Saturday, July 30, 2011

Medical-device manufacturer to lay off 1400 …



posted at 2:05 pm on July 29, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
printer-friendly

In March 2010, Nancy Pelosi warned us that we had to pass ObamaCare to “find out what’s in it.”  What is in it is jobs for China.  What’s not in it is jobs for Americans, as the Boston Globe reports today (via NewsAlert):

    Boston Scientific Corp. said yesterday that it plans to eliminate 1,200 to 1,400 jobs worldwide during the next 2 1/2 years to free money for new investments, the Natick medical device maker’s second major round of cuts since last year.

    The company would not say how many jobs will be lost in Massachusetts, where fewer than 2,000 of its 25,000 employees are based. In February 2010, Boston Scientific said it would pare 1,300 jobs worldwide, but similarly did not say where.

    Yesterday’s move, a day after Boston Scientific disclosed it was investing $150 million and hiring 1,000 people in China, raised fears that the company will gradually shift more work to foreign sites with less government oversight and lower costs than the United States.

Massachusetts state Senator James Elridge (D-Acton) reacted … predictably:

    “My sense is, sadly, that like many other American companies, they are shedding jobs in Massachusetts and adding jobs overseas,’’ Eldridge said. “And this is a company making greater profits, so it’s even more outrageous.’’

Yes, that’s what happens when the American government makes it more expensive to do business in the US.  And that’s exactly what ObamaCare did, especially with medical-device manufacturers like Boston Scientific.  Fourteen months ago, those manufacturers warned that they would have to cut costs in the US as a consequence of the new taxes imposed on their sales:

    Massachusetts medical-device companies say they’ll cut back on operational costs – and jobs – after a planned 2.3 percent tax on their products is implemented in 2013, according to a new survey.

    The Massachusetts Medical Device Industry Council, which held its annual meeting yesterday in Boston, said about 90 percent of the 100 medical-device firms said they would reduce costs due to the new tax tucked into the recently passed health-care reform bill.

It’s not as if Boston Scientific didn’t try to warn people about the problem, either.  Less than two weeks ago, they joined hundreds of other medical-device manufacturers to plead for a repeal of the tax:

    More than 420 companies including Boston Scientific, St. Jude Medical and Stryker signed on to a letter asking the U.S. Congress to repeal a planned 2.3 percent excise tax on medical devices. The tax could cost $20 billion a year and is set to take effect in 2013 as part of broad health care reform package passed last year.

    “The tax is already having an adverse impact on R&D investment and job creation, jeopardizing the U.S. global leadership position in medical device innovation,” said the letter.

    “If this tax is not repealed, it will continue to force affected companies to consider cutting manufacturing operations, research and development, and employment levels to recoup the lost earnings due to the tax,” it said. “It will also adversely impact patient access to new and innovative medical technologies,” it added.

    “The medical device excise tax is a serious burden for companies struggling to maintain America’s global leadership in the development of medical technology,” said Stephen J. Ubl, president and CEO of the Advanced Medical Technology Association (AdvaMed), a medtech lobbying group that drafted the letter.

The tax wasn’t the only problem in the bill, either, as I wrote at the time:

    Taxes on companies aren’t ultimately paid by business entities.  They get paid by the consumer in the long run.  In order to save costs, these device manufacturers will either have to lay off employees or cut back on innovative research — and likely both.  The end result will be higher prices, lower support, and less innovation to meet medical needs of consumers.

    That’s not the only problem facing the industry, either.  They now have to provide an accounting for their marketing efforts among physicians, thanks to a new “sunshine bill” that requires full disclosure of any marketing directed at physicians.  That will escalate internal costs, putting even more pressure on device makers to cut elsewhere or raise prices, or both.

The jobs will move overseas mainly to meet demand overseas.  But we could have kept the jobs and sales here, had it not been for the increasing regulatory and tax policies of the Obama administration, starting with — but hardly ending with — ObamaCare.

Update: I changed the headline, because as TNeloms points out in the comments, not all of the closed jobs are in the US.  However, given the reaction of Democrats in Massachusetts, it’s looking like a good chunk of them will be.

