On Thursday, April 5, around one-hundred people gathered in Calvin College's chapel to hear Grand Rapids area congressional representative Vern Ehlers speak. Ehlers, who taught at Calvin College prior to his political career as both a member of the Michigan House and Senate and in the national House of Representatives, spoke at a lecture titled "A View from my Window in Washington, DC" as part of Calvin's "Noontime Series." Billed as a talk by "a people's politician," Representative Ehlers appeared to "frankly about what's going on in our nation's capital" according to the event description. The talk--given primarily to senior citizens--featured Ehlers talking about a number of issues including recent changes in Congress with the new Democratic majority, why those changes took place, the Iraq War, the national debt, and lobbyists.
In keeping with the title of the lecture, Representative Ehlers began the talk with small talk about how he is so busy in Washington, DC that he does not "have time to look out of his window." Ehlers told the audience that it is "hard to comprehend" how busy the schedule of a representative is and said that he--and the typical representative--spend about 80-90 hours per week on their congressional duties. He said that while he enjoys his work, he finds this to be incredibly frustrating because it is difficult for him to be involved in all of the areas in which he has an interest. He explained that on the typical day he arrives at the Rayburn House Office Building at 8:00am and attends a breakfast meeting followed by meetings all day until 7:00pm when he finally returns to the office and reads email. Ehlers also told the audience that he spends much of his time in Washington DC and that was it not for the Easter Recess that it would have been difficult for him to make this appearance. Recent changes in power have meant that he is no longer the chair of the administration committee, but he has retained positions on four committees. Ehlers joked that he thought the change in power might bring the benefit of giving him less committee work, but he is continuing to serve on the same number of committees.
Ehlers asserted that "a lot has changed in the last five months" in the House of Representatives, telling the audience that this is the "greatest change in representation in Washington since 1994" when the Republicans took over the White House. Despite the change in power being a shift to his opposing party, he said it was "no surprise" and answered his own question of "why did people throw us out?" by stating that it's "pretty obvious... the public is angry about lack of progress in Iraq." While Ehlers was not one of the many Republicans who lost their seat over the war, Ehlers noted that the war affected his support and explained that he received 8% less support than he did in previous elections. With this new Democratic majority, Ehlers stated that it is "interesting to watch" how the Democrats are acting and explained that they are "making almost the same mistakes the Republicans did in 1994." Ehlers says that the Democrats--under the leadership of Speaker Nancy Pelosi--have come into Congress making grand speeches about a "new America and a new congress"--but are seeing the limits of their power. To support this claim, Ehlers explained that Speaker Pelosi supported Representative Murtha as Majority Leader in the House but after he was "whipped" in the voting, Pelosi is learning that "you can't necessarily work your will." Similarly, Ehlers explained that many Democrats won in conservative districts or defeated moderate Republicans and that they understand that they must "act like Republicans" to hold their seats.
In addition to the Iraq War, Ehlers attributed the Democrats' victory in the 2006 elections to a number of other reasons, including "corruption." While Ehlers explained that Representative Pelosi made a big deal about corruption before the elections, she has lessened this talk since a Democrat was caught, said Ehlers, who described the corruption in the Congress as "terrible" and explained that it is a reason why the Democrats were able to take power. Despite this serious assessment of the issue, Representative Ehlers did joke about it, arguing that despite the corruption in Congress the rates of congress people going to prison are "not so bad" compared to the rest of the population. Connecting to this issue is the issue of "pork" spending, with Ehlers asserting that the Congress was "throwing away too much money on special favors." He said that he has not escaped attention for this issue, once being "crucified" in the press and in the public for pork spending when he voted in favor of $1 million for water-free urinals to be manufactured by a company in Grand Rapids. Ehlers defended his support of that proposal, explaining that it would save the government money and save water. He further commented that while the Democrats came to power in part because of discontent over pork, he fond it "interesting that the first thing the democrats have done is pass a bill laden with about $6 million in pork," referring to the recent appropriations bill on Iraq. Finally, Ehlers concluded that it was simply "about time" for a change as the public gets tired and wants to try the other side. He asserted that this regularly happens and that it is reasonable, with the only unreasonable time being the forty years that the Democrats controlled the House before 1994.
