CBS 2 School

Description:
U.S. Senate seeks an exceptional individual to join the nation’s leadership team. Aligned to our Illinois State Constitution succession planning process, Governor Blagojevich is focusing his efforts to identify a dynamic leader to continue the nation’s vision for success. This leadership opportunity is available due to a recent resignation  (for a very good reason.)

Job Summary:
The junior U.S. Senator from Illinois is a full-time, 12-month representative assignment. The selected individual will work closely with the senior U.S. Senator from Illinois (Dick Durbin) during the next two years and will share the responsibility for the representation of the state in the U.S. Senate. This individual will also share the responsibility for congressional oversight of the executive branch.  They should also plan on spending the next two years building statewide political alliances and a campaign war chest in seeking election for a 6-year-term in 2010.

Qualifications:
Qualified applicants must be a U.S. Citizen for at least 9 years, 30 years old, and reside in the State of Illinois. Applicants must demonstrate a history of working effectively with diverse constitutencies; the ability to promote a positive climate for the Democratic Party; skill at organizing personnel to manage a Senate office, and a track record of formulating and of achieving short and long-range legislative goals.  The person selected must also remove their name from consideration as a 2010 Illinois gubernatorial candidate.

Working Conditions:
A transition plan will be developed and the identified candidate will be sworn in on January 6, 2009. The salary for this position will be $169,300 and include a comprehensive benefits package.

Application Procedure:
Interested candidates should submit an application and mail/attach a letter of interest, résumé, copies of transcripts and three letters of reference to: Governor Rod Blagojevich, James R. Thompson Center?100 W. Randolph, Chicago, IL 60601

P.S. Republicans need not apply.
 

 VIDEO: The Open Senate Seat

In American politics, a “lame duck” is any politician leaving office as a successor awaits.  

The term is typically applied to presidents who will be leaving the White House but are awaiting the inauguration date of January 20th to turn power over to their successor.  Like a duck wounded by a hunter, this president lies powerless as those with power approach.

Starting today, the Congress begins a lame duck session as at least 56 current members will be leaving as of January 6th, 2009.  But with S.O.S. calls coming daily from the struggling U.S. auto industry, much is being asked from this lame duck Congress.  

Arguing that hundreds of thousands of American manufacturing jobs could be put at risk with no action, Democratic congressional leaders have set the goal of getting at least $25 billion of the $700 billion bailout package set aside for the Big 3 of Detroit.  These leaders say the auto industry can not wait until January 20th for action.

The Bush Administration has not rejected the bailout proposal, but has hinted that he would favor using money that had been set aside for the 2007 Energy Bill for any bailout of the auto industry.  

Students of government should keep their eyes open for some interesting lame duck legislative intrigue in the coming days with classic legislative lingo resting at the center of this D.C. drama.

Filibuster:  A filibuster is a weapon used in the Senate by the minority side (currently Republicans) to permanently delay a bill with permanent debate.  It can successfully kill a bill unless 60 Senators vote to limit debate with “cloture.”

Unlike the next Congress, this lame duck Congress has a very narrowly divided Senate where Republicans might very well resort to using endless filibusters to prevent their chamber from passing any bailout.

VETO:  If a bailout bill manages to survive a Senate filibuster, President Bush might decide to kill the bill with his Veto power.  To pass a bill that has been vetoed, two-thirds of the House and the Senate must then vote to approve the bill.  This is not too likely with the narrow Democratic majorities in the 110th Congress.

Pocket Veto:  If Congress passes a bill with less than 10 days left in its session, President Bush can simply choose not to sign this legislation into law.  In this case, the law is automatically rejected with this “pocket veto.”

111th Congress:  The field changes on January 6th with the swearing in of the new 11th Congress.   With a more powerful Democratic majority in both chambers, the 111th Congress could turn up the heat on President Bush before his departure on January 20th.

Inauguration: On January 20th, President Obama comes to town with a whole lot of power to replace the lame duck president.  He will certainly be more willing to work with the Democratic Congress, but many question what the U.S. auto industry will look like after weeks of lame ducks.

   

 VIDEO: The Lame Duck Congress

George Washington said, “Liberty, once it begins to take root, is a plant of rapid growth.”  We wish the same could be said of today’s economy.  Rapid growth in the U.S. appears to be a thing of the past.

The news is worse.  The global economy is bad too.

There may be some good news coming.  This weekend the G20 is meeting in Washington D.C.  This group representing both the industrialized countries and the emerging market countries hopes to bring a timely breath of confidence to the world economy.  The G20 conference hopes to calm our fears about an imminent fiscal Armageddon.

It would not be the first meeting of its kind.

