Stan and I have started the “Utah Republican Party - Official Group” on FaceBook.  You can join FaceBook at www.facebook.com!

Facebook is a free-access social networking website. Users can join networks organized by city, workplace, school, and region to connect and interact with other people. People can also add friends and send them messages, and update their personal profiles to notify friends about themselves.

Facebook has a number of features with which users may interact. They include the Wall, a space on every user’s profile page that allows friends to post messages for the user to see, Pokes, which allows users to send a virtual “poke” to each other (a notification that tells a user that they have been poked), Photos, where users can upload albums and photos, and Status, which allows users to inform their friends of their whereabouts and actions. A user’s Wall is visible to anyone who is able to see that user’s profile, which depends on their privacy settings. In July 2007, Facebook began allowing users to post attachments to the Wall, whereas the Wall was previously limited to textual content only.

Over time, Facebook has added several new features to its website. On September 6, 2006, a News Feed was announced, which appears on every user’s homepage and highlights information including profile changes, upcoming events, and birthdays related to the user’s friends. Initially, the News Feed caused dissatisfaction among Facebook users; some complained it was too cluttered and full of undesired information, while others were concerned it made it too easy for other people to track down individual activities (such as changes in relationship status, events, and conversations with other users). In response to this dissatisfaction, Zuckerberg issued an apology for the site’s failure to include appropriate customizable privacy features. Since then, users have been able to control what types of information are shared automatically with friends. Users are now able to prevent friends from seeing updates about different types of activities, including profile changes, Wall posts, and newly added friends.

One of the most popular applications on Facebook is the Photos application, where users can upload albums and photos. Facebook allows users to upload an unlimited number of photos, compared with other image hosting services such as Photobucket and Flickr, which apply limits to the number of photos that a user is allowed to upload. In the past, all users were limited to 60 photos per album. However, some users report that they are able to create albums with a new limit of 200 photos. It remains unclear why some members have a 200-photo limit while others do not. Privacy settings can be set for individual albums, limiting the groups of users that can see an album. For example, the privacy of an album can be set so that only the user’s friends can see the album, while the privacy of another album can be set so that all Facebook users can see it. Another feature of the Photos applications is the ability to “tag“, or label users in a photo. For instance, if a photo contains a user’s friend, then the user can tag the friend in the photo. This sends a notification to the friend that they have been tagged, and provides them a link to see the photo.

As 2009 opened, three weeks before Barack Obama took office, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 9034 on January 2, its highest level since the autumn panic. Yesterday the Dow fell another 4.24% to 6763, for an overall decline of 25% in two months and to its lowest level since 1997. The dismaying message here is that President Obama’s policies have become part of the economy’s problem.

Americans have welcomed the Obama era in the same spirit of hope the President campaigned on. But after five weeks in office, it’s become clear that Mr. Obama’s policies are slowing, if not stopping, what would otherwise be the normal process of economic recovery. From punishing business to squandering scarce national public resources, Team Obama is creating more uncertainty and less confidence — and thus a longer period of recession or subpar growth.

The Democrats who now run Washington don’t want to hear this, because they benefit from blaming all bad economic news on President Bush. And Mr. Obama has inherited an unusual recession deepened by credit problems, both of which will take time to climb out of. But it’s also true that the economy has fallen far enough, and long enough, that much of the excess that led to recession is being worked off. Already 15 months old, the current recession will soon match the average length — and average job loss — of the last three postwar downturns. What goes down will come up — unless destructive policies interfere with the sources of potential recovery.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123604419092515347.html

__________________

“Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things you couldn’t do before.” - Rahm Emanuel, White House Chief of Staff

WASHINGTON – Trying to salvage his nomination, Tom Daschle apologized Monday for delinquent tax payments as President Barack Obama and a top Senate chairman stood by him as the choice to lead the Health and Human Services Department.

Following a weekend of revelations about taxes and potential ethical conflicts, Daschle expressed remorse to the Senate Finance Committee, the panel that will decide his fate, saying he was “deeply embarrassed and disappointed” about failing to pay more than $120,000 in back taxes — a lapse he said was “unintentional.”

Obama, speaking to reporters, said he was “absolutely” supporting his Cabinet choice. Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate panel, said he backed Daschle’s confirmation. The expressions of support came hours before Daschle was scheduled to meet with the committee.

In a letter to the Finance Committee that was released Monday, Daschle sought to explain how he overlooked taxes on additional income for consulting work and the use of a car service. He also deducted more in charitable contributions than he should have.

