Politics or Poppycock

A Look From the Left At Politics, Politicians, Policies and Issues of National Concern

Archive for April 1st, 2009

RECESSION HITS SOCIAL SECURITY INCREASES

Posted by James O'Rourke on April 1, 2009

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER,

Associated Press Writer

Tue Mar 31, 6:05 pm ET

WASHINGTON – The recession is projected to wipe out annual cost-of-living increases for 50 million Social Security beneficiaries for the next three years, something that hasn’t happened since automatic adjustments were adopted in 1975.

The Congressional Budget Office says in its latest budget estimates that inflation will dip so low that Social Security recipients will not qualify for annual increases in 2010, or for two years after that. In 2013 through 2019 — when projections are less reliable — CBO estimates annual increases of 2 percent each year, which would be among the lowest.

David Certner, director of legislative policy for the AARP, said many recipients rely on those increases to help pay for rising health care costs, which tend to outpace inflation. Many older Americans have also seen the values of their homes and savings decrease because of the nation’s financial crisis.

“They are going to feel like they are falling behind,” Certner said.

If the projections hold true, Social Security recipients would forgo a total of $378 billion in increased payments through 2019, according to the CBO estimates. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Social Security | Leave a Comment »

A Dead-End “Road To Recovery”

Posted by James O'Rourke on April 1, 2009

CAF STAFF
By
Terrance Heath
March 27th, 2009 – 3:57pm ET

more»  

I don’t know whether to praise the Republicans or pity them.

On one hand, they’ve been given chance after chance to “bring it,” in term of ideas to address the crises we face — an act of astounding generosity, if you ask me, extended to a party that worked very hard for a very long time to bring us to this point — and they’ve consistently shown up empty-handed. I muster some admiration for someone who brings a knife to a gun fight, because at least he brought something. But to show up empty-handed is, well, pitiful.

On the other hand,I have to give them credit. In the face of current political and economic realities, it takes work — hard, grueling work — to not “get it.” Their “(Dead End) Road to Recovery” shows that when it comes to not “getting it,” Republicans are not afraid to roll up their sleeves and plunge in.

Take a minute and read it yourself. (It’s 19 pages. So, it won’t take long.)
“Republican Road to Recovery” Budget Rebuttal
Publish at Scribd or explore others: Government Business & Legal economy obama

I won’t repeat what’s already been said, and said very well, about the utter lack of details, the compete absence of numbers (something even George W. Bush knew a budget is supposed have), or the omission of so much as a hint of how their plan would reduce the deficit, because … well … some conservatives have already done that for me.
Staffers assured me after yesterday’s press conference that alternative budgets are always presented this way — with details coming only at the last minute. But the document that’s currently available to the public here, while it contains a lot of very broad ideas that most of our readers would agree with, does not even give a ballpark idea of where the GOP budget would leave us. Would it leave us with deficits half as large as the president’s? Twice as large? Would they balance the budget?
I can only add that the Republicans’ (numberless, detail-free) “budget” proposal achieves new depths in what a favorite college professor of mine used to call “self-evasion of the mind”, something I’ve come to define as the act of contorting the mind so as not to have to see or acknowledge what is obvious to anyone who looks.

Put bluntly, it means working very had at having no idea.

In the face of an economic downturn that reveals new depths every day — an economy that continues to shrink, where disappearing jobs are becoming the norm, and the only growth is in the ranks of the unemployed — Republicans started out blaming minorities for the economic crash (just for fun, someone should put invite Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva to the next GOP caucus meeting), and then moved on to suggesting that government “Let the markets crash!” and recommending the remaining remnant of our industrial sector “drop dead.”

Now, their “Road to Recovery” shows that the party has reached a dead end, and inadvertently (or perhaps intentionally) told Americans the truth: When it comes meeting the challenges America faces, and  relieving the increasing economic pain visited upon our families and communities, they have no ideas.

The question is what their arrival at this dead end signifies. Are they just out of gas? Or have they — and we — finally arrived at the destination they had in mind all along?
After all, thirty years of their best thinking, and policy making paved the road we travelled to get here.


“Republican Road to Recovery” Budget Rebuttal

The Republican “counter-plan” to President Barack Obama’s 2009 budget.
View Document Info »

Posted in Issues | Leave a Comment »

What A Progressive Budget Looks Like

Posted by James O'Rourke on April 1, 2009

CAF STAFF
By
Isaiah J. Poole
April 1st, 2009 – 2:45pm ET

Unlike the 19-page propaganda document House Republicans lamely called their alternative budget last week, the Congressional Progressive Caucus has released a real budget with real numbers. Plus, it gets to the core of the country’s fiscal problems, not with platitudes and excessive giveaways to the rich, but with sound, responsible proposals for making government work as it should.

The Progressive Caucus alternative budget will be introduced on the House floor as early as this afternoon. It is a wonderful demonstration of progressive principles in action.

