Sherman's Blog - Political & Social Commentary

Taking on the Banks: Critical Administration/Democratic Failure: Jobs, Wall Street and Banks: The Administration Achilles

(1) Oversight of Big Banks Remains with Fed Weakened reform, as consumer protection won’t be an independent agency

Banks with more than $100bn of assets will be overseen by the US Federal Reserve under a regulatory reform plan that represents a partial victory for the central bank after months of attacks in Congress.

Chris Dodd, the Senate banking committee chairman, had proposed hiving off all bank supervision to a single regulator but is set to propose this week that the 23 largest institutions stay under the Fed’s oversight, according to people familiar with the plans.

At issue over the weekend was the regulation of several hundred state chartered institutions that also want to remain under the Fed’s supervision.

While attention has been focused on an argument between Democrats and Republicans over the powers and location of new consumer protection functions, which may also be housed within the Fed, other elements of regulatory reform – deemed more important by many institutions and policymakers – are close to fruition.

A new “resolution” regime to deal with failing, but systemically important, institutions would allow the government to wind up a company quickly to avoid contagion spreading through the financial system.

But in a concession to Republican fears about giving government too much power over business, a bankruptcy judge would provide checks and balances. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0f1b6822-2a2c-11df-b940-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1

(2) Katrina Vanden Heuvel

…there is no better measure of how craven and corrupt our politics have become than the news that the proposal for the Consumer Financial Protection Agency is about to be abandoned in the Senate. Republicans opposed it from the start, while shamelessly peddling themselves to Wall Street's deep pockets. In the House, not one Republican voted in favor of the diluted reform bill that includes an independent CFPA. And in the Senate, Republicans announced that the price of bipartisan agreement was to shelve any notion of an independent agency. Instead, they're pushing for a new presidentially appointed watchdog to be put inside the Federal Reserve -- with rule-making subject to objections by the very same regulators who failed so consistently and ignominiously to protect consumers in the past. Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd is trying to get Democrats to sign on to an only slightly toothier version of this compromise. Barney Frank, Dodd's counterpart in the House, had the better reaction: "I thought it was a joke at first, to be honest."

In this debate, the president has been largely absent without leave. Mired in the interminable health-care debate, he has been unable or unwilling to provide Americans with a clear explanation of what needs to be done to dig our way out of the hole we're in. Without a White House willing to fight hard for reform, Republicans and corporate Democrats pay little price for catering to the bank lobby.

"I have been most struck by how invisible the issue has been as part of the public debate," Bill McInturff, a Republican pollster, told the New York Times. If voters don't "understand what it is and why it matters," he added, "it's unlikely to have much consequence in the campaign."

With The Post, the Times and "60 Minutes" all assuring us that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is a political genius, this White House failure is truly befuddling. Surely, nothing is more vital to the economy's future, or to the Democrats' political fortunes, than to take on the banks, get them under control, provide consumers with some protection, and make banking a boring profession once again. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/09/AR2010030901718_pf.html

Where the Jobs Went: Long Live Monoplies! The overlooked- and key- factor: For 29 years we’ve shelved the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, i.e. since the ascendancy of Reagan and his radical conservative handlers

…while the mystery of what killed the great American jobs machine has yielded no shortage of debatable answers, one of the more compelling potential explanations has been conspicuously absent from the national conversation: monopolization. The word itself feels anachronistic, a relic from the age of the Rockefellers and Carnegies. But the fact that the term has faded from our daily discourse doesn’t mean the thing itself has vanished—in fact, the opposite is true. In nearly every sector of our economy, far fewer firms control far greater shares of their markets than they did a generation ago.

Indeed, in the years after officials in the Reagan administration radically altered how our government enforces our antimonopoly laws, the American economy underwent a truly revolutionary restructuring. Four great waves of mergers and acquisitions—in the mid-1980s, early ’90s, late ’90s, and between 2003 and 2007—transformed America’s industrial landscape at least as much as globalization. Over the same two decades, meanwhile, the spread of mega-retailers like Wal-Mart and Home Depot and agricultural behemoths like Smithfield and Tyson’s resulted in a more piecemeal approach to consolidation, through the destruction or displacement of countless independent family-owned businesses.

It is now widely accepted among scholars that small businesses are responsible for most of the net job creation in the United States. It is also widely agreed that small businesses tend to be more inventive, producing more patents per employee, for example, than do larger firms. Less well established is what role concentration plays in suppressing new business formation and the expansion of existing businesses, along with the jobs and innovation that go with such growth. Evidence is growing, however, that the radical, wide-ranging consolidation of recent years has reduced job creation at both big and small firms simultaneously. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2010/1003.lynn-longman.html

Virginia: States Rights on the March South Carolinian John C. Calhoun, Mr. States Rights 1832, is smiling from the grave. Virginia is in the midst of a sharp counter- revolution which harkens back to days of post 1954 Virginia that had steadfastly refused to comply with the Brown v Board of Ed de-segregation decision. They’ve led the charge of conservative states who are now vowing to block any federal imposing of the individual insurance mandate, key to the Democrats’ health care legislation.