He recently filed amended tax returns for 2005-07 to report $128,203 in back taxes and $11,964 in interest.

“I am deeply embarrassed and disappointed by the errors that required me to amend my tax returns,” said Daschle, the former Senate Democratic leader. “I apologize for the errors and profoundly regret that you have had to devote time to them.”

Uncertain is whether the tax issue will stall or derail Daschle’s nomination.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs reiterated Obama’s support for Daschle during a press briefing Monday afternoon.

“Nobody’s perfect. It was a serious mistake, one that he caught and remedied,” Gibbs said. “We still think he’s the best person to do health care reform and shepherd a very complicated process through Congress to achieve savings and cut costs for the American people.”

Baucus, in a statement, called Daschle “an invaluable and expert partner” in the effort toward “meaningful health care reform,” and said he backs Daschle’s nomination. The two men have had tussles in the past over Baucus’ handling of former President George W. Bush’s 2001 tax cut proposals, the Medicare prescription drug bill in 2003 and trade legislation.

Daschle was an early supporter of Obama’s presidential bid and several of Daschle’s former Capitol Hill staffers went to work for Obama after Daschle, then a South Dakota senator, lost his re-election bid in 2004.

Daschle filed the amended tax returns after Obama announced he intended to nominate him as secretary of Health and Human Services.

In his apology letter, Daschle provided a timeline for when the errors were discovered and tax payments made. He explained that the presidential transition team flagged charitable contributions they concluded were deducted in error. When his accountant realized amended tax returns would need to be filed, he suggested addressing another matter that Daschle raised with him earlier in the year: whether the use of a car service provided by a close friend and business associate, Leo Hindery, should be reported as income.

The unreported income for that car service totaled more than $250,000 over three years.

At about the same time, Hindery’s company informed Daschle’s accountant of a clerical error it made on a form it provided to Daschle that he subsequently reported to the IRS. The error resulted in an additional $88,333 in unreported consulting income for 2007.

“I disclosed this information to the committee voluntarily, and paid the taxes and any interest owed promptly,” Daschle wrote. “My mistakes were unintentional.”

A financial disclosure form Daschle filed about a week ago shows that he made more than $200,000 in the past two years speaking to members of the health care industry that Obama wants him to reform.

The speaking fees were just a portion of the more than $5.2 million the former senator earned over the last two years as he advised health insurers and hospitals and worked in other industries such as energy and telecommunications, according to a financial statement filed with the Office of Government Ethics.

Jenny Backus, a spokeswoman for Daschle, said the money he earned in speaking fees from health care interests do not pose a conflict for the health care reform Obama wants him to lead.

Among the health care interest groups paying Daschle for speeches were America’s Health Insurance Plans, $40,000 for two speeches; CSL Behring, $30,000; the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy, $16,000; and the Principal Life Insurance Co., $15,000.

(Posted 6/16/06 - so it’s a little outdated)

1. Steele was born at Andrews Air Force Base in Prince George’s County, Md., Oct. 19, 1958.

2. Adopted as an infant, he grew up in Washington, D.C., and graduated from Archbishop Carroll High School, where he was class president senior year and voted “Man of the Year.”

3. One of the first in his family to go to college, he earned a bachelor’s degree in international relations from Johns Hopkins University, then a law degree from Georgetown University Law Center.

4. Steele also spent a few years at the Augustinian Friars Seminary at Villanova University, in preparation for the priesthood, before deciding instead on a career in civil service.

5. He grew up in a family of Democrats. Photographs of JFK and Martin Luther King Jr. hung on the living-room wall.

6. Steele credits his mother, Maebell, and Ronald Reagan with turning him toward the Republican Party. Reagan’s pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps message was a trait Steele’s mother exhibited after her first husband, Steele’s father, died in 1962 of alcoholism-related liver disease. She refused to go on welfare. Instead, she went to work as a laundress earning minimum wage to support Michael and his sister.

7. Steele’s stepfather, John Turner, used to work as a limousine driver in Washington, D.C., and on occasion drove Robert F. Kennedy around town.

8. After graduating from law school in 1991, Steele joined an international law firm based in Washington, D.C. Work took him to Tokyo, where he learned some Japanese.

9. In 1997, he left his high-paying corporate job, realizing he would never make partner, and worked briefly at a real-estate development firm as in-house counsel. He then went out on his own, starting a consulting firm, the Steele Group.

