, Milspec., the fact that
Well, Milspec., the fact that you once said you wouldn't give credit to this president for anything no matter what, and the fact that several of your statements above are demonstrably false really just goes to show you're not exactly an objective observer.
Wrong:
Well PP, as usual you are incorrect. I have never said any such thing. However I have not seen anything this man has done to warrant a that-a-boy. I will give him credit on the order to kill Osama. But then if he haden't could you imagine the consequences. So you are denying the facts that I listed above concerning the economy?
@Milspec.: you most certainly
@Milspec.: you most certainly did say such a thing, and I called you out on the spot.
And no, I'm not denying facts, I'm denying your assertions. Don't confuse your opinions with facts. It's a fact that the president doesn't pass laws, congress does. It's a fact that the president can't directly affect the economy. It's a fact that the economy was broken before he took office. It's a fact that problems are generally easier to create than fix. It's a fact that the ACA, as flawed as it is, certainly has "improved the conditions that are effecting (sic) this country." It's not a fact, however, that he has been promoting "class warfare," whatever you think that is.
In short, you're an ideologue with one purpose: to dislike and discredit our president at every opportunity. Were you an honest, objective individual, you'd point out REAL flaws and give credit where credit is due, but you just can't seem to bring yourself to do that, can you? You even speak of his killing of bin Laden as if it were something he merely "had" to do, as if it were a chore, like mowing the lawn, he really didn't want to do, but did anyway to avoid getting in trouble. Maybe that fits in with the right-wing conspiracy theory that Obama is really a muslim socialist bent on destroying America, but it doesn't fit with reality or a sane worldview.
Be it subconscious racism, partisan hackery, competitive machismo, or some other reason, the fact is that you have not and apparently can not speak rationally and objectively about our president.
p, the name calling and
p, the name calling and attacks aren't convincing any of us that Obama's the bomb.
You might get a better reaction if you'd list all the wonderful things he's accomplished that a lesser man could never have achieved! We'll give you a couple of days to come up with some stuff.
Sorry, but this president owns everything now. Remember he's the leader. How many trillions has he squandered on progressive nonsense?
Here's an idea on how presidents actually do affect the economy. They approve the Keystone Pipeline and they follow the court's ruling on Gulf drilling. Then they don't buy-off congressmen in order to get socialist healthcare passed and put the business community in flux waiting to see the cost of such a debacle. They don't give shareholders in publicly held companies the finger and pay off crony union leaders - think GM and then watch the taxpayer eat the loses. I won't bore you with Solyndra - you should know how that turned out. So how can you say, presidents don't shape the economy?
Congress, you say? Are they still in control? I'm a little confused on their status, as of late. Think NLRB and his other in your face, illegal appointments.
His "accomplishments" just go on and on!
13% congressional approval rate
And no one in Washington seems to care. That is one of the major issues in DC today. No too long ago the American problem was voter thought their congressional delegates were perfect it was the others in Congress that needed to go. Now we see it the voters are doubting their own delegates are doing anything for the country.
So keep dreaming that a change in the Whitehouse is going to magically fixes all the issues you find problematic. For the bottom line is Congress makes the vast majority of the decisions that affect the ultimate direction. Newt and Mitt can profess what they will simply eliminate knowing all along that they need Congress to make the changes the pretend they can implement.
PP:
PP you have an answer for everything don’t you. “@Milspec.: you most certainly did say such a thing, and I called you out on the spot.” You sound like some school kid; I’m taking my ball and going home. Well PP, start searching the archives and prove it. That’s all I can say.
Your statement on Osama is nothing more then assuming what I think or what you want me to think. I was trying to explain that if BO did not give the order and the news got out that he had a chance and did not take it, it would not have settled well with the American people. Noting more. Yes BO has taken on quit a job after the last administration. It’s been over 3 years and nothing has changed. Get over the Bush thing. My question is when Obama is ousted in November does the on coming GOP president blame BO for the mess he has inherited? No matter what you may think PP, BO will go down as the worst president in history. Black, white yellow or green it doesn’t matter what color he is.
See, Milspec, that's what I'm
See, Milspec, that's what I'm talking about. Obama the worst president in history? Maybe I should give you the benefit of the doubt. Maybe you just don't know much about American history. But you're saying Obama will go down as worse than James Buchanan, or Warren Harding, or Herbert Hoover, or Andrew Johnson, or Millard Fillmore, Pierce, Taylor, Tyler, and all the other ones who either make you say, "who?" or "ugh." Including your boy Nixon.