Aside from blocking health care, the new administration has been systematically removing anti-discrimination measures only recently provided for gay employees.

The administration of Virginia governor Bob McDonnell is doubling down on its anti-gay reputation, telling the state's colleges and universities to scrap policies that ban discrimination against gay employees.

In a letter to the state's institutions of higher learning, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli argues that the schools lack the legal authority to ban anti-gay discrimination, because only the state legislature can do so, the Washington Post reported over the weekend. That's a step that the GOP-controlled legislature recently declined to take.

Last month, McDonnell, a socially conservative Republican, rescinded an executive order, promulgated by the previous governor, Democrat Tim Kaine, that prohibited discrimination against gay state workers.

… last month, Cuccinelli angered Democrats and environmentalists by filing suit against the EPA, alleging that it lacks the legal authority to regulate global warming pollution. He was one of several state attorneys general to do so. http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/virginia_ag_to_state_colleges_scrap_protections_fo.php

Assault on Unemployment Benefits: It’s the New Welfare! Welfare has long been demonized by the Right; social insurance- Unemployment and Social Security- has endured less scorn. But, now:

…complaints that extending unemployment payments discourages job-seeking have begun to bubble into the political debate. Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) recently single-handedly held up the latest extension, a bill to keep unemployment benefits in place for another 30 days, saying Congress should find other cuts to cover its $10 billion price tag.

Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) did not join Bunning's effort, but he defended his colleague's point of view. Kyl told the Senate he questioned why anyone would see unemployment benefits as helpful to the economy, or to the jobs market.

"If anything, continuing to pay people unemployment compensation is a disincentive for them to seek new work," Kyl said. "I am sure most of them would like work and probably have tried to seek it, but you can't argue it is a job enhancer."

Andrew Stettner, deputy director of the National Employment Law Center, says there's a good reason people are out of work for so long. There are six unemployed Americans for every available job, he said.

"The primary reason people are out of work so long is a lack of jobs," Stettner said.

…"It is appropriate and natural for Congress to extend the time limit of unemployment insurance with the job market as bad as it is," said James Sherk, a labor economist at the Heritage Foundation. "But by quadrupling it, it is no longer an unemployment insurance program but a welfare program." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/08/AR2010030804927.html?hpid=topnews

Japan Edges Toward China Adaptation. The ruling DPJ party is cozying up to China as they view the Chinese as having smarter trade, economic policies than the struggling U.S.

China is about to overtake Japan as the world's second-largest economy. The country's national debt has hit an awesome 180 per cent of gross domestic product, (un)comfortably the highest in the world among rich countries - and there is no credible plan in place to hack it back. Toyota, a company that used to embody Japan's reputation for quality, is enmeshed in a safety and public relations nightmare. Last year, the Japanese economy shrank by more than 5 per cent. And the high hopes that surrounded the reformist government of Yukio Hatoyama, the prime minister who was elected last summer, have quickly dissipated. Mr Hatoyama's approval ratings are sinking and the Japanese business and civil service establishment seem eager to dismiss him as an ineffectual clown.

How Japan reacts to this new sense of weakness - exaggerated though it may be - will matter to the whole world. The country's size and strategic importance make it critical to America's Pacific strategy and to China's geopolitical calculations.

As it adapts to Japan's new circumstances the Hatoyama government has, almost unwittingly, initiated a debate about the value of Japan's alliance with the US. Some western observers in Tokyo muse that perhaps Japan is once again following its historic policy of adapting to shifts in global politics by aligning itself with great powers. Before the first world war the country had a special relationship with Britain. In the inter-war period Japan allied itself with Germany. Since 1945, it has stuck closely to America. Perhaps the ground is being prepared for a new "special relationship" with China? http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/74e9b3cc-2b1a-11df-93d8-00144feabdc0.html

Trade War with Brazil: Brazil moves to protect its industries; their tariffs have always been there- 20%, commonly, while ours is closer to 2%, long the practice here, especially since Clinton’s terms. Now the Brazilians are doubling it so as to protect their industries.

Brazil moved to raise tariffs on a wide range of American goods on Monday, potentially igniting a trade war with the US over cotton subsidies after eight years of litigation at the World Trade Organisation.

The decision takes effect next month, starting a 30-day period during which US and Brazilian officials will attempt to negotiate a solution to the dispute.

Under the Brazilian plan, duties would rise most steeply on cotton products. Many that are currently taxed at between 6 per cent and 35 per cent would be taxed at 100 per cent.

The tariffs on beauty products would double, from 18 per cent to 36 per cent. Duties on household goods such as cookers, refrigerators, TVs and video cameras would also double, from 20 per cent to 40 per cent. Duties on cars would rise from 35 per cent to 50 per cent.

Brazil is allowed to impose the tariff increases – worth $560m – after winning a case at the WTO last year. Brazil challenged the legality of direct subsidies to US cotton farmers to protect them against fluctuations in global prices and a loan guarantee programme for international buyers of US cotton. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/dbf4284c-2afa-11df-886b-00144feabdc0.html

Health Insurance/Care Reform: A Two-For? Stop (some) Insurance Abuses and Say Good bye to Rush Limbaugh?