10. Early in his political days, he attended a Prince George’s County Republican Party Lincoln Day dinner. He was ostracized at the event. Only Elizabeth Dole, then transportation secretary, would talk with him. It was then that he decided to enter politics. “I knew the only way to change the Republican Party was to get involved and turn this party around to make it more warm and welcoming,” he says.

11. Steele rose quickly up the Republican Party ladder, starting at the local level in Prince George’s County, then moving up to the state level. He was the Maryland State Republican Man on the Year in 1995, an alternate delegate to the 1996 Republican National Convention, and a delegate to the 2000 Republican National Conventions. He was elected chairman of the Maryland Republican Party in December 2000.

12. Steele became the first African-American elected to statewide office in Maryland, taking office as lieutenant governor in January 2003. He’s currently the only sitting African-American lieutenant governor in the country.

13. Steele was tapped to speak at the 2004 Republican National Convention, eliciting comparisons to Barack Obama’s keynote address at the Democratic convention.

14. When Sen. Paul Sarbanes, a Democrat, announced he would not seek re-election, several prominent Republicans, including President Bush, persuaded Steele to run.

15. Republicans have come out in full force supporting Steele’s bid for the Senate. President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and ex-White House Chief of Staff Andy Card have all appeared at fund-raisers.

16. Steele’s sister, Monica, was married to boxer Mike Tyson but filed for divorce in 2002.

17. A devout Catholic, Steele is a member of St. Mary’s Catholic Church in Landover Hills, Md. He regularly attends services with his wife, Andrea, and their two teenage sons, Michael and Drew.

I am attending my first meeting of the Republican National Committee this week with Stan Lockhart (party chair), End Micklesen (National Committeewoman) and Bruce Hough (National Committeeman).  We are all staying at the Capital Hilton, which incidently is where the Utah Democrats stayed last week for the inauguration.  There are several other loyal Utah Republicans who have accompanied us here and we are all having a great time.  Yesterday, Rob Bishop took us to the very top of the Capital Dome, and Jason Chaffetz showed us his now-famous cot. 

We also had very meaningful conversations with Sen. Bennett and Sen. Hatch.  Sen. Bennett took us down to his Capital Office (the “hideaway”), which I thought was really cool.  When Sen. Bennett took us down to the underground trains, I spotted Sen. Joe Lieberman and Blagojevich-appointed Sen. Roland Burris (whose had I shook).

Today we took a curator’s tour of the U.S. Supreme Court.  It was great.  We even got to see the basketball court which is directly above the chambers where the oral arguments are heard. 

This is an exciting meeting because we will be electing a new RNC Chair to lead the Republican Party for the next two years.  Since we lost the White House, the RNC Chair will lead and speak for the party until the next Republican president is elected. 

There are six very good, qualified men running for chair.  All six have come to Utah to meet with party leaders and solicit our support.  I have been impressed with all of them.  The leading candidates appear to be Mike Duncan (current chair) and Michael Steele (former Maryland Lt. Gov. and Fox News contributor).  A dark horse candidate who could emerge as a consenses candidate is Saul Anuzis (state party chair from Michigan).  If I were a wagering man, I would put my money on Steele.  He is impressive in so many ways, and will represent the party well during the Obama presidency.  (I really like Ken Blackwell from Ohio, but it doesn’t appear he has enough votes to survive in this race.)

Duncan has been a good solider and is a really great guy.  Some people are clamoring for a change, and that is his biggest obstacle.  He has effectively argued that his hands have been tied during his tenure by the White House and the McCain campaigns, but I am not sure that his defense will carry the day.  I expect Duncan to do well on the first round of balloting.  In fact, Orrin Hatch has spoken very highly of Duncan to the Utah delegation.

However, as the rounds of voting continue, I do not expect Duncan to pick up support.  There are 168 members of the RNC, so you need 85 votes to win.  One interesting twist is that no candidate is automatically dropped off as the rounds go on.  So we expect there will be at least 8-10 rounds of voting tomorrow (Friday, January 30, 2009). 

I predict Duncan’s high water mark will be the first ballot.  If he cannot secure 85 votes right out of the shoot, I expect he will drop each round after that.  Unfortunately, this has been a very contentious campaign as there is no party elder around to mediate disputes.  As a result, there has been a lot of nastiness and accusations are flying around everywhere.  If the Duncan supportors refuse to ultimately embrace Steele, then that may create an opening for Anuzis.

