It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Gregg withdraws as commerce secretary nominee

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 03:36 PM

Gregg withdraws as commerce secretary nominee

WASHINGTON – Republican Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire abruptly withdrew his nomination as commerce secretary Thursday, citing "irresolvable conflicts" with President Barack Obama's handling of the economic stimulus and 2010 census.

"We are functioning from a different set of views on many critical items of policy," Gregg said in a statement released by his Senate office.

Gregg, 61, is a former New Hampshire governor who previously served in the House. He has been in the Senate since 1993 and currently serves as the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, where he is known as a crusader against big spending.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 03:36 PM
There is some very weird things going on with the direction the White House is taking with the Census and the Stimulus. There are plans to remove Conservative legislators with the White House taking over the census process, hiring staticians instead of conducting an actual census, and redrawing districts based on statistics.

Between this and the attacks on Conservative radio I am disturbed at what direction the government is taking. If it continues in this direction a heck of alot of people are going to be really ticked off.

Something Wicked This Way Comes.
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 12/2/09 by MikeboydUS]

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 03:38 PM
If that's the real reason Gregg is bailing I couldnt be happier.

If he's bailing because of some closeted skeletons (is any politician clean, geez) then I'm nervous to find out what bizarre, unethical or illegal things he's mixed up in.

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 03:42 PM
Here's another thread to expand your sources...,

Gregg Withdraws as Commerce Secretary Nominee

At least it wasn't as bad as the Richardson withdrawal for the same post (because of the 'pay-to-play' scandal.)

[edit on 12-2-2009 by Maxmars]

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 03:42 PM
Very telling in Drudge's link to the article...

“However, it has become apparent during this process that this will not work for me as I have found that on issues such as the stimulus package and the Census there are irresolvable conflicts for me. Prior to accepting this post, we had discussed these and other potential differences, but unfortunately we did not adequately focus on these concerns. We are functioning from a different set of views on many critical items of policy.

“Obviously the President requires a team that is fully supportive of all his initiatives.


The census being taken away from Commerce and placed under Rahm Emmanuel simply confirmed that the Gregg would have no real power.

At least Gregg has enough sense to get out and not be a fall guy

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 03:44 PM
Well the guy did want the whole position scrapped not that long ago so in that particular reason, it makes sense..but then again, why accept the job in the first place?

The whole Census deal is a gigantic power grab.

Seriously, what else can you expect from these people?

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:01 PM
I'm very glad to hear this. Partly because it puts him back in the Senate where I believe he is a powerful voice and that is needed with this crazy Spending Bill about to be voted on. I do wish they would reveal the details before the actual vote.This order just signed by the president giving union workers preference on the stimulus projects proves how partisan this bill is. The other reason it's a good choice for Gregg because it removes the white house's purported "reason" for snatching the census away from commerce. Let's see what they do next.

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:16 PM
One thing that must be changed with the census is the issue of where inmates should be counted. With more than one million Americans in prison there is much at stake in states, especially urban areas.

I can only speak with specifics about NY but have read this is a similar pattern across the country. Where an inmate is housed is where he is counted for the census. This greatly effects the government money allotted to rural areas where the prison population is large giving them an unfair representation. In like manner, home areas for inmates are undercounted with inner cities where in inordinate number of inmates live are grossly undercounted.

Generally this is a strictly party line issue and it is a growing one all over the nation.


posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:25 PM
reply to post by MikeboydUS

This is too weird. Of course, the media reports something and we're left to figure out the truth...

I know it was reported in the Washington Post that the President was going to move the census to the White House, but I can't find confirmation of that. They didn't even say where they had heard it... Can anyone help me out?

Yesterday in FOX News it was reported that he hadn't even done that.

Obama has not proposed removing the census from the Commerce Department and that the same congressional committees that had oversight during the previous administration will retain that authority.

And according to Associated Press

The Congressional Black Caucus and a group representing Latino elected officials have raised questions about Gregg, noting that as chairman of the Senate panel overseeing the Census Bureau budget he frequently sought to cut funding that they believe led to an undercount of minorities.

To allay concerns over Gregg, the White House initially indicated that it might take greater control over the Census Bureau. But amid GOP criticism it has since clarified that the White House will "work closely with the census director," and that the Census Bureau would not be removed from the Commerce Department.

"The president recognizes the importance of ensuring that the Census Bureau conducts a complete and accurate count through a process that is free from politicization, and he looks forward to working with members of Congress on both sides of the aisle and Secretary-designate Gregg to achieve that goal," White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said.

So, it sounds like some minority groups complained about Gregg and Obama assured them that he would be working with Gregg (And the Washington Post took that as Obama bringing the Census into the White House), but Gregg didn't want Obama looking over his shoulder, so Gregg left.