Allen West: Not going to get involved in Tea Party “schizophrenia”


posted at 1:25 pm on July 29, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
printer-friendly

Matt Lewis says, “When Laura Ingraham and Rep. Allen West are calling out the Tea Party, you know something’s up[.]” As it turns out, some of the Tea Party attack on Allen West turned out to be a misunderstanding, but West takes the opportunity to support John Boehner and remind people that Harry Reid’s plan cuts defense spending. Laura Ingraham pledges her support to West as she scolds some conservatives for attacking West for attempting the possible:



As I said on the air yesterday in an interview, any definition of “fiscal conservative” that doesn’t include Paul Ryan and Allen West is one that I can’t recognize. West defends himself and the Republican caucus well enough, so I don’t need to recap it, but West has a point when he asks what he’s voting for if people demand that he vote against Boehner 1.1.

Besides, the entire notion that the Tea Party Nation would push for a primary against West is based on a faulty media report. Judson Phillips, its founder and CEO, repudiated that notion entirely in a statement later in the morning:

    Setting the Record Straight

    There is a story in The Hill that a group of Tea Party organizations is threatening a primary challenge against a number of Freshmen Congressmen including Allen West. This story says a press release has been issued with Tea Party Nation supporting an effort to push a primary challenge against Allen West.

    Tea Party Nation has NEVER said we want to see a primary challenge against Allen West. West has been a staunch Tea Party supporter and though we strongly disagree with his support of the really terrible John Boehner plan, West has been an overwhelmingly good Congressman and we would be hard pressed to find someone better.

    The group that put this press release out used Tea Party Nation’s name without our permission. No one at TPN was shown this press release in advance. Had we been shown that press release, we would have vetoed the use of our name.

    We still call for a primary challenge to John Boehner and there maybe some Republicans who deserve a primary challenge, but Allen West is not one of those.

    To be absolutely clear, neither Tea Party Nation, nor Tea Party Nation founder Judson Phillips support this effort.

    We specifically repudiate it.

Not that there is anything wrong with primary challenges anyway, of course. That’s a perfectly legitimate way to push for policy goals, and the Tea Party in general made good use of them in 2010. However, targeting Allen West of all people for being insufficiently conservative would have been a fast track to irrelevancy, and Phillips certainly understands that.

Dollar Falls on US Growth Slowdown


The US dollar fell sharply against some of the major currencies today, following a report that showed that the economic growth in the second quarter of 2011 was worse than expected.
The greenback was trading at a rather high level against the other currencies earlier today, advancing significantly both against the euro and the Great Britain pound before 12:30 GMT today. Following the US GDP report, it slid to bearish against the euro and trades almost in the negative zone against the pound. The dollar is also down against the Japanese yen and the Swiss franc.
The gross domestic product increased at an annual rate of 1.3 percent in the Q2 2011 from the Q1 2011. The first quarter growth was revised down from 1.9 percent to 0.4 percent. The traders expected 1.8 percent gain in GDP on average. This news is very pessimistic in regards of the possible rate increases in the United States and thus is extremely negative for the US dollar.
EUR/USD went up from 1.4327 to 1.4333 as of 13:09 GMT, trading as low as 1.4229 earlier. GBP/USD is now trading near its opening level — 1.6369. USD/JPY fell from 77.69 to 77.14 today.
If you have any questions, comments or opinions regarding the US Dollar, feel free to post them using the commentary form below.
Earlier News About the US Dollar:
» Continued Debates over US Debt Push USD to New Lows vs. CHF (2011-07-25)
» Optimism for Europe Returns, Greenback Suffers (2011-07-20)
» Dollar Rises on Signs of Agreement Among US Lawmakers (2011-07-19)
» S&P Warn About Possible Downgrade of US Rating, USD Down (2011-07-15)
» Dollar Regains Strength as Bernanke Speaks (2011-07-14)

Friday, July 29, 2011

Crude Oil Tumbles, Heads for Weekly Decline, on U.S. GDP, Debt Stalemate


By Margot Habiby -

Oil fell, heading for its first weekly drop since June, as the U.S. economy grew less than estimated in the second quarter and a deadlock of U.S. lawmakers over raising the debt limit further threatened expansion.

Futures tumbled as much as 2.6 percent after the Commerce Department reported that gross domestic product climbed at a 1.3 percent annual rate, less than the 1.8 percent median estimate of economists surveyed by Bloomberg News. The Treasury Department has set an Aug. 2 deadline for increasing the U.S.’s $14.3 trillion debt limit to avert a default.

“The markets have been negative all week as we continue to watch the stalled debt ceiling talks,” said Tom Bentz, a broker with BNP Paribas Commodity Futures Inc. in New York. “The GDP number missed expectations and that’s created more pressure on oil and equities.”