Anuzis seems to be everyone’s number two pick.  The last time there was a wide open race for RNC chair in 1997, the Jim Nicholson (Colorado) only received 17 votes in the first round of balloting but ultimately took the cake.  (He went on to lead the Department of Verteran Affairs and was later appointed by Bush 43 as an ambassador to the Vatican.)  So the winner will have to pick up support as member’s first choices drop by the wayside.

In any event, it will be a very interesting race to watch.  Stay tuned!

WASHINGTON (CNN) — President Obama struck down a rule Friday that prohibits U.S. money from funding international family-planning clinics that promote abortion or provide counseling or referrals about abortion services. 

Obama said in a statement that family planning aid has been used as a “political wedge issue,” adding that he had “no desire to continue this stale and fruitless debate.”

The policy says any organization receiving U.S. family-planning funds from the U.S. Agency for International Development cannot offer abortions or abortion counseling.

“It is time we end the politicization of this issue,” Obama said. “In the coming weeks, my administration will initiate a fresh conversation on family planning, working to find areas of common ground to best meet the needs of women and families at home and around the world.”

Obama’s memorandum reversing the policy comes the day after the 36th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. The landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision held that a woman’s right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy protected by the 14th Amendment. The ruling gave a woman autonomy over her pregnancy during the first trimester.

The memorandum reverses the “Mexico City policy,” initiated by President Reagan in 1984, canceled by President Clinton and reinstated by President George W. Bush in 2001.

The policy, referred to by critics as “the global gag rule,” was initially announced at a population conference in Mexico City.

Reversing the previous administrations’ stance on the policy was one of Clinton’s first acts as president in January 1993 and the very first executive order issued by Bush on January 22, 2001, the 28th anniversary of Roe v. Wade.

Critics, including Planned Parenthood, called Bush’s move a “legislative ambush.”

He defended his action, saying, “It is my conviction that taxpayer funds should not be used to pay for abortion or actively promote abortion.”

The group Population Action International praised Obama’s move, saying in a statement that it will “save women’s lives around the world.”

“Family planning should not be a political issue; it’s about basic health care and well-being for women and children,” the group said.

“Women’s health has been severely impacted by the cutoff of assistance. President Obama’s actions will help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, abortions and women dying from high-risk pregnancies because they don’t have access to family planning.”

Republican lawmakers were critical of the new president’s action.

“Not even waiting a week, the new administration has acted to funnel U.S. tax dollars to abortion providers overseas,” Rep. Tom Price, R-Georgia, said in a written statement.

“This is a stunning reversal of course from the president’s campaign statements that he hoped to reduce the number of abortions. Just a day after thousands of Americans came to Washington to celebrate the principle of life, President Obama has made it clear that reducing abortions is not one of his priorities.”

In his statement, however, Obama said he had directed his staff “to reach out to those on all sides of this issue to achieve the goal of reducing unintended pregnancies.”

“They will also work to promote safe motherhood, reduce maternal and infant mortality rates and increase educational and economic opportunities for women and girls.”

The president added that he looked forward to “working with Congress to restore U.S. financial support for the U.N. Population Fund.”

The Bush administration has repeatedly withheld funding authorized by Congress for the U.N. fund, saying the agency has funded a forced sterilization program in China. The fund has repeatedly denied that accusation.

“By signaling his intention to restore U.S. funding for, UNFPA, the UN Population Fund, President Barack Obama is signaling his re-engagement with the international community on the critical challenge of improving reproductive health around the world,” UN Foundation President Timothy Wirth said.

“For the past seven years, UNFPA funding has been a victim of false accusations and misinformation that had everything to do with politics and nothing to do with sound policy,” he said.

“Approximately 180 industrialized and developing countries, including all the countries in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, contribute to UNFPA. The United States was the only country to withhold funding for political reasons.”

Having attended the Olympics and two national political conventions, I was surprised at the mass chaos and confusion that I witnessed and experienced at the inauguration of President Barack Obama on January 20, 2009.

I was the bearer of a “North Standing - Purple” ticket to the inauguration. In preparation for the big day, I visited numerous government websites and obtained all of the information available to the public. The attached map that I obtained showed that the purple ticket screen point would be located on First Street NW at its intersection with Louisiana Avenue NW.

I entered First Street NW about 8:30 a.m. at its intersection with D Street. I stood there for over 90 minutes without moving an inch. (At one point, I noticed that Jesse Jackson was standing about ten feet away from me.) As the time for the inauguration grew near, I and those around me began to realize that we were not going to make it inside the gate. We all had purple tickets. I would guess that there were close to 10,000 people in a two block radius. There were thousands of people in front of us, thousands more to the sides and back of us, and the line was not moving.