I’ll just tell you this, if this passes and it’s five years from now and all that stuff gets implemented — I am leaving the country. I’ll go to Costa Rica. – Limbaugh http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/09/limbaugh-exile-health-care/

-R

Health Care/Insurance Bill: Stupak The Michigan congressman is threatening to derail the bill, pledging to rally 11 others to reject it as it promotes public payment for abortion. Of course the bill doesn’t do that, and Stupak is actually trying to deny health coverage to anyone who uses private money to pay for an abortion.

A central puzzle of the health reform debate is why Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., keeps saying that the Senate-passed bill allows taxpayer dollars to be spent on abortions. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops says it, too. This dispute concerns (or at least pretends to concern) matters of fact, not belief. The question of whether the government funds a given medical procedure is not like the question of whether human life begins at conception. It's empirical, not ideological. And Stupak happens to be wrong.

Stupak's and the bishops' claim is important because abortion is the single likeliest issue to scuttle the bill. Stupak says that "at least" 12 pro-life House members who previously voted aye on health reform, including himself, will vote against President Obama's package, which is based on the Senate bill, unless it contains abortion language that he inserted into the House bill. The trouble is, Stupak's language can't be shoehorned into President Obama's package, because it's nonbudgetary and therefore ineligible for inclusion in a budget reconciliation bill. Republican Scott Brown's Massachusetts Senate victory made reconciliation the only possible vehicle for passing health care reform.

…What really rankles Stupak (and the bishops) isn't that the Senate bill commits taxpayer dollars to funding abortion. Rather, it's that the Senate bill commits taxpayer dollars to people who buy private insurance policies that happen to cover abortion at nominal cost to the purchaser (even the poorest of the poor can spare $1 a month) and no cost at all to the insurer. Stupak and the bishops don't have a beef with government spending. They have a beef with market economics. http://www.slate.com/id/2246905/pagenum/2

Theda Skocpol: All “Democrats” should support the health care bill

The next two to three weeks will determine whether the United States gets on a better track toward including all citizens in health coverage and controlling costs in the public interest. This is NOT the moment for Democrats to posture and bargain -- remember, this is in part what lost us MA, that mess in the Senate over the Cornhusker Kickback and other unseemly deals. Scott Brown made use of these deals -- he pointed to Democratic dysfunctionality. Speed and simplicity are crucial right now, as Obama and the House and Senate leaders put together what they must to get this done. This is a time for the Indians to listen to the Chiefs.

At the risk of irritating people on the left, this is NOT the moment for "progressives" to demand a public option. Nor is it the moment for either pro-choice feminists or pro-life Democrats to derail reform.

PROGRESSIVES need to cut the posturing over a currently unattainable (and in any event already hollowed out version of the) "public option." To get legislation now that includes massive subsidies for the uninsured and a new regulatory framework for the future requires that Nancy Pelosi -- the real heroine in all this -- persuade shakey conservative Dems in the House. The legislation cannot include a public option if she is to succeed. Yet if this new framework passes through House action and a reconcliliation side-car, that will open new political possibilities in the future. Before long, it will become very possible to enact Medicare extensions or a public option through majority budget votes, because they will be deficit-fighters. Especially "Medicare for More" which will be my new slogan. At this juncture, I hate to get emails from so-called progressive advocacy groups pushing for anything other than supporting Obama in the current end-game. Criticizing what is now attainable is the real defeatism, Adam Green! Conservatives are hammering wavering moderate Dems; use your resources to run moderate ads against private insurers in their districts. Praise the President's plan and help him get the votes. Same for MoveOn.

As for PRO-CHOICE versus PRO-LIFE advocates, give us all a break from your extremist posturings, please. Health care for all is probably the single most important issue for women and families and actual babies and children. http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/05/all_dems_including_progressives_need_to_back_obama/?ref=fpblg

Romney: Squirming Aside from telling the expectable lies- the current line that the Democrats are trying to use the ‘nuclear option’ to pass health care reform- he’s been on the trail denying that the Massachusetts plan is at all similar to the current health care bill:

Former Massachusetts governor and likely 2012 presidential hopeful Mitt Romney is insisting that the universal health care plan he championed in the Bay State has virtually nothing in common with the plan President Barack Obama is urging Congress to adopt.

"There a big difference between what we did and what [President Obama] is doing. What we did I think is the ultimate conservative plan," Romney said on Fox News Sunday. In response to a polite but somewhat incredulous grilling by anchor Chris Wallace, the ex-governor and 2008 presidential candidate painted Obama's plan as a takeover of the health care system and his plan as an effort to do make it impossible for people to consume health care resources as "free riders." http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/0310/Romney_Mass_health_plan_entirely_different_than_Obamas.html?showall

U.S. to Visitors: Pay Up Did they really just pass a bill that bills tourists $10? This is the way to make up for the decline in tourism?

The US yesterday passed a new law designed to boost dwindling numbers of foreign tourists - it will start charging them for the privilege of entering the country.