Crude for September delivery fell $1.83, or 1.9 percent, to $95.61 a barrel at 12:51 p.m. on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Earlier, it touched $94.95, the lowest price since July 18 on an intraday basis. Prices are down 4.3 percent this week and have risen 19 cents in July.

Brent for September settlement on the London-based ICE Futures Europe exchange dropped 97 cents, or 0.8 percent, to $116.39 a barrel. The European benchmark contract was at a premium of $20.78 a barrel to New York futures, compared with a record close of $22.63 on July 14.

The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index fell 0.4 percent to 1,295.58, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 68.04 points, or 0.6 percent, to 12,172.07.
Technical Support

Crude in New York is extending losses as prices slide below the 50-day moving average, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Front-month futures have settled for more than a week above this indicator, at $97.33 today. A breach of technical support usually means prices will continue to fall.

U.S. GDP increased following a 0.4 percent gain in the prior quarter that was less than the 1.9 percent previously estimated, Commerce Department figures showed today in Washington. Household purchases, about 70 percent of the economy, rose 0.1 percent in the second quarter. The U.S. is the world’s largest oil-consuming country.

House Speaker John Boehner, a Republican, delayed a planned vote on debt-limit legislation late yesterday as Senate leaders stood ready to kill the measure should it get to their chamber. Boehner’s plan failed to gain enough backing from his own party members.
Debt Vote

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and other Democrats are working to break the impasse over raising the debt limit by devising a strict enforcement mechanism to guarantee future deficit savings, according to party officials. President Barack Obama said today that the two parties are in “rough agreement” on a debt measure and urged senators from both parties to work together to resolve the deadlock.

“The U.S. debt talk resembles a train wreck,” Thorbjoern Bak Jensen, an analyst at Global Risk Management, said by phone from Middelfart, Denmark. “Oil is still awaiting the debt ceiling outcome.”

Oil inventories in Cushing, Oklahoma, the physical delivery point for Nymex futures, rose by 583,000, or 1.6 percent, to 36.9 million barrels on July 26 from July 16, according to data compiled by DigitalGlobe Inc. (DGI) from satellite images.

The Energy Department said July 27 that Cushing stockpiles, including floating and fixed tanks, were 37.1 million. The hub has working storage capacity of 48 million barrels, the department said on May 31.
OPEC Production

Crude production from the 12 members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries jumped 245,000 barrels a day in July from June to 29.6 million barrels a day, according to a Bloomberg News survey of producers, oil companies and industry analysts. The 11 members with output quotas, all but Iraq, pumped 26.8 million barrels a day in July, up 230,000 barrels a day from June.

Tropical Storm Don, currently in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico and heading for the Texas coastline, has shut in about 6.8 percent of oil and 2.8 percent of gas production from the gulf, according to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement.

Outer rain bands from the storm were approaching the Texas coast, the National Hurricane Center in Miami said in a bulletin at 10 a.m. local time. It’s forecast to make landfall late today or early tomorrow. Don is about 190 miles (305 kilometers) southeast of Corpus Christi, Texas, with maximum winds of 50 miles per hour, the bulletin said.

Crude may drop next week, a Bloomberg News survey showed. Thirteen of 32 respondents, or 41 percent, forecast oil will decrease through Aug. 5. Analysts were split last week, with 41 percent looking for a gain and 41 percent projecting a fall.

Oil volume in electronic trading on the Nymex was 310,035 contracts as of 12:53 p.m. in New York. Volume totaled 426,749 contracts yesterday, 31 percent below the average of the past three months. Open interest was 1.51 million contracts.

To contact the reporter on this story: Margot Habiby in Dallas at mhabiby@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Dan Stets at dstets@bloomberg.net

Rick Perry: Abortion is a states’ rights issue

posted at 5:07 pm on July 28, 2011 by Allahpundit
printer-friendly

A smart middle-ground play for independents, but I thought he was supposed to be the great evangelical hope. Last week he said he was “fine” with New York legalizing gay marriage before clarifying today that he’s not fine with gay marriage itself. (In fact, he supports a Federal Marriage Amendment.) Now this. Why would a social-conservative voter looking for a champion who has traction in the polls prefer him to, say, Bachmann?

Maybe Perry’s willing to shed some votes in Iowa in exchange for picking some up in New Hampshire.

Despite holding personal pro-life beliefs, Texas Gov. Rick Perry categorized abortion as a states’ rights issue today, saying that if Roe v. Wade was overturned, it should be up to the states to decide the legality of the procedure.