There was a rumor spread that the gate two blocks ahead (which we could not see) had been temporarily closed due to an injury but would be reopening soon. (In reality, I believe that First Street NW had been intentionally blocked off.) Some people were questioning whether the start time of the inauguration would be delayed until we could enter. I told them it wouldn’t.

As the time continued to pass, the crowd grew larger and tighter. No one knew what was going on. Some guy climbed on top of a sidewalk covering and began shouting for people to back up so no one would get hurt. People began shouting questions to him that he was unable to answer. I think he was just a member of the crowd. Several police officers with bikes began pushing their way through the crowd, north on D Street. Tens of people would follow them because they created paths out of the melee. As the officers passed my area, we would ask them questions — but they had no answers.

Eventually, we heard sirens coming closer and closer. A fireman then jumped on top of the sidewalk overpass and began telling people to make way for an ambulance. Yet everyone was already crammed in as tight as possible. (The fireman was also unable to provide answers to the questions shouted to him.) The ambulance inched forward and people squished in even tighter. After it passed, I expected the crowd to relax — but it didn’t. People behind me immediately pushed forward into the space created by the vehicle and the situation worsened. All told, we had three different ambulances pass through the intersection — each one creating a tighter and tighter situation. When the third one came though, a large group of people about 50 feet from me were screaming and yelling as one of their own needed medical attention. They were ignored, the best I could tell.

The situation heightened with every passing minute. I began to fear that a riot would break out. Even without a riot, I feared that some would be seriously injured. Older ladies in my immediate area were beginning to fail under the pressure. Those around them were propping them up. Many people were shouting and asking people to let them out, yet none of us could move. Some particularly pushy people would begin to push through and lots of people would follow. I heard many of people say they were giving up and turning back. Many of them were black, and had made tremendous personal sacrifices to be there for the historic event. Some of them were crying and despondent. It broke my heart to witness this scene.

At one point, I was unable to reach into my own pockets. After struggling for several minutes, I was finally able to retrieve my Blackberry. I began e-mailing and texting other friends with inauguration tickets. I asked them if the situation was the same where they were, etc. After I lifted my arms above my head to text, I was unable to bring them back to my sides because there was simply no room. After awhile, one of my friends responded that the security gate for the tickets was a few blocks north of where the map indicated, and had to be accessed from Constitution Avenue. At that point, there were two women next to me who were frantic to escape from the crowd. I told them to follow me and we headed north on D Street. I pushed and prodded my way through the crowd as gently and persistently as I could. After some time, we were able to make it out. I cannot express the relief it was to break out of that can of sardines.

I then headed north and then turned west to Louisiana Ave. where I saw the “real” line for the purple security gate. I got into that line and it was actually moving. The line inched forward very slowly. At about 11:25 a.m., I was within 15 feet of the first security gate where they were checking for tickets. The crowd then began strongly pushing from behind me as people began to panic that the event was going to start without them. I was pushed to the security gate and quickly flashed my purple card. I then was able to choose between about 20 security lines with metal detectors, etc.

By about 11:30, I was through the second security check. I immediately proceeded to my Purple North Standing Section, but was turned away by security. They said the section was “closed” because it was “full” I found this somewhat unbelievable, as I knew there were thousands of purple ticket holders behind me (as well as those still stuck on First Street). As a result, I had no where to go. I wandered around the back sections and witnessed people trampling the green netted security fences, climbing trees, and even standing on top of the portable toilets. It was quite a sight. As the ceremonies proceeded, the small slivers of space where a Jumbo-Tron could be viewed became crowded. I eventually worked my way into the blue standing area, but it was so crowded that even the latrines were inaccessible unless you asked someone to move.

One of my friends with a blue ticket never made it in. Her sister got in, but witnessed many people without any tickets entering the silver ticket area. She said that when the gates opened at 8:00 a.m., no one at the silver gate was even checking for tickets. Let me know if I can be of further assistance.

Obama’s Pick for Dep. Pentagon Chief Violates Pledge About Lobbyists

January 09, 2009 10:23 AM

Nancy

Pelosi is in an enviable position, the most powerful Democrat in Congress at a time of national ascendancy for her party, but she seems a little nervous.