The bizarre move has prompted controversy on both sides of the Atlantic and warnings that it could backfire. Under the Travel Promotion Act signed into law by Barack Obama yesterday, a new national marketing body will be set up to promote US holidays abroad, a job that until now has only been done piecemeal by individual states. However the money to pay for the "multi-channel marketing campaign" is to be raised in part from visiting tourists, by charging them $10 for permission to enter. The rest of the funding will be raised in private sector contributions. http://www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2010/mar/05/us-charge-tourists-to-enter

Iraq Elections: …‘heavy turnout and deadly violence’

On a day that began with the thundering explosion of insurgent mortar rounds and ended with outbursts of celebratory gunfire by hopeful political activists, millions of Iraqis voted Sunday to elect lawmakers who will rule this country for years as U.S. forces withdraw.

Voter turnout appeared to be modest, as many Iraqis chose to stay home out of fear and a sense that democracy has brought them more misery than blessings.

Still, many voters said they went to the polls despite their disdain for Iraq's political establishment and their deep apprehension about the future of a vibrant democracy saddled by the weakness of its institutions.

Like past Iraqi elections, Sunday's vote will almost certainly be followed by fierce and protracted jockeying as coalitions recalibrate alliances and wrangle over top jobs. The process is expected to drag on for months, with political fights potentially spilling back into the streets and deepening sectarian and ethnic divides as Iraqis enter an era in which the United States will be increasingly powerless to shape events.

"It's certainly possible that the losers will not accept their defeat," said Joost Hiltermann, an Iraq expert at the International Crisis Group. Results are not expected for a day or more. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/07/AR2010030700515_pf.html

Iraq: What from here? Juan Cole:

Al-Maliki, however, may well have to pay a price for remaining prime minister, if he can manage to do so, since that outcome would certainly require that he make a post-election coalition with the Shiite religious parties of the National Iraqi Alliance. The latter include the Sadr Movement and the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq. Muqtada al-Sadr, leader of the Sadr movement, said Saturday on the Iran-based al-Alam satellite channel that he would only support a prime ministerial candidate who agreed to accelerate the departure of the US from Iraq. Based on its performance in last year's provincial elections, the Sadr Movement could well get half of the seats gained by the National Iraqi Alliance; if Sadrists did that well, they could be essential to putting together the 51 percent al-Maliki (or any other prime minister) would need to govern. Scroll down to see a translation of Sadr's remarks, which are the first entry for Sunday below.

Moreover, it is not just al-Sadr. I detect a change in the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, now led by Ammar al-Hakim after the death from lung cancer of his father, Abd al-Aziz. The father had been sanguine about the presence of US troops in Iraq, and called for them to stay in the country, seeing them as a guarantor against the return of the Baathists (the secular Arab nationalists led by Saddam Hussein before his overthrow in 2003). Ammar al-Hakim was brought up in Iran and is close to Iranian hard liners. The US military once arrested him as he was sneaking across the border from Iran after a secret visit to Tehran that appears not to have involved any visas or border stations. In Ankara last winter, he referred to the US military as "occupation forces" and gave partial credit to ISCI for forcing them to withdraw on a timetable. But as late as January, even he was saying that the US presence in Iraq is not a major issue, since it has departed and the bases are being closed (he probably meant that it has decided to depart). He also, however, praised armed resistance to Israeli occupation and, on a trip to Beirut, laid a wreat at the tomb of Imad Mughniya, a radical Shiite whom the US and Israeli categorized as a terrorist. www.juancole.com

The Liberal Media Eric Alterman takes us back to golden moments when the Mainstream Media revealed their liberal bias (jk):

Consider as a couple of not-so-random examples two appearances on two networks with two famous hosts by the extremist and occasionally delusional Republican ex-presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani. The man who likes to call himself “America’s mayor” went on ABC’s "Good Morning America" and insisted, “We had no domestic attacks under Bush; we’ve had one under Obama.” Alas, this nutty statement went entirely unchallenged by the show’s host George Stephanopoulos, who happened to be a long-time Democratic aide to various congressmen and to President Clinton.

I was reminded upon hearing Giuliani’s statement of another of his appearances, this one just before Christmas in 2001. He was on NBC’s “Meet the Press” to discuss America’s response to the 9/11 attacks with First Lady Laura Bush and Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of the Archdiocese of Washington. Rudy found himself being asked by Tim Russert, a former aide to liberal Governor Mario Cuomo and Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, whether George Bush had been given the election in 2000 despite having lost the popular vote by divine intervention. I swear I’m not making this up. There was no mention of the antidemocratic shenanigans of the likes of Katharine Harris and Antonin Scalia and the mobs who interfered with Florida vote counting. Interestingly Mrs. Bush demurred at this crazy question, but Rudy took the bait. “I do think, Mrs. Bush, that there was some divine guidance in the president being elected,” was his expert opinion.