Again, you are incapable of talking rationally about our president.
score
Milspec 3
Calypso 3
pp -3
oneofwe
Ah, now FDR is one of the worst presidents in history! So good to know you are more educated than all those ignorant historians who consistently place him in the top 3 (along with Lincoln and Washington). Regardless of your political views, FDR was elected to four terms, brought the U.S. into the 20th century with the New Deal, helped win World War II, and ended the Depression. To say he was the worst or even one of the worst presidents in history shows a complete lack of understanding of basic American history and/or complete partisan demagoguery. Here I thought learning our country's history accurately and being fair about it was the patriotic thing to do. Silly me. Patriotism must mean ignoring it entirely and inserting your own fantasies, which are largely based on hating half of the country for its views.
Good god. Stop and reflect. Read a book. Stop believing everything you hear on Fox or read on Redstate.
PP, thanks for the effort,
PP, thanks for the effort, but I think you are wasting your time. Obviously they have adopted the bass akwards thinking of fox news: a tax cut is an increase, a conservative president is a socialist, forgign policy success is defeatism, on and on.
The best thing to do is get some popcorn and enjoy the show as their candidate implodes when he is forced to go outside the coccoon and confront the real world. The fun will be when they finally confront their own stupidity, or not.
wow
This is among the most absurd things I've ever read:
"Poor Dick Cheney being slandered this way! He's nowhere near Obama when comparing secrecy and corruption."
milspec
I apologize for writing this again, as I've written it a couple times on this forum. But it's worth mentioning again:
The US economy is generating more money than at any other point in history, yet we're in a $15 trillion dollar debt. How do you explain that?
Would you agree that outsourcing American jobs to Central America or Southeast Asia because it's more profitable to pay someone $2 a day than it is to pay an American $10 an hour isn't exactly the best thing to do to help get our economy back on track? What if those jobs weren't outsourced? We'd see a substantially lower unemployment rate...
barnardj1, Well put!
barnardj1,
Well put!
@oneofwe: if you don't watch
@oneofwe: if you don't watch TV, I don't know where you get your rhetoric from. Perhaps instead of replacing one source of information for another, you eschew information altogether? It would explain a lot.
Nice, though, comparing Lincoln to totalitarians (and a totalitarian-wannabe). I'm sorry if you're still butthurt about his decision to not leave slavery up to the states, but that doesn't make Lincoln a dictator. Or FDR. Or even Andrew "Trail of Tears" Jackson.
Also, TV is filled with center-right "liberals" and fascist [filtered word]s who call themselves conservatives. I have yet to see any actual communists get air time, except for Noam Chomsky on very rare occasions. Oddly enough, for someone who seems to think the likes of Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck aren't real conservatives, the things you say sound very much like the things they say. Coincidence? You decide.
race card
@PP, I hate to admit it, but you do place the race card way too much. Just a polite observation from your ally, me.
The reason the wingnuts hate Obama so much isn't because he is black, it is because he is a moderate Democrat they view as a left-winger, which shows how clouded their judgment truly is. Also, they are upset because John McCain and Sarah Palin (vomit) aren't in the White House. THANK GOD for small favors like that! Imagine our world under them right now.
And the reason oneofwe doesn't watch TV is he is likely one of those people who listen to a.m. hate radio shows 12 hours every day like Rush, Sean, Glenn. The buzz phrases and words he constantly regurgitates sounds like a Rush Limpuke show. I like listening to Rush because I enjoy sleeping with the enemy. Oneofwe's expressions aren't original, critical thought--they are regurgitated buzz words from Rush.
And you really have to laugh when people say FDR was one of the worst POTUS in history. Guess that's why he was POTUS longer than anyone else?
It's also laughable when the wingnuts criticize the Obamas for so many vacations when GW Bush took more vacations than the previous five presidents combined! He was at his Texas ranch gettin' drunk and chokin' on pretzels whenever he could.
You also gotta laugh at wingnuts who call us 'pinkos.' Um, that term died in the 1970s when "All in the Family" went into syndication.
Consider the sources. You'll never win an argument with a kindergartener because their level of logic is different than yours.
@Jo: I'm not "playing" the
@Jo: I'm not "playing" the race card. It's a fact that racism is alive and well, and Obama has received less respect and more flak than any president in history. Even Bush didn't have his ancestry called into question, no one said his wife was fat or trying to control the nation's youth, and only the fringe went so far as to call him a traitor.
The authors of Freakonomics performed an analysis of how many votes Obama lost due to racism, and it was considerable.
Plus, most racism isn't conscious. Racism is that uncomfortable feeling you get when a darker skinned guy in a hoodie sits down on the bus across from you. It's the feeling of disapproval when you see a Native Alaskan drinking a beer. It's the assumption that Asians are all good at math.
We are ALL prejudiced to some extent, whether consciously or subconsciously. And many of us refuse to admit it, and thus can never work to overcome it.