Back in 1944 as World War II was coming to a close, over 700 delegates representing 44 nations met at the Mount Washington Hotel in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire.  Their mission was to calm the fears of an impending economic depression.  Its greatest legacy was the creation of the all-important International Monetary Fund (IMF).  Too complex to describe here the IMF made possible the global trade we take for granted today.

Will the G20 be able to accomplish anything comparable?

Perhaps a trip back to Mount Washington is in order or least the fount of Washington.  Our first President faced an imposing crisis during the American Revolution oft overlooked.  Historians call it the Newburgh incident.

A group of colonial officers were planning a coup.  The old General, they were afraid, was not up to the challenge.  We are told Washington brought the men together.  Fumbling to put on his spectacles Washington said:

"Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray but almost blind in the service of my country."

Recognizing the difficult sacrifices made by Washington the officers sense of shame overcame them.  They wept.  Energized by their leader’s time tested example those officers went on to win a revolution still worth fighting for.

This weekend a return to Mount Washington is in order.  Hopefully we all have learned the lessons of our Washington.  After this weekend will we be able to say in Washington we trust?  

Strength is in the roots.  Tolstoy’s words should give us pause:  “The leaves of a tree delight us more than the roots.”

Hopefully the G20 will leave Washington with more than just fanciful words.  Just maybe they will lead us in planting the roots of a successful economic future. . . again.

 VIDEO: CBS 2 School: The Economy And The G20

The big winner in last Tuesday’s election was unified government.  Between the years 1900 – 1952 unified governed occurred 85% of the time.  Since, however, unified government has occurred much less frequently.  The trend toward divided government has been an important feature of our contemporary government.

Such trends appear over.

Divided government occurs when the majority party in Congress differs from the party of the President.  In recent years this has meant a Democratic majority in charge of the legislative branch and a Republican George Bush as President.

Unified government occurs when the majority party in Congress is the same as the party of the President.  Since 1952, we have experienced unified government only about one third of the time.  As political scientist-in-chief David Mayhew has written, “Divided we Govern.”

One would expect that divided government produces gridlock and unified government yields legislative productivity.  Yet the facts may be counter intuitive.  Mayhew and others have argued that significant legislation is no more likely in a unified government.  Periods of divided government may encourage greater deliberation and subsequent bipartisan success.

Unified government, however, often finds itself trapped and snared by incestuous bickering.  Agenda setting rarely has one master.  The White House and Congress often have different constituent groups to please.  The push and pull of the legislative process may butt up against Obama and his minions.  Obama won the election after all by appealing to his moderate side.  Ramming a liberal agenda through Congress may make for a short honeymoon.

The last time we had an extended unified government, all the way back to the 1960s, significant reform legislation was passed.  This included advancements in civil rights, education and health care.  In G. Calvin Mackenzie and Robert Weisbrot’s latest book The Liberal Hour they argue:

“The institutions of national politics and bureaucrats who inhabited them . . . produced social and economic changes that have become the deep and enduring legacy of the 1960s.”

Unified government need not to be feared.  Years ago Woodrow Wilson wrote – “It is only once in a generation that a people can be lifted above the material things.  That is why conservative government is in the saddle two thirds of the time.”

Has our time arrived?

Barack Obama was not the only winner last week.  Unified government is back and looking stronger than ever.  The recent trend toward divided government was soundly defeated.  Only time will tell what the consequences will be of taking that last trend out of town.


 VIDEO: Unified Government

As Obama, our Wizard of Oh’s, builds his Yellow Brick Road for an expectant majority we best ask “what can president’s actually do?”

After last week’s election no one would deny that Obama captured IT.  We do not know much about him.  He ran virtually free from a past record fore there was none.  But historic millions cast their ballot for him because he had IT.

IT must start doing something to fulfill our expectations.  But what?

A brief civics lesson is in order.

Presidents fill a number of critical roles.  In no particular order here they are:

Chief of State:  In this role Presidents embody America.  Presidents become the personification of the United States.  When we need to be represented at some official gathering we send our President.  Our image at home and abroad is best realized in the person of the President of the United States.  He is our Chief of State.

Chief Legislator:  Although the separation of powers reserves lawmaking to our Congress, today’s Presidents play a critical role in our legislative process.  Presidents are agenda setters.  They prioritize key pieces of legislation by not only stumping for them but in many cases proposing them as well.  Presidents can do more than merely signing or vetoing laws.  Presidents have become to a great extent our Chief Legislator.

Chief of Party:  Though not mentioned in our Constitution, our form of government would be unthinkable without political parties.  Presidents become de facto leaders of their political party.  By campaigning, raising money and promoting party platforms Presidents work to reinforce existing party advantages.  A President’s agenda is best served when members of his party both nationally and locally win their respective elections as well.  Not to be underestimated, our President serves as Chief of Party.

