BrianGarst.com

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

Eric Cantor Archive

Thursday

5

September 2013

0

COMMENTS

Syrian Intervention Reveals Central Foreign Policy Divide

Written by , Posted in Foreign Affairs & Policy

When Obama was elected, I noted that his soon-to-be Ambassador to the U.N and now National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, had previously argued for unilateral military action in Darfur and represented a kind of left-wing humanitarian interventionism that those preoccupied only with the most current of events might not have been familiar with:

Left-wing interventionists are actually more common than right-wing ones. Before the neoconservatives had won the day in establishing Republican policy, there was Secretary Madeliene Albright, who asked Colin Powell, “What’s the point of having this superb military you’re always talking about if we can’t use it?” The ironic difference between the left and right interventionists is this: on the left they only want to use force when U.S. interests are non-existent. Boondoggle that Iraq was in many ways, at least there was a debatable, though certainly plausible, claim of serving U.S. national interests in deposing Saddam. One can’t even make a pretense of serving U.S. interests in Darfur.

I assumed this information would come as a surprise to many given the dominant opposition rhetoric of the Bush years. Many had also forgotten that Bush ran a campaign opposed to interventionism and nation building, which contrasted with Clinton’s international adventures as world police. But like so many politicians, Bush reversed position upon entering office.

We’ve since witnessed Obama’s unilateral interventionism in Libya, an adventure conjured for the specific purpose of revitalizing the image of humanitarian interventionism post-Iraq. And now we see the same thing happening with Syria, where once again there is no credible argument of a U.S. interest at stake. Matt Welch at Reason does an excellent job of exposing the administration’s dissembling via Secretary of State John Kerry, who was against military mistakes before he was for them.

While the public overwhelming opposes a pointless strike on Syria, Republicans are nevertheless providing the President political cover. Speaker Boehner and House Majority Leader Cantor have endorsed a strike, while John McCain is once again one of the loudest voices calling for insertion of the United States into a Middle Eastern civil war, suggesting it would be “catastrophic” should Congress decline authorizing force.

The position of Republican leadership and the GOP old guard contrasts with more stridently small government newcomers Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and Justin Amash, and they’re joined by true anti-war liberals (as opposed to those, like Nancy Pelosi, who apparently just took positions for convenience because they were against Bush). All of this makes for a lot of political intrigue surrounding the vote over a resolution of force.

Friday

26

November 2010

0

COMMENTS

Republicans Look To Halt Honorific Legislation

Written by , Posted in Waste & Government Reform

The story:

The House this session has spent time honoring Geronimo, celebrating the Hollywood Walk of Fame’s 50th anniversary, declaring country music a distinctly American art form and congratulating the Saratoga Race Course on its 142nd season.

But the days of lawmakers spending hours on such niceties are on the way out.

A leader of the House’s new Republican majority intends to end the practice of voting on such resolutions — or at least dramatically scale it back.

…”I do not suspect that Jefferson or Madison ever envisioned Congress honoring the 2,560th anniversary of the birth of Confucius or supporting the designation of National Pi Day,” said Eric Cantor (R-Va.), the next House majority leader. “I believe people want our time, energy and efforts focused on their priorities.”

I’m somewhat torn on this issue.  As a general rule, I like when Congress wastes time. The more time they waste on these kinds of bills, or stuck in partisan gridlock, the less time they can spend further destroying the economy or invading personal liberties.

That said, as a Congressional observer, I grow tired of scrolling through vote after vote of nonsensical bills to get to the important stuff.  Put less selfishly, Congress might be a tiny bit more transparent and accessible if people don’t have to weed through so much nonsense just to see what Congress is really up to.

Sunday

28

February 2010

0

COMMENTS

Sunday

21

June 2009

0

COMMENTS

Cantor Seeks To Redesign Dollar

Written by , Posted in Education

Eric Cantor (R-VA) has proposed legislation to redesign the one dollar bill. Specifically, the Liberty Bill Act (H.R. 2854) would “require the Secretary of the Treasury to redesign $1 Federal reserve notes so as to incorporate the preamble to the Constitution of the United States, a list describing the Articles of the Constitution, and a list describing the Amendments to the Constitution, on the reverse side of such notes.”

The bill states that Congress finds that “many Americans are unaware of the provisions of the Constitution of the United States, one of the most remarkable and important documents in world history.”

This is undoubtedly true, but what are we doing about all the members of Congress that are unaware of the provisions of the Constitution?

If we’re really serious about improving knowledge about the provisions of the Constitution, then what we need is to improve the primary method by which people acquire knowledge: our schools.  So we see once again that the best solution to an issue is to end the government monopoly on education.

Hat tip: OpenMarket