Chris Matthews, who was also an aide to a top Democratic politician Tip O’Neil, has demonstrated a similar tendency to fall in love with right-wing politicians. George W. Bush reminded him of Ernest Hemmingway, he said. Really. Here’s Matthews’s tough-minded critique of Bush’s ability to throw a strike at Yankee Stadium: “There are some things you can’t fake,” he explained breathlessly. “Either you can throw a strike from 60 feet or you can’t. Either you can rise to the occasion on the mound at Yankee Stadium with 56,000 people watching or you can’t. On Tuesday night, George W. Bush hit the strike zone in the House that Ruth Built...This is about knowing what to do at the moment you have to do it—and then doing it. It’s about that ‘grace under pressure.’” http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/03/ta030510.html

GOP Lawmaker Demands Recall of Car That Drove Him to Gay Club

Andy Borowitz:

Anti-gay California State Sen. Roy Ashburn today demanded a sweeping recall of the vehicle that drove him to a gay nightclub this week.

Sen. Ashburn, a Republican who has consistently voted for anti-gay legislation, said that the car drove him to the club “against my will.”

“If we are recalling cars for problems with their brakes and power steering, then surely we should be recalling vehicles that force their drivers to go to gay nightclubs,” Sen. Ashburn said.

The state senator said not only did the car drive him to the gay nightclub, but it forced him to enter the club and party there for hours, resulting in his later arrest for DUI.

“I can’t tell you what a menace this car is,” he said. “It really is the gayest car I’ve ever seen.”

In addition to calling for a recall of the gay car, Sen. Ashburn said he would sponsor legislation mandating that all California vehicles be fitted not only with GPS but gaydar.

In other news, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin offered this appraisal of her standup comedy performance on The Tonight Show: “I was like, I’m not going to quit my day job, but then I remembered I already did.” http://www.borowitzreport.com/2010/03/05/gop-lawmaker-demands-recall-of-car-that-drove-him-to-gay-club/

-R

Financial Reform: Consumer Protection Agency: Neutered? Barney Frank has expressed alarm; Elizabeth Warren is concerned:

While members of the Senate Banking Committee debate proposals to fix the nation's broken financial system and ineffective approach to protecting consumers, Elizabeth Warren has one message: Pass a strong bill or nothing at all.

"My first choice is a strong consumer agency," the Harvard Law professor and federal bailout watchdog said in an interview with the Huffington Post. "My second choice is no agency at all and plenty of blood and teeth left on the floor."

There's been a steady leak of Senate proposals to fix the dysfunctional way federal regulators protect consumers from abusive lenders. One was an independent unit housed within the Treasury Department; another was a new entity, housed in the Federal Reserve, with little independence or power.

The Senate shouldn't waste its time, asserts Warren, explaining that current proposals fail to address some of her key priorities such as arming the proposed agency with independent rule-making authority, without interference by bank regulators.

"My 99th choice is some mouthful of mush that doesn't get the job done," Warren said.

The Fed proposal, attributed to Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), was leaked earlier this week. Corker is working with Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) on Dodd's update to his November bill to reform the nation's financial system.

Warren spent Tuesday on the phone with reform groups, members of Congress and administration officials, rallying support for a new independent agency tasked solely with protecting consumers. Many of them were skeptical that Corker is willing to agree to let the entity have real independence, an aide to Warren said. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/03/fight-for-the-cfpa-is-a-d_n_483707.html

Repealing NAFTA effort A long shot, but…

The bill spearheaded by Rep. Gene Taylor, a Mississippi Democrat, would require President Barack Obama to give Mexico and Canada six months notice that the United States will no longer be part of the 16-year-old trade pact.

"At a time when 10 to 12 percent of the American people are unemployed, I think Congress has an obligation to put people back to work," Taylor said.

He argued NAFTA has cost the United States millions of manufacturing jobs and hurt national security by encouraging companies to move production to Mexico.

The high unemployment rate makes it the "perfect" time to push for repeal even though past efforts have failed, he said.

"You'll see the American people rally behind this, in my humble opinion," said Rep. Walter Jones, a North Carolina Republican who is one of about 28 co-sponsors of the bill.

Business groups like the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce strongly support NAFTA, which they say has spurred U.S. economic growth by tearing down trade barriers between the three countries. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6233MS20100304?type=politicsNews

RNC and Blackwater: A Perfect Marriage A RNC fundraiser, hosted by Blackwater

The Republican National Committee plans to hold an April fundraiser at a Moyock, N.C. compound owned by the military contracting firm formerly known as Blackwater, Politico reports.

According to an RNC fundraising document uncovered on Wednesday, RNC "Young Eagles" -- party major donors under 40 -- will meet at the facility in the spring.

Also on Thursday, the Wall Street Journal reported that Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) has written a letter to the Justice Department asking for an investigation of Raytheon's alleged use of the Blackwater subsidiary, Paravant, for a contract in Afghanistan.

Levin has also suggested that the Pentagon should no longer consider granting a $1 billion contract to Xe Services LLC (formely, Blackwater) due to "serious questions" about the contractor's conduct.