The only candidate I have met personally is Michael Steele.  He is the former Lt. Gov. of Maryland, and is very impressive.  He ran for the U.S. Senate two years ago and lost.   When I was in New York for the national convention in 2004, Michael Steele came to our hotel and spoke to the Utah delegation.  I have been a fan ever since. 

Todd Weiler

Todd Weiler

See http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-rahm-obama13dec13,0,3359611.story

Big deal.  I would have been shocked if that didn’t happen.  There is no evidence that Emanuel (or anyone else connected to Obama) engaged in any deal making.

I had been impressed with Obama since the election, but he has clearly botched his handling of this crisis.   If his team doesn’t learn from their mistakes, it may be a very long four years for his administration. 

Todd Weiler

Obama addressed the scandal over his Senate seat Tuesday afternoon, saying, “I had no contact with the governor or his office and so we were not, I was not aware of what was happening.” But Obama’s senior advisor David Axelrod told a Chicago affiliate of Fox News that Obama had in fact spoken to Blagojevich about his empty Senate seat.

“I know he’s talked to the governor and there are a whole range of names, many of which have surfaced, and I think he has a fondness for a lot of them,” Axelrod said in the Nov. 23 interview.

The controversy continued Tuesday evening, when Axelrod issued a statement retracting his statement. “I was mistaken when I told an interviewer last month that the President-elect has spoken directly to Governor Blagojevich about the Senate vacancy. They did not then or at any time discuss the subject,” said Axelrod.

“I know he’s talked to the governor and there are a whole range of names, many of which have surfaced, and I think he has a fondness for a lot of them,” Axelrod said in the Nov. 23 interview.

The controversy continued Tuesday evening, when Axelrod issued a statement retracting his statement. “I was mistaken when I told an interviewer last month that the President-elect has spoken directly to Governor Blagojevich about the Senate vacancy. They did not then or at any time discuss the subject,” said Axelrod.

The president-elect, who was speaking to reporters following a meeting with Al Gore about green energy and climate change, also said, “Obviously, like the rest of the people of Illinois, I am saddened and sobered by news that came out of the U.S. Attorney’s office today, but as this is an ongoing investigation into the governor, I don’t think it’d be appropriate for me to comment at this time.” The president-elect, who was speaking to reporters following a meeting with Al Gore about green energy and climate change, also said, “Obviously, like the rest of the people of Illinois, I am saddened and sobered by news that came out of the U.S. Attorney’s office today, but as this is an ongoing investigation into the governor, I don’t think it’d be appropriate for me to comment at this time.”

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman could be rivals for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination

In politics, there is nothing as appealing as the Next Big Thing.

The Next Big Thing is that politician who — for reasons both tangible and intangible — is seen as a player on the national stage, someone we all will hear from in the not-too-distant future.Four years ago, Barack Obama had that aura. Today he is in the midst of preparing to become the 44th president of the United States.

Not every rising star fulfills his or her potential in quite the way Obama has but many of them wind up influencing the debate even if they come up short — former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards jumps to mind in that realm.

With that in mind, The Fix is launching a new regular feature that we are calling The Rising (with obvious apologies to the Boss). In The Rising, we aim to provide the need-to-know information about the next set of party leaders, presidential candidates and others elected officials who will help shape the political landscape in the next four years or so.

We kick off our newest feature in Utah — where else? — with a look at Beehive State Gov. Jon Huntsman.

On paper, Huntsman doesn’t seem like anyone worth keeping an eye on. The son of a billionaire businessman and philanthropist, Huntsman served in several positions within the Administrations of George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush before running successfully for governor in ruby-red Utah in 2004 and cruising to reelection last month with 70 percent of the vote.

But, dig only slightly deeper and Huntsman’s appeal begins to become apparent. He is an expert on China and speaks Mandarin Chinese fluently. He is far more progressive on the environment than many within his party. He has built a record of economic recovery and growth during his first four years in office at which even Democrats marvel. And, most importantly (and interestingly), he sees himself as a force for bipartisanship in Utah.

“People work with people,” said Huntsman during an interview last month with The Fix. “Most Americans are fed up with the idea that partisanship has stood in the way of progress.”

As evidence of his across-the-aisle style, Huntsman points out that he appointed Scott Matheson, the Democrat who ran against him in 2004, to head up an independent commission investigating the Crandall Canyon Mine collapse in 2007.

Huntsman is openly critical of the recent Republican leadership, including the campaign run by Arizona Sen. John McCain, who he endorsed early in the primary season. (Huntsman’s father was an active supporter of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.)