Here are some highlights, from the CPC’s “Dear Colleague” letter:

  • Elimination of unneeded, unwanted, and unproven Cold War Era weapons systems ($60 billion/year);
  • Elimination of waste, fraud, and abuse at DOD. ($8.7 billion/year);
  • Redeployment of all U.S. troops and military contractors out of Iraq ($90 billion);
  • Repeal of Bush tax breaks for the top 1% of taxpayers ($222 billion);
  • Instituting “Make Wall Street Pay For Wall Street’s Bailout” tax of .25% on all stock transactions ($150 billion/year);
  • Closing egregious corporate tax loopholes ($100 billion/year);and
  • Cap on tax deductibility of excessive executive compensation ($20 billion/year).
  • Provides $991 billion for non-military discretionary spending in FY10, $469 billion above President Obama’s request, primarily to help rescue the faltering U.S. economy and those Americans hardest hit;
  • Provides $479 billion as sufficient defense spending level;
  • Provides a strong economic stimulus package of $300 billion that includes an extension of unemployment insurance, an increase in assistance for food stamps, transportation infrastructure, school construction, water and flood control projects;
  • Provides $120 billion a year for health care for all Americans; and
  • Provides $1.22 trillion to cut the poverty rate in half over the next decade.

There are three things that are particularly noteworthy about the Progressive Caucus budget.

First, it makes a particularly strong case for eliminating Pentagon spending that is widely acknowledged to be wasteful. The Pentagon already has more than enough F/A-22 Raptors, and the Osprey, the jet-like helicopter that has been on the drawing boards for more than two decades, has been a $20 billion disaster. We’re building weapons based on a combination of outdated and imagined threats, not on real security needs. In Congress, there is a bipartisan chorus of defenders of this wasteful spending, but a stronger bipartisan force can be marshaled to end it. There is no reason for the Obama administration to shirk away from that battle.

Second, the budget document says that it is designed to ensure that the recovery bill recently signed by President Obama “will not be a one-time investment, but rather a pivoting point to help Americans in need get through the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, while also making longer-term investments to help all Americans secure a brighter and more prosperous future.” That is a commitment that we particularly need to get our Democratic Party friends to make in the face of a Republican-led assault on any long-term commitment to public investment in rebuilding and renewing the country.

Third, by immediately rolling back the Bush administration’s top-end tax cuts and by eliminating a host of special-interest tax breaks, the Progressive Caucus budget would restore progressiveness and fairness to the tax code. Eliminating tax loopholes and focusing resources on ending tax evasion allows the federal government to simultaneously expand spending on human needs and put the government on a path of reducing the federal deficit by 58 percent by 2012. Yes, we can have adequate federal support for health care, education, energy and other domestic priorities and have a sustainable budget that does not overburden working people.

Sadly, this budget alternative will not have the support to be treated seriously in Congress. But that is all the more reason for progressives to fight for its underlying principles. The proposal sets up principled fights that a united progressive movement can win.

Posted in *Economy | Leave a Comment »

Broad Brush Issues

Posted by James O'Rourke on April 1, 2009

Progressive Breakfast:
picture-7.jpg

CAF STAFF
By
Bill Scher
March 30th, 2009 – 10:37am ET

more»

Boom Lowered on Big Auto

USA Today reports on new WH demands for an auto rescue plan:

President Obama will announce Monday that his auto task force does not believe the plans General Motors (GM) and Chrysler delivered in February can result in viable companies and that he is giving them more time, along with an aggressive set of conditions. One of the conditions was the resignation of GM CEO Rick Wagoner … While they’re working on improving their plans, the two car companies will receive just enough money to keep operations going.

Chrysler, which the task force does not believe can stand alone, has 30 days to work out its proposed partnership with Fiat or find a new partner. It could get an additional $6 billion to make the Fiat deal work, but it then would require them to build new engines and cars in the U.S. and to pay back taxpayers before Fiat could increase its initial 35% stake.

GM has 60 days to force greater concessions out of its debt holders and other parties and to find new ways to deal with its shrinking market share.

Fuel-efficency must be a priority, reports Bloomberg: “GM will also replace most of its board and must increase reliance on producing more fuel-efficient vehicles, under findings to be announced today at the White House by President Barack Obama.”

Though WSJ reports the WH task force not betting on the electric-powered Chevy Volt: “The government body also took aim squarely at the Chevy Volt – GM’s heavily hyped electric car of the future – saying it will likely be too expensive to be commercially successful in the short-term.”

NYT on the bankruptcy option: “two senior [WH] officials, offering a preview on condition of anonymity, made clear that some form of bankruptcy — a quick, court-supervised restructuring, as they described it — could still be an option for one or both companies … The plan Mr. Obama is to announce on Monday will also include government backing of warranties for G.M. and Chrysler cars and trucks, to give consumers enough confidence to buy them, even if one or both are forced into bankruptcy.”

W. Post on remaining points on contention:

Their plan has “got to be one that’s realistically designed to weather this storm and to emerge at the other end much more lean, mean, and competitive than it currently is,” [President Obama] said Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Issues | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »