Dems Mock GOP Outrage Over Shutdown Closures

Darrell Issa listens during a meeting of the House Oversight and Government Reform committee, which he chairs, on Thursday, April 14, 2011.
National Journal
Alex Brown
Oct. 16, 2013, 8:39 a.m.

Mem­bers of Con­gress seemed to chan­nel Cold­play Wed­nes­day dur­ing a House hear­ing on the shut­down’s ef­fects. “Nobody said it was easy,” went the Demo­crat­ic mes­sage. Countered Re­pub­lic­ans: “No one ever said it would be this hard.”

At is­sue were pub­lic land clos­ures by the Na­tion­al Park Ser­vice that Re­pub­lic­ans have de­scribed as polit­ic­ally mo­tiv­ated. Even the name of the hear­ing — “As Dif­fi­cult As Pos­sible” — car­ried the GOP mes­sage of un­ne­ces­sary hard­ship caused by NPS de­cisions. The joint hear­ing was con­vened by the Nat­ur­al Re­sources Com­mit­tee and the Over­sight and Gov­ern­ment Re­form Com­mit­tee.

“The Park Ser­vice “¦ [should] nev­er al­low it­self to be sub­jec­ted to polit­ic­al in­flu­ence,” said House Over­sight and Gov­ern­ment Re­form Chair­man Dar­rell Issa, R-Cal­if. “Yet it ap­pears today the Park Ser­vice lead­er­ship is no longer liv­ing up to that man­date.”

NPS Dir­ect­or Jonath­an Jar­vis had the un­en­vi­able task of re­spond­ing to Issa and oth­ers who de­man­ded an­swers for a host of the agency’s spe­cif­ic clos­ures. He de­fen­ded them as ne­ces­sary un­der shut­down pro­ced­ure, de­clin­ing to wade in­to the polit­ic­al blame game over who is re­spons­ible for the shut­down. Per­haps that’s be­cause Demo­crats did it for him.

“We’re 15 days in­to a gov­ern­ment shut­down, and now Re­pub­lic­ans want to in­vest­ig­ate why the gov­ern­ment is shut down,” said Nat­ur­al Re­sources Com­mit­tee rank­ing mem­ber Peter De­Fazio of Ore­gon. Oth­er Demo­crats asked Re­pub­lic­ans what they ex­pec­ted would hap­pen when they shut down the gov­ern­ment, but De­Fazio took it a step fur­ther. “I will demon­strate who’s re­spons­ible,” he said, hold­ing up a mir­ror to face his GOP col­leagues.

Jar­vis said the Park Ser­vice gave no or­ders, nor re­ceived any from the White House, to make shut­down clos­ures in­ten­tion­ally pain­ful or vis­ible. Much-cri­tiqued clos­ures of monu­ments such as the World War II Me­mori­al were not without reas­on, he said. “There’s a lot of talk about open-air me­mori­als that are un­manned,” he said. “They are not un­oc­cu­pied. My re­spons­ib­il­ity is to keep them pro­tec­ted 24 hours a day.”¦ It pains us to not be able to in­vite the Amer­ic­an pub­lic in­to their na­tion­al parks.”

Some Demo­crats poin­ted to the green paint splattered on the Lin­coln Me­mori­al this sum­mer, say­ing such in­cid­ents could es­cal­ate if monu­ments were left open with no NPS rangers to provide se­cur­ity.

That didn’t sat­is­fy Re­pub­lic­ans, who said earli­er gov­ern­ment shut­downs did not in­flict such pain­ful con­sequences. Former NPS Deputy Dir­ect­or Denis Galv­in called that se­lect­ive memory. “Yes, Lin­coln and Jef­fer­son were bar­ri­caded,” he said. “The much-dis­cussed World War II Me­mori­al did not ex­ist then, but if it had, I think we would have bar­ri­caded it.”

Jar­vis also pushed back on news re­ports that quoted a ranger who said NPS em­ploy­ees were in­struc­ted to make clos­ures pain­ful. “I have no idea where that in­form­a­tion came from. That’s hearsay,” he said. “I’m in com­mu­nic­a­tion with my em­ploy­ees — the ones who are still at work — and they do not be­lieve that.”

Keep­ing the parks open, Jar­vis said, would have been a vi­ol­a­tion of the An­ti­de­fi­ciency Act, which pre­vents op­er­a­tions without ap­pro­pri­ated fund­ing. Rep. Rob Bish­op, R-Utah, re­spon­ded that erect­ing bar­ri­cades “cre­ated a new ob­lig­a­tion with no new threat,” it­self a vi­ol­a­tion of the act.

Over­sight Com­mit­tee rank­ing mem­ber Eli­jah Cum­mings, D-Md., lamen­ted that ar­gu­ments over the World War II Me­mori­al dis­trac­ted from ser­i­ous shut­down prob­lems, like delayed vet­er­ans’ be­ne­fits. Oth­er Demo­crats were more than con­tent to mock the GOP for its out­rage over the park clos­ures. “Blam­ing the Na­tion­al Park Ser­vice for the clos­ure of the parks is like vot­ing for cap­it­al pun­ish­ment and then blam­ing the hang­man,” said Del­eg­ate Elean­or Holmes Norton, D-D.C.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
These (Supposed) Iowa and NH Escorts Tell All
8 hours ago
NATIONAL JOURNAL AFTER DARK

Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:

  • Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
  • Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
  • They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
  • One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
Source:
STATE VS. FEDERAL
Restoring Some Sanity to Encryption
8 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
8 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Hillary Is Running Against the Bill of 1992
8 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Trevor Noah Needs to Find His Voice. And Fast.
9 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”

Source:
×