Of the 2008 McCain campaign, Huntsman said: “The big ideas didn’t come forward.” He added that “people have to have to something they can vote on, they can digest” and McCain never gave them that information.

Huntsman is even more critical of the Bush Administration which, he suggests, chose narrow partisanship rather than “preeminence” around a few big ideas — a decision that cost the party control of the White House and both chambers of Congress.

“Right now we are devoid of ideas,” said Huntsman. “We don’t have the big thing, we don’t have the organizing principle.”

Asked about the war on terrorism, around which Bush has built his presidency, Huntsman said that while it should be part of our overall national security, it can’t be an organizing principle…it’s not big enough.”

The Administration’s singular focus on the war in Iraq, he added, has “completely neglected” other parts of the world — notably China and India. “Iraq has taken all of the oxygen out of the room,” Huntsman said.

For all of the change messaging and outsider appeal, Huntsman still has a number of major obstacles to overcome between now and 2012. (He says he has made no decisions about his future but certainly has the look and feel of a future presidential candidate.)

First and foremost is his Mormon faith, which, as we saw with Romney earlier this year, is a major stumbling block for Republican caucus and primary voters. While most voters were loath to say that a candidate’s gender or race made them less likely to support him or her, there was no such hesitation to voicing opposition to a Mormon candidate.

What the 2008 Republican primary proved is that there remains a bloc of base Republican voters — how large a bloc is up for debate — that believes Mormonism to be a cult and simply will not support any candidate who adheres to its tenets.

Huntsman’s second problem is Romney. By all indications, Romney is planning to run again in 2012 and would start the race better known and better financed than Huntsman. A Romney candidacy would also force Huntsman to answer questions about whether the Republican field was big enough for two Mormons — especially given the trepidation cited above toward Mormons from some GOP voters. (An interesting side story: There is a definite rivalry between Huntsman and Romney that will be fascinating to watch play out over the coming few years.)

The third major issue facing Huntsman is his lack of a political team. He said he cut his own ads for his gubernatorial campaigns and isn’t particularly close to any national consultants. Mock D.C.-based consultants if you like but it pays to have people around you who have done it before and know what it takes.

All in all, Huntsman is far more than meets the eye. He’s well worth watching over the next few years as he positions himself for a place on the national stage in 2012.

Blagojevich and his chief of staff, John Harris, are charged with conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud and solicitation of bribery, according to a statement from the U.S. Attorney’s office for the Northern District of Illinois.

Both men are expected in U.S. District Court in Chicago later Tuesday.

A news conference is expected at noon ET.

Federal prosecutors say Blagojevich, Harris and others conspired to gain financial benefits in appointing President-elect Barack Obama’s Senate replacement, according to the statement.

“The breadth of corruption laid out in these charges is staggering,” U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald said in a statement. “They allege that Blagojevich put a ‘for sale’ sign on the naming of a United States Senator; involved himself personally in pay-to-play schemes with the urgency of a salesman meeting his annual sales target; and corruptly used his office in an effort to trample editorial voices of criticism.”

According to the statement, Blagojevich is alleged to have discussed obtaining:

But Huntsman cautioned that he hasn’t filled out any paperwork and doesn’t believe an appointment is likely.

Huntsman, a former U.S. ambassador who supported Sen. John McCain for president, said Obama’s transition team called him for “a feeling out conversation” about his desire to help at some point with the incoming Democratic administration but that he was not asked about any specific position.

Asked whether he was being vetted for the administration, Huntsman said he didn’t know.

“I don’t know the answer because I don’t know what is going on behind the scenes,” the governor said in an interview with The Tribune’s Washington bureau. “I don’t know if there are certain Republicans under consideration. I really would have no idea in knowing if we were under consideration.”

Obama said in an interview with 60 Minutes on Sunday that there would be Republicans in his Cabinet, though he deferred on how many he would appoint. And the president-elect is reportedly studying President Abraham Lincoln’s appointments to his Cabinet, which he stocked with some critics.

Paul Light, a professor of public service at New York University who has studied the transition and political appointment process, says adding a Republican or two, or even three, to Obama’s Cabinet is a “low-cost option politically” and that the president-elect gains when he brings in members of the opposing party.

As a Western GOP governor, Huntsman also would bring diversity, Light says.

“Two things: Western Republican,” Light says. The Obama transition team is “currently under some fire — I think to a certain extent unfairly so — for filling up their key positions with Washington insiders.… A Western Republican would be a nice thing to have in the Cabinet.”