That's what it sounds like to me.

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:32 PM
I couldn't be happier that he withdrew his nomination. He is one of the brightest bulbs in the GOP brain trust and he clearly smelled something foul in the Obama cabinet.

I'm sure that he has seen the snub treatment that Hillary (secretary of state who) has been getting and wanted nothing to do with it. Obama's cabinet is full of cronies and now he wants to toss the census into Rahm's lap. That's a great idea. The GOP will sue if this motion to move the census moves any further.

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:35 PM
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

It seems the Democrats are doing damage control. We can only wait and see what happens next, but my prediction is that things will only get worse and more partisan.

Instead of unity I think we will see much division in this nation in the near future, primarily involving the census and the stimulus. I can't wait to hear what role illegal immigrants are going to play in the census.

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:41 PM
Why is it not partisan when the Republican's run the show but it is when the Democrat's do?

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:48 PM
Well, I think the census story is a bunch of hooie. I don't think it's happening. I don't think it was ever going to happen. I'd like to see something official from the administration.

White House Denies Meddling in Census

A White House spokesman denies Republican congressional charges that the White House is "taking the unprecedented step of moving control of the Census Bureau" to "political operatives on the White House staff."

The charge is made in a letter House Republicans - including Minority Leader John Boehner - sent yesterday President Obama - calling on him to "reconsider and reverse this harmful course of action."

In response to questions from CBS News, spokesman Ben LaBolt says the charge is not accurate.

Census Story Morphing

The Obama team botched its chance to explain in a timely way, clearly, not in code, what Obama did--or did not--want to change in regards to overseeing the Census Bureau after Gregg was nominated.
"Once it became clear after his nomination that Senator Gregg was not going to be supporting some of President Obama's key economic priorities, it became necessary for Senator Gregg and the Obama administration to part ways. We regret that he has had a change of heart".
So after some Democrats--particularly the Congressional Black Caucus--complained about Gregg, the White House sent some kind of signal--vague, but still something--that the White House will take some kind of oversight role with the Bureau. That morphed into Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel running the Census from the West Wing, though that is not the case. After a few days, as the issue festered, the White House then said in a statement not widely released that nothing would change.

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:51 PM
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

This from the Chicago Sun-Times tends to agree with you.
Obama Team lets Census questions linger too long
There was discussion and the president tried to reassure people that he would watch out for problems but rather than clarify exactly what would be done, conclusions were jumped upon. It sounds from this article like the real problem was that Gregg could not support the stimulus bill which he was naturally expected to do as a member of the cabinet, and as he originally promised Obama he would be able to do.

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:53 PM
Don't forget either that Gregg begged the Whitehouse for the job.

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:59 PM

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by MikeboydUS

This is too weird. Of course, the media reports something and we're left to figure out the truth...

I know it was reported in the Washington Post that the President was going to move the census to the White House, but I can't find confirmation of that. They didn't even say where they had heard it... Can anyone help me out?

Does that help?

And no, the change has not happened yet, but people in the White House apparently let the rumor fly that should Gregg become Commerce Secretary that the Census would be moved.

Edit to add:

THe Official White House response

White House statement on Gregg withdrawal

From the BNO Newsroom.

Washington, D.C. (BNO NEWS) -- White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs released the following statement on the news that Judd Gregg is withdrawing his nomination for Commerce Secretary.

“Senator Gregg reached out to the President and offered his name for Secretary of Commerce. He was very clear throughout the interviewing process that despite past disagreements about policies, he would support, embrace, and move forward with the President’s agenda. Once it became clear after his nomination that Senator Gregg was not going to be supporting some of President Obama’s key economic priorities, it became necessary for Senator Gregg and the Obama administration to part ways. We regret that he has had a change of heart”.

[edit on 2/12/09 by redhatty]

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 05:25 PM
Press Conference Transcript

This is what's missing in the clip that FOX aired...

Q One last one. Has the White House moved the control of the Census Bureau into the White House for the purposes of the 2010 census, and if so why?


Gibbs said that the director of the census works for the Sec’y of Commerce, the President and also works closely with the White House to insure a timely and accurate count and that’s what we have in this instance.

That does not say the census is being moved to the White House.

The FOX guy said it's "being taken out of the Commerce Dept. essentially and put into oversight at the White House."

He's making that up. Gibbs said no such thing. (but they did leave out the Q&A from the beginning of the clip)

Originally posted by redhatty
And no, the change has not happened yet, but people in the White House apparently let the rumor fly that should Gregg become Commerce Secretary that the Census would be moved

Apparently? Is that just your take or do you have something to base that on?

[edit on 12-2-2009 by Benevolent Heretic]

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 06:43 PM

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Apparently? Is that just your take or do you have something to base that on?

Server had a hiccup as I was trying to reply....

