Bush administration

If you need any additional indication that the Bush administration checked out several weeks...or months...before Inauguration Day 2009, just ask yourself what happened to the final Bush budget.

Some background: The president is required by law to submit a budget to Congress between the first Monday in January and the first Monday in February.  That one-month time frame works except in the year following a presidential election when there's a change at the White House.  Inauguration Day falls between the start and end of the period when the budget is supposed to be sent to Capital Hill, and the outgoing president typically says the legal requirement applies to the incoming president and vice versa.

Here's this week's "Fiscal Fitness" column from Roll Call.

Hey, Scott. Bob Dole Did theSame Thing to Me 

As far as I know, Scott McClellan and I only have one thing in common: Bob Dole has attacked us both.

Dole’s attack on McClellan occurred last week when he sent an e-mail to the former White House press secretary to express his unhappiness about his tell-all book. Dole, a Kansas Republican who served as Senate Majority Leader, never said anything in the book was wrong. He simply implied that, because of his character, McClellan's opinion wasn't worth reading.

The last time I bought and read a kiss-and-tell book was 22 years ago when David Stockman's The Triumph of Politics was published.  Most are uninteresting and poorly written.  I don't want to help create a market for them and in the process encourage others to be writen and published.  I have far more respect for those who wait to write them than those who rush them into print and are willing to trade their confidences for a few sheckles.

So I'm not going to buy Scott McClellan's book.

But this is not about him or his book in any case; it's about the Bush administration's massive response to it's publication.

The key phrase is "nondenial denial."

I first remember hearing it during Watergate, when the Nixon White House repeatedly denied accusations with angry sounding words and tones that actually meant very little when you read them closely.  The Nixon folks typically denounced those making the allegations or even just asking the questions.  They or their publications were said to be no friend of the president's or the administration.  They were accused of being disloyal and unAmerican.

Eight days ago I commented on Pete's post about the strong possibility that the two veto overrides he was predicting would be the effective end of the Bush administration. Mark the date: it was May 21, 2008, when the House voted 316 to 108, including a majority of Republicans, to override the Bush veto.

The Senate is expected to do the same before it leaves for the Memorial Day recess.

Pete's post today about two very possible veto overrides that could happen in the next few weeks is very significant.

Overrides would have been an important development under any circumstances. But they take on even more significance in light of the win by the Democratic candidate in the Mississippi special election last night.

The fact that it's the third special election the Democratic candidate has won this year is noteworthy. The fact that the wins have all come in districts that were considered absolutely safe Republican up to that point makes you to sit up and take notice. The additional fact that all of these seats were expected to stay Republican had the incumbent chosen to run for reelection virtually forces you to wonder what's really going on.

As I said last week, the 2008 election is starting to have all the signs of not just a Democratic win, but also realignment.

Andrew Samwick, one of my bloggers-in-crime here at Capital Gains and Games, had an interesting post on Thursday about whether we're in a recession.

Andrew was speaking like an oustanding economist, which he is.  I can report that after spending most of the past week talking at conferences sponsored by two of the largest brokerage firms as well as doing separate meetings at several individual offices of a third, there is little doubt that the people on the ground have already concluded the downturn is real.

Does anyone else think that Treasury Secretary Paulson is doing everything possible not to be involved with domestic economic issues?