Commander-in-Chief:  One of the more high profile roles, our President serves as leader of our armed forces.  Led by a civilian, our military and its natural tendencies are checked by a President who must answer directly to the people.  Nevertheless, Presidents have the power and authority to take our might and display it around the world as seen fit.  The power of the sword carries a burden most Presidents would rather avoid.  War can make or break any Presidency.  Our President is also our Commander-in-Chief.

Chief Diplomat:  Presidents also attempt to build strong friendships and alliances around the world.  War for most Presidents is a last resort.  Forging trusting relationships around the world is diplomacy’s higher calling.  Making treaties and reducing conflict through constructive talk is an art most Presidents hope to get good at.  All Presidents are called upon to be our Chief Diplomat.

Chief Executive:  Our complex government employs nearly 3 million civilian workers.  Can any one person be in charge?  Yes, our President is the CEO of the United States government.  There is no issue in which he is not called upon to deliver an answer.  Whether it be an economic recession, a natural disaster, an impending foreign threat or shaking the hand of some new found hero do not look to anybody else other than our President.  The President is our Chief Executive.

What role do you think is most important?

Time will tell if Obama can role with IT.

 VIDEO: Presidential Roles

You’ve just won 53% of the national popular vote as your party cement gains in both the House and the Senate while people across the globe heap praise and accolades on your potential as U.S. President.

What’s next?

For any president-elect, job #1 is to start hiring key staff members.

Despite back-handed compliments that that Barack Obama might possess superhuman powers, no one person can possibly tackle all that a president has to do.   Surrounding yourself with key staff and delegating responsibilities to that staff is a crucial job for any executive, especially the Chief Executive of the United States.

This job of the presidency is often called the role of Chief Administrator and is very similar to the responsibilities of a human resources director who helps to put the right people in the right spots of an organization.

While the positions of Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense and Secretary of the Treasury might get more attention, the president-elect’s selection for Chief of Staff is his most crucial early appointment.

The Chief of Staff helps to organize the president’s White House operation and prioritizes a president’s decision making on a day to day basis.

With the selection of Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Chicago to be his Chief of Staff, Obama has already indicated some of his priorities more than 70 days before taking office.

First, Obama knows that a top requirement of White House advisors is loyalty.  While Cabinet members might be torn between allegiances to the President and their executive departments, White House advisors must always prioritize what’s good for the President.

Having served in the White House as an advisor to Bill Clinton and known for his fierce loyalty, Emanuel matches this part of the job description perfectly.

The selection of Emanuel also sends an important signal to Congress.

Obama is relatively new to the culture of Washington D.C. having served in the U.S. Senate for under 4 years.  Even though his party controls both chambers of Congress, he will be pitted against Congressional leaders who have solidified power for many years before and will be in Congress many years after Obama departs.  These are leaders who are licking for the chance to get their pet policies enacted into law after years of being blocked.   Not all of these pet policies meet Obama’s objectives.

Emanuel is the architect of the Democratic takeover of the House of Representatives in 2006.  He is known as a shrewd negotiator by both the liberals and conservatives on Capitol Hill.  The pick of Emanuel demonstrates Obama’s message to Congress that his relative inexperience does not make him a patsy in dealing with congressional heavyweights.

 In terms of sending a message that he is serious about working hard on a tough agenda of ideas, we’d say Obama had a very productive first day on the job with the selection of Rahm Emanuel as Chief of Staff.

 VIDEO: Before Obama Takes Office

Life is understood looking backwards,  Kierkegaard said, but it must be lived forwards.  What lies ahead is still uncertain, but looking back on this historic presidential election we should remember coins.

The first coins should be remembered literally.  Obama won the money race early.  His ability to out fund raise the Clintons gave the Obama campaign an early legitimacy.  Though much will be written about his ability to raise coin, central to any campaign is framing your message.  This takes time.  This takes money.  Obama had both in great abundance.

Another coin we should remember from Obama’s successful campaign is his ability to turn a phrase into gold.  Obama is the Rumpelstiltskin of rhetoric.  Whereas most leaders win through perspiration, Obama won through inspiration.  No one in recent memory could coin a phrase like Obama.

When we first met him on the national stage in 2004 this was true:

“E pluribus unum: "Out of many, one."

Now even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us -- the spin masters, the negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of "anything goes." Well, I say to them tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America -- there is the United States of America. There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America -- there’s the United States of America.”

And then again last night it remained true:

“And to all those who have wondered if America's beacon still burns as bright _ tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from our the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity, and unyielding hope.

For that is the true genius of America _ that America can change. Our union can be perfected. And what we have already achieved gives us hope for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.”