“You either have to believe in the 10th Amendment or you don’t,” Perry told reporters after a bill signing in Houston. “You can’t believe in the 10th Amendment for a few issues and then [for] something that doesn’t suit you say, ‘We’d rather not have states decide that.’”…

The National Right to Life Committee responded to Perry’s categorization of abortion as a states’ rights issue in a statement, saying, “Our society has an obligation to enact laws that recognize and protect the smallest members of our human family. Prior to Roe, states had the ability to enact laws that extended full legal protection to unborn children. We look forward to the day when Roe v. Wade is changed, and the states will once again have the ability to pass legislation that fully protects mothers and their unborn children.”

I’m surprised the NRLC gave him cover on that. Granted, the immediate first step after Roe is overturned would be state laws restricting abortion, but I’ve never understood that to be the end point for pro-lifers, as Perry seems to suggest by invoking the Tenth Amendment. The goal is a Human Life Amendment or, at a minimum, a federal statute banning abortion coast-to-coast. If you believe abortion is murder, why on earth would you want to let any state choose to legalize it? Huckabee made that point succinctly during the 2008 campaign; watch the end of the clip below.

Maybe Perry’s position on this mirrors his position on gay marriage. His argument for the Federal Marriage Amendment is that it would require ratification by three-fourths of the states, so the process honors the federalist principle of the Tenth Amendment even though the FMA would trump it. He could make the same argument for the HLA, although (a) a hardcore believer in the Tenth Amendment presumably wouldn’t want to see the sovereignty of any state trumped, even if three-quarters of the other states agree, and (b) if he didn’t make the same argument for the HLA, he’d have to explain why he thinks gay marriage requires a national solution but abortion doesn’t.

But maybe none of this matters. Neither the HLA nor the FMA will ever pass, so all we’re doing is polishing credentials here — and his already have plenty of polish. The latest whispers from his advisors, incidentally, claim that he’ll be in by late August. In fact, he’s already nudging Fox about a spot in the August 11 debate.

Guess who’s gotten pretty quiet this week

posted at 4:28 pm on July 28, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
printer-friendly

Jim Geraghty notices that the man who has spent July all over our TV screens now seems strangely … shy:

This is not a complaint, but an observation: President Obama has made no public speeches, appearances, or remarks since Monday night.

According to CBS News’ Mark Knoller, he has no public or press appearances scheduled for today.

This seems more than just a coincidence. After all, this is crunch time on the debt ceiling. If the President wanted to pick a time for conspicuous leadership, this would be it. By tomorrow, there may not be enough time to get any solution through Congress, let alone one the White House likes.

Jim speculates that Obama’s advisers may have decided that Obama’s media blitz the last three weeks has just not moved the needle, but I think it goes farther than that. I’d guess that the White House is getting worried about Obama’s relentless scolding while pursuing the no-plan strategy. The White House press corps has begun insisting on seeing Obama’s plan in writing, and since it’s not forthcoming, Obama’s team may be afraid of putting him out in public.

This could also reflect some frustration from Senate Democrats. The Reid and Boehner plans share a similar structure, and Reid might want to get the Senate into position to pass his proposal so that a conference committee can quickly produce something that will pass both chambers. Having Obama out front demagoguing the issue doesn’t help move that process along, as Republicans could filibuster Reid’s efforts if they really dig in their heels.

But Jim has the bottom line right — Obama very obviously didn’t help matters over the last three weeks with his all-mouth, no-plan strategy. If one doesn’t want to offer a solution, then perhaps the One shouldn’t be spouting off about those who do — and have.

Thursday, July 28, 2011

New numbers, no surprise: Affordable Care Act anything but affordable

posted at 9:50 am on July 28, 2011 by Tina Korbe
printer-friendly

We already knew this, but, today, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid released a 10-year forecast that confirms it: National health spending will grow at a rate faster than it would have if Obamacare had not passed. The Washington Times reports:

    Total spending is projected to grow annually by 5.8 percent under Mr. Obama’s Affordable Care Act, according to a 10-year forecast by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services released Thursday. Without the ACA, spending would grow at a slightly slower rate of 5.7 percent annually. …

    The federal government is projected to spend 20 percent more onMedicaid, while spending on private health insurance is expected to rise by 9.4 percent. …

    “Simply put, this report states the obvious, that Americans have known for more than a year – the $2.6 trillion law only makes the fundamental problem of skyrocketing health care costs worse,” said Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, Utah Republican and ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee.

The White House responded to the report in a blog post, spinning the report to emphasize, “National Health Expenditures Reach Historic Low.” White House Deputy Chief of Staff Nancy deParle writes:

    But the report doesn’t tell the whole story.