It was recently reported that Blackwater employees took hundreds of firearms from both the U.S. Military and Afghan police forces using the South Park alias "Eric Cartman." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/04/blackwater-rnc-fundraiser_n_485687.html

Health Care: E.J. Dionne on Republican hypocrisy and recent lies:

Republicans… don't want to talk much about the substance of health care. They want to discuss process, turn "reconciliation" into a four-letter word and maintain that Democrats are "ramming through" a health bill.

It is all, I am sorry to say, one big lie -- or, if you're sensitive, an astonishing exercise in hypocrisy.

In an op-ed in Tuesday's Post, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) offered an excellent example of this hypocrisy. Right off, the piece was wrong on a core fact. Hatch accused the Democrats of trying to, yes, "ram through the Senate a multitrillion-dollar health-care bill."

No. The health-care bill passed the Senate in December with 60 votes under the normal process. The only thing that would pass under a simple majority vote would be a series of amendments that fit comfortably under the "reconciliation" rules established to deal with money issues. Near the end of his column, Hatch conceded that reconciliation would be used for "only parts" of the bill. But why didn't he say that in the first place?

Hatch grandly cited "America's Founders" as wanting the Senate to be about "deliberation." But the Founders said nothing in the Constitution about the filibuster, let alone "reconciliation." Judging from what they put in the actual document, the Founders would be appalled at the idea that every major bill should need the votes of three-fifths of the Senate to pass.

Hatch quoted Sens. Robert Byrd and Kent Conrad, both Democrats, as opposing the use of reconciliation on health care. What he didn't say is that Byrd's comment from a year ago was about passing the entire bill under reconciliation, which no one is proposing. As for Conrad, he made clear to The Post's Ezra Klein this week that it's perfectly appropriate to use reconciliation "to improve or perfect the package,” which is the only thing that Democrats have proposed doing through reconciliation.

Hatch said that reconciliation should not be used for "substantive legislation" unless the legislation has "significant bipartisan support." But surely the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts, which were passed under reconciliation and increased the deficit by $1.7 trillion during his presidency, were "substantive legislation." The 2003 dividends tax cut could muster only 50 votes. Vice President Dick Cheney had to break the tie. Talk about "ramming through."

The underlying "principle" here seems to be that it's fine to pass tax cuts for the wealthy on narrow votes but an outrage to use reconciliation to help middle-income and poor people get health insurance. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/03/AR2010030303097_pf.html

Republicans Dump on their Own An embarrassment or worse for the Republican National Committee, as a document detailing their fundraising plan for their small and major donors is found and dispatched to the media. Their fundraising pitch to their own pushes the fear of Obama and Socialism, focusing on the “Evil Empire” of Obama, Reid and Pelosi. The only surprising aspect is the tone this document demonstrated toward their own donors, referring to them as “ego driven” or “reactionary.”

The Republican National Committee plans to raise money this election cycle through an aggressive campaign capitalizing on "fear" of President Barack Obama and a promise to "save the country from trending toward socialism."

The strategy was detailed in a confidential party fundraising presentation, obtained by POLITICO, which also outlines how "ego-driven" wealthy donors can be tapped with offers of access and "tchochkes."

The presentation was delivered by RNC Finance Director Rob Bickhart to top donors and fundraisers at a party retreat in Boca Grande, Florida on February 18, a source at the gathering said.

… The presentation explains the Republican fundraising in simple terms.

"What can you sell when you do not have the White House, the House, or the Senate...?" it asks.

The answer: "Save the country from trending toward Socialism!” http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/33866.html

Addressing Global Warming: The need for Fuel Taxes: Making the case, which would have us pay prices that approach what Europeans have long paid.

To meet the Obama administration’s targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions, some researchers say, Americans may have to experience a sobering reality: gas at $7 a gallon.

To reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the transportation sector 14 percent from 2005 levels by 2020, the cost of driving would simply have to increase, according to a forthcoming report by researchers at Harvard’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.

The 14 percent target was set in the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget for fiscal 2010.

In their study, the researchers devised several combinations of steps that United States policymakers might take in trying to address the heat-trapping emissions by the nation’s transportation sector, which consumes 70 percent of the oil used in the United States.

Most of their models assumed an economy-wide carbon dioxide tax starting at $30 a ton in 2010 and escalating to $60 a ton in 2030. In some cases researchers also factored in tax credits for electric and hybrid vehicles, taxes on fuel or both.

In the modeling, it turned out that issuing tax credits could backfire, while taxes on fuel proved beneficial.

“Tax credits don’t address how much people use their cars,” said Ross Morrow, one of the report’s authors. “In reverse, they can make people drive more.”

Dr. Morrow, formerly a fellow at the Belfer Center, is a professor of mechanical engineering and economics at Iowa State University

Researchers said that vehicle miles traveled will increase by more than 30 percent between 2010 and 2030 unless policymakers increase fuel taxes. http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/02/fuel-taxes-must-rise-harvard-researchers-say/

Scott Brown: Still on his Honeymoon Following his predicted initial “independent” vote, Brown now shows us his core values: First, he supports Jim Bunning in his filibuster that temporarily shut down highway projects, threatened unemployment checks; Now, he proposes a tax cut- another $500 for taxpayers supposedly to be the best use of “unused stimulus funds,” i.e. more deficit spending. Have we already forgotten how wasteful those previous checks were?