Disraeli once said, “with words we govern men.”  Obama will be our homilitician-in-chief. Presidential language will no longer be the butt of our jokes.  At this time of grave uncertainty, Obama will want to use the bully pulpit to bring America back to its glory.  Yes we hope he can.

Yet most importantly, perhaps, is that Obama promised us the other side of a coin.  He promised us change.  Clearly that single message resonated with voters.  Clearly that brand sold well wherever Obama went.  The number of foreign press covering this story suggests that change is desired all over the world.  If Obama best represents the other side of a coin, we seem interested.

Coins played an important part in the Obama campaign.

Taken collectively, his coins gave us change.

We look forward to seeing if it will be enough.

 VIDEO: Barack Obama's Win, And The Road Ahead

Who is our next President?

Let us know your thoughts, views and experiences from today's historic election.

When asked twenty-five years from now, "What were you doing on November 4, 2008?"

Nothing comes easy in Presidential politics, especially understanding the complex way the final winner is decided.

The Framers of the Constitution did not want much to come easy to the office of the president.  They feared that this person would become tyrannical and planned to have his power checked.  They also feared that the masses were not to be trusted with selecting the president directly so they developed a unique institution called the Electoral College.

The Electoral College was originally designed to be a group of elite Americans who would pick the most qualified person to be president.  The College worked that way exactly twice when it selected George Washington unanimously. Then political factions began campaigning to elect their preferred candidate, and the Electoral College was changed to what it is today…a state-by-state method of selecting the winner of the Presidential election.
 
Today there are a total of 538 electoral votes distributed across all 50 states plus Washington, D.C.  The electoral vote total matches the number of congress members for each state.  The least populated states (Wyoming, Alaska, Delaware, Montana and the Dakotas) get a minimum of 3 electoral votes.  California, the most populated has 55 electoral votes.

To win the presidency, one must win a majority of the 538 potential votes in the Electoral College.   This sets the magic number to win the White House at 270.   But candidates must get these votes one state at a time.

To win a state’s electoral votes, a candidate must win the popular vote in that state.   All but 2 states award their electoral votes based on a “winner-takes-all” method.  This allowed George W. Bush to win all of Florida’s electoral votes in 2000 even though he only won 49% of Florida’s votes and beat Al Gore officially by a mere 537 votes in Florida.

Because of this rule, candidates rarely spend any significant effort campaigning in one-sided states where the outcome is surely known.   Instead, candidates focus on the “battleground” states that hover or swing between the two candidates.  

The “winner-takes-all” feature is also responsible for the most controversial Electoral College outcome when the winner of the national popular vote loses in due to the Electoral College system.

This has happened four times, the most recent being George W. Bush in 2000.  This rare occurrence is not unlike a World Series champion that gets blown out in several World Series losses but manages to win four close games.   While outscored over the course of the entire series, the winning team simply needs a majority of games not a plurality of runs.

We welcome your input on the Electoral College.  If you think we should scrap this plan for another method of selecting the president, please offer your alternative plan.   And of course, be sure to leave us your Electoral College predictions for the race between McCain and Obama.   A handy reference tool for counting electoral votes can be found at www.270towin.com

 VIDEO: The Electoral College

Today is Halloween and many still dress in costumes. This Fall Celtic Festival can be traced back over two thousand years. Apparently, Celts hoped that by dressing in ghoulish garb on the eve of their New Year certain evil spirits could be warded off. Here, by wearing costumes, we hope to scare our neighbors into giving us free stuff. It is a day to pretend.

Allow us to pretend to be a pundit, a political prattler, a prognosticator of pith. Today the 2 Regular Guys would really like to portend. We want to foreshadow. We want to foretell the outcome of next week’s historic election. Today we will pick the winners.

One winner will be the American voter.  Record numbers of first time voters will be going to the polls.  Overall turnout will be higher than recent presidential elections.  Historic elections attract attention.  With more paying attention, more should be expected to vote.

Another clear winner will be the Democratic Party.  Look for the Democrats to gain seats in both the House and the Senate.  There may not be coattails this year, but there will be sizable majorities for Democrats.  Look for Senate Democrats to close in on the cloture proof number of 60.

Locally the anti-incumbent sentiment will show its limits.  In the high profile Congressional elections in our area, the incumbents will hold serve.

The big loser next Tuesday will be Red and Blue America.  For too long our politics has been reduced to a simple metaphor.  Partisan splits have dominated.  This year a number of red states will have the blues.

Of course, that means an early exit for McCain.  With key red states leaning toward Obama, like Virginia, it looks as if we will have an early winner.  Look for Obama to be declared the next president as early as 9:01 PM.  There will be no late night drama this year.

This year’s candy Obamalicious.

Then again, this is a day to pretend.

 VIDEO: The Candidates' Costumes