POLITICO's Ben Smith:
Tuesday Nov 24, 2009
BULLETIN:
President
Obama is expected to address the nation TUESDAY, DEC. 1, on his new Afghanistan policy, likely in PRIME TIME, Playbook is told.
WORTH 1,000 WORDS
'The White House has told the story of the long Afghan deliberations in part through a series of Flickr images, released after each meeting. The place of Biden, the presence or absence of political staffers like Rahm and Axelrod -- all of it has borne its share of interpretation by close watchers of the process.
The latest symbolism: Budget Director Peter Orszag is now in the picture, second from the right, his presence
signaling growing concerns on the Hill and in the White House about the cost of the war, and/or a new avenue of pushback against Pentagon requests.'
SEE THE PHOTO:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/whiteho...86126/sizes/l/
TOP STORY -- 'OBAMA ON CUSP OF AFGHANISTAN TROOP DECISION' -- AFP:
'President Barack Obama has huddled with his war cabinet for what officials said could be the final time before he decides whether to dispatch tens of thousands more US troops to Afghanistan. Top officials at the two-hour meeting on Monday night, the ninth gathering of Obama's national security team to review Afghan strategy since August, included Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The meeting began just before 8:15 p.m. and lasted around two hours.'
THE ROLLOUT -- NPR Pentagon reporter Tom Bowman:
'The tentative plan is for the president to make his announcement [Tuesday], followed shortly thereafter by testimony on Capitol Hill by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Also expected to brief Congress is the top commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal.'
'WHITE HOUSE BRACES FOR TOUGH SELL ON AFGHAN POLICY' -- AP's Anne Gearan and Jennifer Loven:
'The White House braced for a tough sell of President Barack Obama's long-awaited decision on whether to commit tens of thousands of new U.S. forces to the stalemated war in Afghanistan, even as the president met Monday with top advisers for the last major discussion before an announcement 'within days.'
Military officials and others expect Obama to settle on a middle-ground option that would deploy an eventual 32,000 to 35,000 U.S. forces to the 8-year-old conflict. That rough figure has stood as the most likely option since before Obama's last large war council meeting earlier this month, when he tasked military planners with rearranging the timing and makeup of some of the deployments.'
'SHARE THE SACRIFICE ACT' -- POLITICO's David Rogers:
'Call it 'pay as you fight.' After months of listening to conservatives caterwaul over deficits and health care, senior House Democrats want a graduated surtax on individuals and corporations to pay for another big drain on the treasury: the Afghanistan war. Three full committee chairmen - including the House's top tax writer, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) - are backing the initiative together with the chair of the party caucus, Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.), and close allies of Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
The speaker has been silent thus far, and many dismiss the idea as more rhetoric than real legislation. But ... the initiative testifies to the growing restlessness among Democrats over the costs of the American commitment in Afghanistan. Today's jobless rate - far worse than during the height of the Vietnam War in the '60s - adds to this angst.
And Rep John Murtha (D-Pa.), who oversees the Pentagon's budget and supports the surtax, went so far as to send Obama last month a copy of Yale historian Paul Kennedy's 'The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers.' U.S. military spending in Afghanistan had reached $3.6 billion a month this summer - or more than $43 billion a year, according to estimates by the Congressional Research Service. And in the course of meeting with lawmakers, Obama has used a rough measuring stick that every 1,000 troops added will add another $1 billion to this annual basis. ...
Dubbed the 'Share the Sacrifice Act,' the six-page bill exempts anyone who has served in Iraq or Afghanistan since the 2001 terrorist attacks as well as families who have lost an immediate relative in the fighting. But middle-class households earning between $30,000 and $150,000 would be asked to pay 1 percent on top of their tax liability today - a more sweeping approach than many Democrats have been willing to embrace. By comparison, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) has spoken only of an added tax on the wealthy.'
Linear Mode