Almost one month to the day of entering the U.S. Senate after a race that rocked the political world, Sen. Scott Brown, R-MA, has come out with his first piece of legislation --- a tax cut.

It targets mostly working class Americans, those employees making up to about $200,000, with a temporary tax cut that would, according to data released from Brown's office, save the average worker "about $100 a month for a total of at least $500 for individuals and $1,000 for working couples."

Brown will win few, if any, Democratic supporters, however, as he seeks to pay for the entire amendment with "all unallocated stimulus funds," of which Brown estimates there is "over $80 billion."

There has not yet been a full analysis of the bill, which offers the tax cut for a six month period, which determines its price tag, by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

Brown's office, in a statement, said, "Families could immediately use their returned tax dollars to provide for their families and put back into the struggling economy to spur job creation." http://congress.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/03/03/scott-brown-wants-to-give-you-a-tax-cut/

Reagan and the $50 bill: The Reagan Legacy Project has already named a federal office building for him in every state, plus roadways, Washington National airport, etc. Now, they want to replace U.S. Grant on the $50 bill. You’d think this guy and his tax cuts for the rich and ‘we can survive a limited nuclear war’ was someone to honor!

A U.S. congressman from North Carolina wants the $50 bill redrawn to feature the face of former President Ronald Reagan.

Republican Rep. Patrick McHenry wants Congress to tell the U.S Treasury to replace former President Ulysses S. Grant on the bill. McHenry announced his bill Tuesday. He has 13 Republican co-sponsors.

Grant was a Union general during the Civil War who led the North to victory and later became the nation’s 18th president.

McHenry said Reagan transformed the nation’s political and economic thinking and argued that "every generation needs its own heroes."

One of McHenry’s Republican primary opponents, Scott Keadle, said he admires Reagan, too. But he accused McHenry of pandering to voters with the bill instead of focusing his work on the bad economy. http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view/20100303nc_congressman_wants_ronald_reagan_put_on_50_bill/

Mid-East Peace: Delays accompanied by Growing Radicalism Hamas is no longer The Extremist.

The recent calm on the Israel-Gaza border could be deceiving. Hamas is not firing rockets into Israel and is also preventing more radical groups from launching rockets. At the same time, Hamas is coping with the domestic threat posed by radical groups that identify with Al-Qaida. Recent reports from Gaza indicate that these groups are getting stronger, at the expense of Hamas.

At this point these groups do not pose much of a threat to Hamas' authority, but Gaza authorities believe that they could pose a concrete threat in the distant future.

Last week, operatives from one of the fundamentalist groups set off three explosive charges in the Shati refugee camp, not far from the home of Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh. Two weeks ago, the car of a Hamas police officer was blown up in Khan Younis and three cars of Hamas officials exploded in Gaza City. Three similar explosions occurred in January. Also, there have been attempts to blow up Red Cross vehicles and pharmacies that sell condoms.

Last week, Hamas arrested dozens of suspected supporters of the "Army of Islam", identified with Gaza's Salafi branch, and is also moving against the Darmush clan. According to various assessments, these arrests were connected to the explosions that targeted Hamas. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1153940.html

-R

Right-wing Extremism: Proliferating The trend continues, a lousy fit with “Tea Party” activism

Global Warming: Microsoft Separates from Chamber of Commerce In view of the slowed momentum on ‘climate change,’ their statement, if not exactly leadership, is welcomed.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has never spoken for nor done work on behalf of Microsoft regarding climate change legislation, and we have not participated in the Chamber’s climate initiatives. Microsoft has stated that climate change is a serious issue that demands immediate, worldwide attention and we are acting accordingly. We are pursuing strategies and taking actions that are consistent with a strong commitment to reducing our own impact as well as the impact of our products. In addition, we have adopted a broad policy statement on climate change that expresses support for government action to create market-based mechanisms to address climate change. And, we believe the greatest value Microsoft brings to the fight against climate change is our expertise on the role software and technology can play in reducing carbon emissions. To this end, Microsoft is working ranging from the Digital Energy Solutions Campaign to the World Wildlife Fund to the European Environmental Agency to advance public policies that promote the use of ICT solutions to advance energy efficiency, spur innovation and economic opportunity, and contribute to practical strategies for mitigating climate change. http://blogs.msdn.com/see/archive/2010/03/02/microsoft-s-position-on-the-u-s-chamber-of-commerce-climate-related-activities.aspx

Fringe Economy: Major companies are thriving, picking the bones of people on the margins.

The payday loan industry has found a new and lucrative source of business: the unemployed.

....No job? No problem. A typical unemployed Californian receiving $300 a week in benefits can walk into one of hundreds of storefront operations statewide and walk out with $255 well before that government check arrives — for a $45 fee. Annualized, that's an interest rate of 459%....APRs in other states are even higher: nearly 782% in Wyoming and 870% in Maine.