    The Affordable Care Act creates changes to the health care system that typically don’t show up on an accounting table. We know these new provisions will save money for the health care system, even if today’s report doesn’t credit these strategies with reducing costs.

The report comes just as the legal challenges to the ACA reach the Supreme Court. At the same time, ads from RepealItNow.com report the drive for congressional signatures on a petition for repeal continues to be successful. In the ads, a congenial Mike Huckabee says the coalition needs the signatures of just four senators to make repeal possible. (Maybe those same four senators could revive Republican hopes of Cut, Cap and Balance!) That’s a stretch, of course — the best strategy for repeal remains to capture the Senate and White House in 2012 (and as much as I don’t want to admit it, that’s the best strategy for Cut, Cap and Balance, too). But the point is, grassroots organizations continue to bring the heat, even as health care reform seems to have fallen off the radar in debt and deficit discussions and in national news media, in general. This new report only provides more fodder for their efforts.

Obviously, that doesn’t mean the report is good news. Rising health costs affect us all and, frankly, seem especially daunting in light of our present economic outlook. So, as someone who has accepted that entitlement programs won’t carry me through retirement or future health problems, I find it helpful to remember that the best approach to health care to keep personal costs down, at least, is to attend to the basics — you know, right diet, regular exercise and ample sleep. Easier said than done, of course, but still worth attempting.

IBD: Boehner 1.1 beats nothing at all


posted at 9:10 am on July 28, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
printer-friendly

As John Boehner attempts to whip his caucus for a vote this morning on version 1.1 of his debt-ceiling bill, the Speaker gets some support from Investors Business Daily. It’s not enthusiastic support, mind you, but IBD’s editors seem to feel that the only thing worse than passion Boehner 1.1 is not passing Boehner 1.1:

President Obama may not have a plan for resolving the debt crisis, but he definitely has a goal — to shift blame for the lousy economy onto Republicans’ shoulders. Above all else, the GOP must not let that happen.

When House Speaker John Boehner released his latest plan to cut spending in exchange for raising the debt ceiling, attacks from Obama and his fellow Democrats were to be expected.

The attacks from the GOP side, however, are short-sighted at best. They risk giving Obama what he wants more than anything — a way to weasel out of responsibility for the economic mess his policies have produced.

As Charles Krauthammer did on Wednesday, the conservative IBD editorial board urges Republicans to take a long view:

As Obama’s poll numbers continue to sag, his hopes for re-election increasingly depend on his ability to convince voters that he had nothing to do with the lousy economy. And if the GOP blows the current debt standoff, Obama will be free to blame any bad economic news going forward on Republican intransigence.

Republicans can’t let themselves fall into this trap. Obama, and Obama alone, is responsible for the fact that two years after the recession ended, the unemployment rate is above 9%, growth is stagnant, inflation is rising, and federal spending and debt are exploding.

They conclude with the thought that it’s better to lose a skirmish than the entire war, but this isn’t even really losing the skirmish. It’s not a great victory either, but Republicans have changed the paradigm of deficit reduction in Washington in this debate. Tax hikes are off the table, and we’re now talking about spending reductions to address the long-term debt situation.

Passing Boehner 1.1 puts the onus back on the Democrats in the Senate to produce an alternative, which would be their very first vote on any plan in this crisis. If they pass a Reid plan, then the entire issue goes to a conference committee and we end up with a compromise on the principles of the GOP. If the Senate refuses to act at all, then it’s not the fault of Republicans when the deadline arrives.

IBD’s two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist Michael Ramirez puts the crises in spending, long-term debt, and leadership into single-frame perspective this morning:

Also, be sure to check out Ramirez’ terrific collection of his works: Everyone Has the Right to My Opinion, which covers the entire breadth of Ramirez’ career, and it gives fascinating look at political history. Read my review here, and watch my interviews with Ramirez here and here. And don’t forget to check out the entire Investors.com site, which has now incorporated all of the former IBD Editorials, while individual investors still exist.

All 53 Senate Dems sign letter to Boehner: Your bill will never pass


posted at 10:23 pm on July 27, 2011 by Allahpundit
printer-friendly

Awfully nice of them to give Boehner one more little boost on the eve of tomorrow’s vote by calling the House GOP’s bluff like this.

Default it is, then.

