OC Register Editorial Wrong: Issa Not Serious About His Job

Congressman Darrell Issa (R-CA)

Congressman Darrell Issa (R-CA)

Darrell Issa, the congressman representing much of south Orange County is far from the serious legislator that an Orange County Register editorial claims he is. Issa is the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform committee. In that role he has made a name for himself by chasing Attorney General Eric Holder around with a contempt of congress suit over the hyped-up, and failed, gun-running sting called Fast and Furious.

The Register editorial attempts to paint Issa as a hero of government reform for his focus on budget shortfalls in the U.S. Postal Service. The Register unfortunately failed to point out that Issa is complicit in the huge shortfalls at the Postal Service as a key supporter of reforms in  that forced the Post Office to fund, in a very shot period of time, projected liabilities for retirement and medical benefits that wont occur for 75 years. Essentially, Issa and his GOP colleagues decided to add payments of more than $5 billion annually to pre-fund retiree benefits.

But for me, the most disgusting assertion in the Register editorial is that Issa is serious about his job. Don’t tell that to my 81-year old friend Toni who called Issa’s office yesterday to find out what he was doing about “Sequestration.” The staffer in Issa’s office heralded Issa’s support for failed legislation that passed the House last session, stating the party-line that the House did it’s job last year and that President Obama has not introduced any legislation for him, and the GOP majority in the House, to vote on.

Apparently, after 12 years in office, Darrell Issa, or at least his staff, have not learned that the President does not introduce legislation. That is up to members of Congress. To claim that action on legislation, now expired, is doing one’s job is absurd. Issa has spent his time chasing hyped-up scandals rather than taking action to offer real solutions to a problems that he and his GOP colleagues created. Remember that the Sequestration cuts are the result of an partisan position that attempted to tie payment of the national debts already incurred, to deficit reduction cuts. Since the GOP members, including Issa, refused to compromise the  y kicked the can down the road agreeing to draconian cuts that no one wanted, in the hope that they could force their plan in a future session.

That plan failed, and now the cuts no one wanted are at our collective doorstep.

Issa and his GOP colleagues are not interested in doing their jobs. They are interested in only one thing—Sinking our economy and blaming the results on the President.

  12 comments for “OC Register Editorial Wrong: Issa Not Serious About His Job

  1. March 1, 2013 at 10:34 am

    It’s amazing how liberals continue to blame Republicans for the debt, deficit, and slow economy created by the Obama administration. Not only is Obama responsible for the mess this country finds itself in, but the LIberal media who has supported,worshipped and defended Obama’s policies must take responsibilty for promoting the Obama agenda.

    Instead of criticizing Congressman Issa for doing his job in investigating the Fast and Furious scandal, liberals should be criticizing Obama for obstructing Congress in it’s investigation.

    • March 1, 2013 at 8:30 pm

      It’s amazing that their policies were so bad — and their blocking of the government spending that we need to get out of this crisis — that those Republican policies ARE still to blame.

      “Fast and Furious” was a tempest in a teapot and Issa’s investigation was discredited months ago. Maybe you think that people forgot, but they can still look it up.

  2. Ryan Cantor
    March 1, 2013 at 11:07 am

    “Remember that the Sequestration cuts are the result of an partisan position that attempted to tie payment of the national debts already incurred, to deficit reduction cuts.”

    Also, remember, it was President Obama’s idea. So, if you really want to call it partisan, attach the label correctly and call it what it really is: A Democrat’s position.


    • March 1, 2013 at 8:27 pm

      Gee, Ryan — to bad that the Washington Post’s fact-checker deferred to its “faded star” reporter Bob Woodward’s book on the topic, given that this week Woodward has been exposed as such a wingnutty fool of an Obama opponent that even the likes of Erik Erikson are backing away from him.

      When the bill containing the sequestration provision was passed, John Boehner said that he “got 98% of what [he] wanted.” Sequestering funds — a stupid PR plot and self-inflicted wound on part with the deficit cap crises that the Republicans keep manufacturing — was not presented as part of the remaining 2%. Republicans thought that it would force Democrats to accede to their demands; they set up this hostage-taking and now want to disclaim it as it seems to be going wrong.

      • Ryan Cantor
        March 2, 2013 at 12:22 am

        Dr D– I didn’t quite catch that. Are you saying it wasn’t the White Houses’s idea or that it doesn’t matter that its the White House’s idea?

  3. March 1, 2013 at 5:31 pm

    Blame the Senate Democrat Majority Leader, Harry Reid and Obama for the Sequestration.
    The Republican House passed a budget.
    The Democrat Senate could have amended the House bill and sent it back to the House.
    A joint committee could have been formed to create a budget bill that would have stopped the Sequestration. But, – instead Obama wanted to play political games.

    • March 1, 2013 at 8:22 pm

      Quick quiz, Robert: have any Senate attempts to produce such a bill been filibustered by the Republican minority?

      • March 2, 2013 at 11:43 am

        ‘Filibustering’ – is unrelated to my comment above.
        The Republican House passed a budget bill, (the Ryan Bill). Now it’s the responsibility of the Democrat majority in the Senate to amendment it and sent it to the House. It’s called debate, – working together, – compromise, – etc. It’s called creating a budget bill that both parties hate, but does in fact kick sequestration down the road.
        But Obama and Senator Harry Reid only wanted to play games.

  4. March 1, 2013 at 8:32 pm

    Gotta disagree with you on one point, Chris: saying that the President doesn’t introduce legislation is too formalistic. Presidents can and do work with sympathetic members of Congress to propose legislation that they want, so that criticism of Obama isn’t entirely groundless. His response, quite reasonably, is that Republicans ruled out everything that he would propose — including new revenues — even before he did so, to his proposing or not proposing anything is beside the point.

  5. March 1, 2013 at 10:05 pm

    Obama & the Gang of 8, – The sequester cuts make room for:

    (AD CLAIM No. 5): Who elected Graham to demand amnesty and welfare for millions of illegal aliens?

    Sen. Graham has persuaded some in the media that this part of the ad can’t be true because federal law prohibits welfare for illegal aliens.

    But Sen. Graham and Gang’s proposal would help the 11 million illegal aliens get around that ban by declaring them “legal.” And that is why “comprehensive immigration reform” would add trillions of dollars of new spending to taxpayers over the next couple of decades. The Gang promises a green card and path to citizenship to the millions of illegal aliens, which makes them eligible for the array of social welfare programs. Declaring an illegal alien to be a legal resident at the very beginning opens up federal entitlement spending, too. For example, the Affordable Health Care Act (commonly called “Obamacare”) requires every legal resident to qualify for government health care. Legal status also opens up benefits from Social Security, Medicare, Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), and child tax credits. (Source: Washington Post, “Bipartisan Framework for Immigration Reform”, Jan. 27, 2013)


    • March 1, 2013 at 10:32 pm

      I take it that you didn’t see my question to you just above. Check it out.

  6. Joe Sixpack
    March 8, 2013 at 8:48 am

    “Draconian cuts”, what a joke. 2.5% is “draconian”? Without lies, liberals would be speechless, and what a fantastic improvement that would be.

Comments are closed.