After accounting for why the Democrats took power, Representative Ehlers explained some of the changes that have taken place. Ehlers said that the Democrats now control the House but that the single vote margin in the Senate has meant that the Democrats have not been able to exert full control over the Senate. Still, Ehlers has said that the "agenda has changed dramatically" and that the Democrats had "pent up anger" over minimum wage, that they passed a bill on Medicare prescription drug benefits because they do not believe that the Republicans should have changed it, passed a bill allowing the funding of stem cell research, passed a bill lowering student loan interest rates (Ehlers said he doubts it will help much), and have passed legislation "helping the unions." With regard to union legislation, Ehlers said he finds it "amusing when people say Democrats are in line with unions and Republicans are in line with business" because in reality unions act together while businesses frequently have competing interests in my mind and rarely get together. The Democrats have also launched investigations into the firing of eight US Attorneys by the Attorney general, with Ehlers stating that it is the first time that such an investigation has been launched. He said that the Attorney general has the right to fire anybody but that the problem arose because of how it was done. Ehlers said it was the wrong way to fire people in public office and that the right way would have been to do it quietly by saying to the Attorneys that "it might be a good idea to give me your letter of resignation." He said it simply did not make sense to do it both publicly and to imply that the Attorneys were fired due to their lack of competence. Ehlers did say that he believes if it goes to the Supreme Court, the Court will likely rule that staffers do not have to testify due to the separation of powers.
Ehlers also discussed the Iraq War and stated that "war is very dominant on almost everything that we do." He said that there is widespread dissatisfaction with the way the war has gone. He asserted that "in some ways it is not even a war," referencing how President Harry Truman "got in trouble" for calling the Korean War "a police action"--and while the argument was incomplete--seemed to be referencing the fact that few people thought the war would turn out this way. Representative Ehlers claimed that he was "one of the few" who warned the Pentagon about what he thought would happen In Iraq once the invasion was over. Ehlers explained to the audience that before the war started he talked to then Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz "a couple of times" and then National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice to express his concerns. He said that he agreed with the administration that the United States could go in with 150,000 soldiers and depose Saddam Hussein but that he had questions about what would happen next. According to Ehlers, Wolfowitz responded by stating that the people of Iraq will greet us as liberators and that oil revenues will pay for it. Ehlers then told Wolfowitz to his face that "you [Wolfowitz] are incredibly naive." Ehlers asserted that he "is not proud" of the way some in the administration decided to go to war and said that he "wished we would have gone in with better knowledge" of what would happen after the war. He also said that he wished someone in the Bush administration would have lived abroad because they would then understand that cultures are different and would have understood that the Iraqis would not welcome the United States.
Of course, while Ehlers' story of expressing frustration before the war is interesting, he left out the fact that he voted to give President Bush the authority to attack Iraq and that he himself has repeatedly made statements supporting the war. In the months before the March 2003 invasion, Representative Ehlers described the consequences of nuclear weapons being detonated over Calder Plaza and accepted the administration's assertions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Most of his statements on Iraq were cautiously worded and expressed minor concerns over the war in Iraq, but Ehlers consistently supported the assertions of the Bush administration and did nothing of substance to halt the invasion, nor has he done anything since the invasion to end the occupation of Iraq. Ehlers touched on recent efforts in Iraq stating that he "wants to see a surge in diplomatic efforts" rather than the "so-called surge" that President George W. Bush launched, yet he voted against a resolution rejecting "the surge." With regard to "the surge," Ehlers said today that he "doesn't understand why president is making a big deal of it [the surge]" because bigger troop rotations happen all the time. He did state that the "cost of war in dollars and people lost is something that is going to bother us for a long time" and that "it certainly will bother me for a longtime," arguing that now the question is "how do we stabilize region and get out." He reiterated his opposition to a deadline or timetable for withdrawal, stating that such proposals are "utterly stupid" and that you do not "tell other people involved when you are getting out." He said that the United States has a "moral obligation to people of Iraq" and claimed responsibility for the situation in Iraq when he said that "we created mess as far as I am concerned." He concluded by stating that he is "not trying to sugar coat" what is happening in Iraq "but that he is hoping progress will help." He pointed towards recent efforts to get neighboring countries involved and progress in Iraq including Anbar province chieftains fighting al-Qaeda, Shiite death squads disbanding, and bombing and executions decreasing. He attributed the last two to President Bush's troop surge.
In his prepared remarks, Ehlers also addressed climate change and the budget. Ehlers was encouraged to see that many Republicans now want to act on the issue of global warming. While Ehlers asserted that the climate is "changing so rapidly that we must be the cause of it," he told the audience that there are still some "Neanderthals" in his party who refuse to accept the issue and dismiss it as changes in weather. He went on to state that the Democrats went in talking about a balanced budget, but that they have filled their budget with tax increases and spending increases. He said that the question now is what the Senate and President are going to do, specifically will the President start vetoing bills that he does not like. Ehlers explained that President Bush has only vetoed a few bills and that he has negotiated to get what he wants in bills and what he does not want out of them, but he might not be able to do that any longer.