    Dear Speaker Boehner,

    With five days until our nation faces an unprecedented financial crisis, we need to work together to ensure that our nation does not default on our obligations for the first time in our history. We heard that in your caucus you said the Senate will support your bill. We are writing to tell you that we will not support it, and give you the reasons why.

    A short-term extension like the one in your bill would put America at risk, along with every family and business in it. Your approach would force us once again to face the threat of default in five or six short months. Every day, another expert warns us that your short-term approach could be nearly as disastrous as a default and would lead to a downgrade in our credit rating. If our credit is downgraded, it would cost us billions of dollars more in interest payments on our existing debt and drive up our deficit. Even more worrisome, a downgrade would spike interest rates, making everything from mortgages, car loans and credit cards more expensive for families and businesses nationwide.

    In addition to risking a downgrade and catastrophic default, we are concerned that in five or six months, the House will once again hold the economy captive and refuse to avoid another default unless we accept unbalanced, deep cuts to programs like Medicare and Social Security, without asking anything of the wealthiest Americans.

    We now have only five days left to act. The entire world is watching Congress. We need to do the right thing to solve this problem. We must work together to avoid a default the responsible way – not in a way that will do America more harm than good.

So that’s how this story ends. With the party of endless spending and entitlements unto death lecturing fiscal conservatives on how they’re leading the country into a credit downgrade. Perfecto.

Politico reports that Mitch McConnell is huddling with Biden to forge some sort of face-saving deus-ex-machina compromise. The story’s thin on details, but since McConnell’s involved and the only big remaining stumbling block is whether the final deal is short-term or long-term, I assume they’re trying to work out a way to combine McConnell’s original proposal about giving Obama more unilateral control over raising the ceiling with Boehner’s bill. E.g., instead of making next year’s debt-ceiling increase contingent upon Congress enacting the new commission’s debt-reduction recommendations, it might grant Obama the power to increase it himself in return for deeper, front-loaded cuts. But that’s just me speculating. We’ll know more tomorrow.

As a late evening dessert, here’s Chris Christie dumping on Obama for not producing his own plan. According to Rich Lowry, Boehner’s getting closer to 218 — but he’s not there yet.


Wednesday, July 27, 2011

ATF official: I told the White House about Fast & Furious


posted at 10:45 am on July 27, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
printer-friendly

What did Barack Obama know about Operation Fast and Furious, and when did he know it?  Rep. Darrell Issa’s committee uncovered an explosive nugget of information from the subpoena of ATF e-mail, which went public in yesterday’s hearings.  The ATF manager of the Phoenix office notified a White House official of Operation Fast and Furious as an update on the overall Project Gunrunner effort, connecting the controversial operation directly to the White House for the first time:

    At a lengthy hearing on ATF’s controversial gunwalking operation today, a key ATF manager told Congress he discussed the case with a White House National Security staffer as early as September 2010. The communications were between ATF Special Agent in Charge of the Phoenix office, Bill Newell, and White House National Security Director for North America Kevin O’Reilly. Newell said the two are longtime friends. The content of what Newell shared with O’Reilly is unclear and wasn’t fully explored at the hearing. …

    Congressional investigators obtained an email from Newell to O’Reilly in September of last year in which Newell began with the words: “you didn’t get this from me.”

    “What does that mean,” one member of Congress asked Newell, ” ‘you didn’t get this from me?’ ”

    “Obviously he was a friend of mine,” Newell replied, “and I shouldn’t have been sending that to him.”

Issa asked him why O’Reilly would have been asking about Project Gunrunner, the overall interdictment effort, but that’s fairly clear.  As a national-security advisor with responsibility for North America, the cartels in Mexico would be one of the primary threats O’Reilly would watch.  O’Reilly told Newell that he planned to travel to Mexico to work on the issue, which would explain the need for an update.

What’s less clear is why Newell informed him with the caveat “you didn’t get this from me”.  Why wouldn’t the ATF report on Fast and Furious results to the White House when asked?  Was Newell told to avoid linking the operation directly to the White House, or was the ATF worried about the implications of the operation even before it blew up in their faces?  Given the hostility towards Congressional oversight already demonstrated at the ATF and Department of Justice during this investigation, this looks like even more evidence that the Obama administration let the ATF run wild, perhaps on purpose.

The more important question will be who O’Reilly told at the White House about the operation.  Clearly, O’Reilly wanted the information to prepare for key meetings on a very sensitive subject.  It’s hard to believe that O’Reilly would have kept that information to himself.  Issa’s committee needs to get O’Reilly into the hearing and on the record, and it may be time to subpoena some White House records, too.