… Payday lenders have been controversial since the industry expanded rapidly in the 1990s, with critics accusing the outfits of preying on the poor. Arkansas, Georgia, New Jersey and New York have virtually banned the institutions. In 2006, Congress stymied payday loans to military personnel, passing a law capping interest at rates prohibitively low for payday lenders. The legislation was spurred by concern that payday loan debt was affecting morale and readiness for deployment. http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-payday1-2010mar01,0,4869285,full.story

[Shaky] World Economy: Greece at Issue… or Great Britain? The concern keeps shifting, a sign that there is generalized concern …ongoing.

As Greece’s debt troubles batter the euro, Britain has done its utmost to stay above the fray.

Until now, that is. Suddenly, investors are asking if Britain may soon face its own sovereign debt crisis if the government fails to slash its growing budget deficits quickly enough to escape the contagious fears of financial markets.

The pound fell to $1.4954 on Tuesday, its lowest level against the dollar in nearly 10 months. The yield on 10-year government bonds, known as gilts, slid as investors fretted that Parliament would be too fragmented after a crucial election in May to whip Britain’s messy finances back into shape.

The slide in the pound followed a sharper decline on Monday after polls released over the weekend indicated that the opposition Conservatives had lost their clear lead in the election race.

Without a strong political majority to tackle Britain’s lumbering fiscal problems, investors could start to make it greatly more expensive for the government to raise funds, setting the stage for a potential double-dip recession, if not worse. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/03/business/global/03pound.html?ref=global-home&pagewanted=print

Health Care: Demonizing Reconciliation Republicans who are running from their past records, have consistently spun that majority vote is some unusual procedure, that it could mean “the end of the Senate as a deliberative body,” that Republicans only used it when reducing the deficit was the issue. Pure b.s.

Orren Hatch takes his turn about this “unprecedented” move: Hatch has voted for bills using Reconciliation 12 times.

To impose the will of some Democrats and to circumvent bipartisan opposition, President Obama seems to be encouraging Congress to use the "reconciliation" process, an arcane budget procedure, to ram through the Senate a multitrillion-dollar health-care bill that raises taxes, increases costs and cuts Medicare to fund a new entitlement we can't afford. This is attractive to proponents because it sharply limits debate and amendments to a mere 20 hours and would allow passage with only 51 votes (as opposed to the 60 needed to overcome a procedural hurdle). But the Constitution intends the opposite process, especially for a bill that would affect one-sixth of the American economy.

This use of reconciliation to jam through this legislation, against the will of the American people, would be unprecedented in scope. And the havoc wrought would threaten our system of checks and balances, corrode the legislative process, degrade our system of government and damage the prospects of bipartisanship.

Less than a year ago, the longest-serving member of the Senate, West Virginia Democrat Robert Byrd, said, "I was one of the authors of the legislation that created the budget 'reconciliation' process in 1974, and I am certain that putting health-care reform . . . legislation on a freight train through Congress is an outrage that must be resisted." Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, also a Democrat, said last March, "I don't believe reconciliation was ever intended for the purpose of writing this kind of substantive reform legislation." They are both right.

Reconciliation was designed to balance the federal budget. Both parties have used the process, but only when the bills in question stuck close to dealing with the budget. In instances in which other substantive legislation was included, the legislation had significant bipartisan support. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/01/AR2010030102754_pf.html

U.S. Hegemony Over: Thwarting U.S. Military “...the party’s over.”

During the Cold War, the Pentagon built the greatest naval and air forces the world had ever seen, endowing the United States with the superpower ability to land huge military forces anywhere in the world, at any time, whether invited in or not.

…But now the party's over. The United States, Pentagon strategists say, is quickly losing its ability to barge in without permission. Potential target countries and even some lukewarm allies are figuring out ingenious ways to blunt American power without trying to meet it head-on, using a combination of high-tech and low-tech jujitsu.

…As Defense Secretary Robert Gates summed up the problem this month, countries in places where the United States has strategic interests - including the Persian Gulf and the Pacific - are building "sophisticated, new technologies to deny our forces access to the global commons of sea, air, space and cyberspace."

Those innocuous words spell trouble. While the U.S. military and strategy community is focused on Afghanistan and the fight in Marja, others - Iran and China, to name two - are chipping away at America's access to the Taiwan Strait, the South China Sea, the Persian Gulf and the increasingly critical extraterrestrial realms.

"This era of U.S. military dominance is waning at an increasing and alarming rate," Andrew Krepinevich, a West Point-educated officer and former senior Pentagon strategist, writes in a new report. "With the spread of advanced military technologies and their exploitation by other militaries, especially China's People's Liberation Army and to a far lesser extent Iran's military and Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, the U.S. military's ability to preserve military access to two key areas of vital interest, the western Pacific and the Persian Gulf, is being increasingly challenged."

At present, "there is little indication that China or Iran intend to alter their efforts to create 'no-go' zones in the maritime areas off their coasts," writes Krepinevich, president of the non-partisan think tank, the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/01/china-iran-creating-no-go-zones-to-thwart-u-s-military-power/

-R