The first question from the audience concerned the national debt and how people such as Ehlers--whose parents were "fiscally conservative"--feel about the nation "saddling its children with debt." Ehlers explained that there are a "lot of ways to look at it." He explained that many people and businesses are in debt and that borrowing money is recognized as a way to generate more money. He sees the problem as the government borrowing money and not paying it back, leaving the debt to the next generation. While Ehlers said that he personally is "uncomfortable with it," economists have told him that the debt is fairly small compared to the size of the budget. He argued that spending did not happen this way in the first one-hundred years of the United States' history as the federal government was a small part of the national structure and did not spend much. He argued that this changed with the advent of improved transportation that helped the nation communicate, the Civil War and the establishment of the idea that the United States is one nation, and the constitutional amendment in 1910 that allowed the government to assess taxes via the income tax. During the Great Depression, Ehlers stated that FDR believed the federal government had to borrow money to get the economy going but that recent economic theories state that plans such as Bush's lowering taxes increase economic activity.
In response to an audience query, Representative Ehlers shared his thoughts on the upcoming farm bill, which he said is interesting in light of the attention that is not focused on manufacturing. He said that farming was important in the first hundred years of the United States' history but that now farmers are less than 2% of the country. Despite this, Ehlers lamented the fact that there is a Department of Agriculture and not a Department of Manufacturing or at the minimum an Undersecretary of Manufacturing within the Commerce Department. He said that this has been particularly bad for Michigan, which depended on manufacturing for years and has faced economic difficulties. Ehlers asserted that he has not been able to pass a bill that would give $100 million annually to manufacturing--which makes up 15% of the jobs in the country--yet a $70 billion farm bill sails through congress. The farm bills are necessary as subsidies given global competition, but Ehlers said that the problem is global and that subsidies limit the trade achievable through WTO, GATTS, NAFTA, and CAFTA. Ehlers asserted that farm bills should put more emphasis on helping family farmers and that they should give less money to corporate farmers. Ehlers also said that while ethanol fuel has been touted as a way to import less oil, it is not a perfect solution because one does not get much net energy out of corn. Ehlers argued that this is because while you might import less oil, fossil fuels are used as fertilizer, for tractors, to process corn, and to distill ethanol. He said that a more promising option might be sugar cane, which is used with success in Brazil where most of their cars run on 85% ethanol fuel. Ehlers addressed this issue in a later question, stating that he believes we need to stop importing oil--a response that drew the only applause of the day. Ehlers said that as it stands now in Iraq, the United States is funding both sides of the war by paying for military actions and buying oil with that money eventually supporting "terrorists."
Ehlers was then questioned about the role of lobbyists in Congress and allegations that the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill was written by lobbyists and then passed in secret at 3:00am. Ehlers began by asserting that there is nothing secret that happens in Congress as the proceedings take place "under the eye of the camera at anytime" and that CSPAN is constantly taping. He said "tough bills" are frequently passed at night because "it just takes time" so there is nothing suspicious about a bill that passes at anytime of the day. As for lobbyists, Ehlers asserted that "there are good lobbyists and bad lobbyists, and good congressmen and bad congressman" and that while he believes most lobbyists are good and perform the necessary job of channeling information to Congress, he himself rarely talks to lobbyists. Instead, he lets them talk to their staff and because he understands that they present information from one side, he seeks out the other side. He said that lobbyists did not write the bill (http://www.impactlab.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=11188) despite the claims of Representative Dan Burton and that he believes it is "a good bill" and has heard only praise for it from his constituents. The only controversy he said that he was aware of in the bill was a prohibition on the federal government negotiating prices.
Ehlers was then asked to comment on the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), a bill that was designed to improve the education system in the United States. Representative Ehlers told the audience that he was on the committee that had responsibility for passing it and that while there have been some problems--which he did not detail--"the net progress has been positive." He said that BECAUSE OF NCLB, schools generally better, poorer kids getting better education, and education for disabled students has improved. He said that as a representative of an urban school district he sees the importance of the program and emphasized that it has standards that require schools to perform at a certain level to receive money. He also stated that he supports local control and believes that the federal government should have no control over local school districts.
The final question posed to Representative Ehlers was "what are you doing about genocide in Darfur?" Ehlers said that while he is meeting with group from Calvin about it in the next couple of weeks, the real question is "what can we do about it." He asserted that he is "very, very upset about genocide in Darfur" and that he has talked to State Department and the Bush administration about it. He said that while his answer may sound like a cop-out, he really does not know what can be done. It is happening in a land-locked country with no friendly allies around and while he "would love to have planes and helicopters stationed" to quickly intervene, the closest airbase is in Chad and France has refused access to it because of Chad's instability. He says that presently African Union soldiers are being used to address the problem, but they have limited funding and equipment. He concluded by stating that there is "no reason for this to be going on."