Hey BH, call it deductive reasoning following these....

Wall Street Journal Article


The decision was made last week after California Rep. Barbara Lee, chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, and Hispanic groups complained to the White House that Judd Gregg, the Republican senator from New Hampshire slated to head Commerce, couldn't be trusted to conduct a complete Census.

Michael Steele's Comment

Republican National Chairman Michael Steele made the following statement on FOX News this afternoon about Judd Gregg's decision not to become commerce secretary.

". . . the Administration this past week stripped out of the Department of Commerce one of the most important things it’s going to have to do over the next couple of years, and that is the census. Now that they have put that inside the White House where I do not think it belongs, basically hijacking the census process, the secretary-designee was sitting there thinking to himself: “So what am I going to do?”

Feb 8th Fox Sundays interview with Congressman Van Hollen and Senator Cornyn

Senator Cornyn, we now learn that the Obama administration is going to have the director of the Census Bureau report not only to the commerce secretary but also to the White House.

What's wrong with that?

CORNYN: Well, ordinarily, this has been something that the commerce secretary has done, and I think it ought to be done on a competent, as much as possible, nonpartisan basis.

And to shift it to the White House to me just politicizes the census, which is not something we should be doing.

WALLACE: And what's the danger, briefly, of politicizing the census?

CORNYN: Well, because, of course, that determines who gets what congressional districts. States like Texas were going to get probably at least three new congressional districts based on the reapportionment — and then, of course, in drawing those lines, redistricting within states.

It's all based on those census figures. So if you cook the figures up front, I think it distorts that process going forward and undermines the concept of one person, one vote.

WALLACE: And very briefly, Congressman Van Hollen, I mean, why not leave it in the Commerce Department?

VAN HOLLEN: Look, I think the issue at the end of the day we should all agree is that we want the facts and accuracy in the count. And it seems to me that the more eyes taking a look at this, the better.

It's going to be all on the Internet in terms of how the process is done. This administration has a huge commitment to transparency. So I think at the end of the day, it matters less exactly what the reporting mechanism is than that we get the facts and the count right.

Feb 2 Census Project calls for new Census Director, meets with Rahm Emmanuel

So tell me, where did the story originate from if NOT the White House???

Oh yeah, btw, looks like another &dist=hplate st]Mutiny in the Obama Administration.

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 07:22 PM
reply to post by MikeboydUS

Yes wicked,


This is what they did in Chicago, forth time I have posted this

The Democrats in Illinois were—won the right to redistrict the state, and like all Democrats in Illinois, Obama was deeply involved with the redrawing of his own district. In fact, one day in the spring of 2001, he sat down at a computer with sophisticated mapping software and began the process of redrawing his own district.

And his district changed in fundamental ways after that. He used to represent just an area in the south of Chicago that went east to west. His district changed; it now pointed north—it was a north-to-south district—and it included a huge chunk of downtown Chicago, including the famous Loop, which is the big business district; the Gold Coast; all—almost all of the Chicago Lakefront. He represented now all the museums, all the finest shopping areas of downtown Chicago, as well as his original Hyde Park base. So it was a very, very different district. It became whiter. It became wealthier. It became more white-collar. It became more Jewish. And it had one of the highest concentrations of Republicans in Chicago. And the folks that lived and worked in that district now would be the important donors for his US Senate campaign that started—that he started to run for in 2002. So it was a big dramatic change, and that redistricting really was a huge turning point in Obama’s political career.

The other thing that it did, besides the fact that his constituents now were so much different, the overall goal of redistricting in Illinois was to take back the State Senate for the Democrats. They gerrymandered the state, and they accomplished that in 2002. So, after 2002, Barack Obama, who had been a state senator since January of 1997 in the minority, where he couldn’t get much done, he’s now a state senator in the majority. And that allowed him to do—to actually get some things passed and get all of the issues—and get all of the things passed that he would then use as a platform for his 2004 Senate campaign. So that redistricting was incredibly important to his political career. I think you could make an argument that without that redistricting, he may not have been a real contender in that US Senate race.

Plus check out the Michelle Obama, Valerie Jarrett, Mayor Daley connection,

Chicago politics come to Washington.

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 07:41 PM
I didn't buy the problems with the stimulus package. It has not been a secret and the meat of it has been known for a long time. he was only asked to join 10 days ago.

I don't know why the white house wants to take over the census. That I don't agree with, at least until sufficient reason is given.

I think his withdrawel is pressure from other GOP, but the whole thing stinks to me.

Though I do imagine it is hard being from the other party trying to join an oppossing party administration.

I also kinda got the feeling that he didn't feel competent, or just feeling like dealing with, the massive problems he could be inheriting and just wants to go about business as usual.

[edit on 12-2-2009 by nixie_nox]

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in