Huntsman was touted as a possible appointee had McCain won the White House because of his credentials as a diplomat. The governor has served as U.S. ambassador to Singapore and also as a deputy U.S. trade ambassador. He also speaks Mandarin Chinese.

For his part, Huntsman said he’s not interested in moving to Washington or an administration spot.

“I think we’ve already made our feelings known about coming back here,” Huntsman said about Washington. “We’ve got the best job in the world for one more term.”

tburr@sltrib.com ]]> http://leadershipthatdelivers.com/could-huntsman-have-a-chance-for-an-obama-cabinet-spot/feed/ http://leadershipthatdelivers.com/op-ed-let-detroit-go-bankrupt-by-mitt-romney/ http://leadershipthatdelivers.com/op-ed-let-detroit-go-bankrupt-by-mitt-romney/#comments Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:26:48 +0000 Todd Weiler http://leadershipthatdelivers.com/?p=495 From http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html

IF General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed.

Without that bailout, Detroit will need to drastically restructure itself. With it, the automakers will stay the course — the suicidal course of declining market shares, insurmountable labor and retiree burdens, technology atrophy, product inferiority and never-ending job losses. Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check.

I love cars, American cars. I was born in Detroit, the son of an auto chief executive. In 1954, my dad, George Romney, was tapped to run American Motors when its president suddenly died. The company itself was on life support — banks were threatening to deal it a death blow. The stock collapsed. I watched Dad work to turn the company around — and years later at business school, they were still talking about it. From the lessons of that turnaround, and from my own experiences, I have several prescriptions for Detroit’s automakers.

First, their huge disadvantage in costs relative to foreign brands must be eliminated. That means new labor agreements to align pay and benefits to match those of workers at competitors like BMW, Honda, Nissan and Toyota. Furthermore, retiree benefits must be reduced so that the total burden per auto for domestic makers is not higher than that of foreign producers.

That extra burden is estimated to be more than $2,000 per car. Think what that means: Ford, for example, needs to cut $2,000 worth of features and quality out of its Taurus to compete with Toyota’s Avalon. Of course the Avalon feels like a better product — it has $2,000 more put into it. Considering this disadvantage, Detroit has done a remarkable job of designing and engineering its cars. But if this cost penalty persists, any bailout will only delay the inevitable.

Second, management as is must go. New faces should be recruited from unrelated industries — from companies widely respected for excellence in marketing, innovation, creativity and labor relations.

The new management must work with labor leaders to see that the enmity between labor and management comes to an end. This division is a holdover from the early years of the last century, when unions brought workers job security and better wages and benefits. But as Walter Reuther, the former head of the United Automobile Workers, said to my father, “Getting more and more pay for less and less work is a dead-end street.”

You don’t have to look far for industries with unions that went down that road. Companies in the 21st century cannot perpetuate the destructive labor relations of the 20th. This will mean a new direction for the U.A.W., profit sharing or stock grants to all employees and a change in Big Three management culture.

The need for collaboration will mean accepting sanity in salaries and perks. At American Motors, my dad cut his pay and that of his executive team, he bought stock in the company, and he went out to factories to talk to workers directly. Get rid of the planes, the executive dining rooms — all the symbols that breed resentment among the hundreds of thousands who will also be sacrificing to keep the companies afloat.

Investments must be made for the future. No more focus on quarterly earnings or the kind of short-term stock appreciation that means quick riches for executives with options. Manage with an eye on cash flow, balance sheets and long-term appreciation. Invest in truly competitive products and innovative technologies — especially fuel-saving designs — that may not arrive for years. Starving research and development is like eating the seed corn.

Just as important to the future of American carmakers is the sales force. When sales are down, you don’t want to lose the only people who can get them to grow. So don’t fire the best dealers, and don’t crush them with new financial or performance demands they can’t meet.

It is not wrong to ask for government help, but the automakers should come up with a win-win proposition. I believe the federal government should invest substantially more in basic research — on new energy sources, fuel-economy technology, materials science and the like — that will ultimately benefit the automotive industry, along with many others. I believe Washington should raise energy research spending to $20 billion a year, from the $4 billion that is spent today. The research could be done at universities, at research labs and even through public-private collaboration. The federal government should also rectify the imbedded tax penalties that favor foreign carmakers.

But don’t ask Washington to give shareholders and bondholders a free pass — they bet on management and they lost.

The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk.

In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check.