Posts Tagged ‘republicans’

Ezra Klein’s Wonkbook

Sourced from Washingtonpost.com

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

wpid-wonk_1-2011-11-25-16-12.gif

Imagine if the Democrats offered Republicans a deficit deal that had more than $3 in tax increases for every $1 in spending cuts, assigned most of those spending cuts to the Pentagon, and didn’t take a dime from Social Security, Medicaid or Medicare beneficiaries. Republicans would laugh at them. But without quite realizing it, that’s the deal Republicans have now offered to the Democrats.

In August, Republicans scored what they thought was a big win by persuading Democrats to accept a trigger that consisted only of spending cuts. The price they paid was 1) concentrating the cuts on the Pentagon while exempting Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare beneficiaries, and 2) delaying the cuts until January 1, 2013. That was, they figured, a win, as it eschewed taxes. Grover Norquist’s pledge remained unbroken.

But 12 years earlier, George W. Bush had set a trigger of his own. In order to pass his tax cuts using the 51-vote budget reconciliation process, he had agreed to let them sunset in 2010. A last-minute deal extended them until the end of 2012.

So now there are two triggers. One is an extremely progressive spending trigger worth $1.2 trillion that goes off on January 1, 2013. The other is an extremely progressive tax trigger worth $3.8 trillion that goes off on…January 1, 2013. If you count reduced interest payments, the two policies alone would reduce future deficits by about $6 trillion. That’s far more than anything the supercommittee came close to discussing. It’s distributed far more progressively than anything the Democrats have even considered proposing. And all that needs to happen for it to pass is, well, nothing.

Republicans can’t stop these triggers on their own. They need Senate Democrats and President Obama to join them in passing an alternative, or they need House and Senate Democrats to join them in overturning President Obama’s veto of their alternative. So the only way for Republicans to avoid this dual-trigger nightmare is to somehow convince Democrats to bail them out. And for that, they have two points of leverage.

The first is political: Democrats don’t want to raise $3.8 trillions in taxes, much of which will fall on middle-class households. Already, Democrats have said that their preference is to make the the Bush tax cuts for income under $250,000 permanent. That means making 80 percent of them permanent.

Continue reading »

Obama’s Budget

Sourced from Campaign for America’s Future

Obama’s Budget: The Good, The Meager And The Ugly

By Robert Borosage
February 15, 2012 – 7:12am ET

President Obama’s budget, dismissed as “dead on arrival,” by Republicans in Washington, is widely described as a political document, designed to highlight the choices facing Americans this fall in dry budgetary numbers. The president presents Americans with a series of common sense propositions – all of which Republicans reject. Yet if the president captures high ground along the way, he leaves us, in the end, near the same uninhabitable place that conservatives would take us.

The common sense propositions proposed by the president include:

1. Priority to Jobs and Growth

With slow growth and over 20 million Americans still in need of full-time work, the President gives priority to jobs and growth in the short run, over austerity and deficit reduction. He calls for sustaining the payroll tax cut, extending unemployment insurance, funds to keep teachers and cops and fire fighters on the job, a relatively small $50 billion infrastructure boost, and a Jobs Corps for veterans. Republicans rail against the spending and deficits, although bludgeoned by bad poll numbers, they have acceded to extending the payroll tax cut.

2. A New Foundation for Economy

With no way back to the old economy, built on debt and bubbles, inequality and middle class decline, the President calls for creating a new foundation for sustainable growth – “an economy built to last.” So he calls for rebuilding our infrastructure, investing in science and technology, and new initiatives to train workers, educate children and make college more affordable. Republicans scorn these long overdue, and in fact inadequate steps, as “more spending,” and pronounce them dead on delivery.

3. Protect Basic Security

With Social Security in surplus and not adding to the deficit, and Medicare and Medicaid providing the most vulnerable with essential health services, the president sensibly protects the basic security programs. He would save money by allowing Medicaid to negotiate bulk discounts for prescription drugs. He trims some spending. He also pushes forward with health care reform, which contains several measures to help contain soaring health care costs. Republicans would repeal heath care reform and end Medicare and Medicaid as we know them, effecting deep cuts in the programs, leaving the most vulnerable to pick up the costs. Mitt Romney calls for cutting Social Security by raising the retirement age. Given that they won’t raise taxes or cut the military, Republicans have no choice but to carve deep cuts out of the programs that are an essential pillar of family security.

4. The Rich Pay a Fairer Share

With revenues to the federal government near record lows as a percentage of the economy (GDP), inequality at Gilded Age extremes, and the wealthy and corporations paying shamelessly low effective tax rates (as illustrated by Mitt Romney’s 14% rate, or General Electric paying nothing in taxes), the president would include progressive taxes as part of reducing our deficits. He would let the Bush tax cuts expire for those earning over $250,000, put a minimum tax of 30% on those earning over a million, tax the income from wealth at the same rate as the income from work for those earning over $250,000, close some corporate loopholes, ask the banks to pick up a small part of the tab for the mess they’ve created. Republicans, of course, have taken a blood oath to oppose tax increases on anyone at any time.

5. A Lid on Military Spending

With Bin Laden dead, al Qaeda dispersed, and troops coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan, the president proposes essentially to freeze core military spending over the next five years, and use the savings from ending the wars to invest at home and to help reduce the deficits. Republicans are divided on military spending, but most, led by Mitt Romney and Sen. John McCain, decry the freeze as irresponsible, and demand the military budget continue to rise.

6. Big Banks, China and the Law

With no serious investigation of or accountability from the big banks for the pervasive fraud that accompanied the financial wilding, the President calls for modest funds to augment attorneys and agents staffing the new investigative task force. With the trade deficit with China reaching simply obscene extremes, he also calls for funding a small trade unit to enforce our trade laws. Republicans, of course, want to repeal the bank reforms passed after the financial collapse. They, like Democrats, split over getting tough with China, but their leadership in the House blocks measures that would challenge Chinese currency violations from ever coming to a vote.

Help for jobs and the economy in the short run, investments vital to our future, asking the rich and the Pentagon to share in helping to reduce our deficits, doing something about holding banks and China accountable – this is just common sense. It is a testament to how extreme Republicans have become that they obstruct it.

No Way Out

But ironically, the president ends near up where Republicans are at the end of the day – in a place where the American Dream cannot survive. To get the deficit down to a sustainable level by 2020, the president and his Republican opponents would savage the domestic “discretionary” budget – spending on education, child nutrition, clean energy, job training, environmental protection, affordable housing, as well as the Justice Department, the FBI and more. In both the Republican House plans and the president plans, the entire domestic discretionary budget will be reduced to less than 2% of GDP. The poor will take the biggest hit, but the result will be devastating to our economic prospects.

Because Republicans won’t raise taxes on anyone and oppose cuts in the military budget, they have little choice but to lay waste to domestic programs and slash spending on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Because he is prepared to advocate modest top end tax hikes and freeze the Pentagon’s budget, the President can protect these vital programs, but still must devastate domestic programs.

In fact these are the programs vital for reviving the economy and rebuilding the American Dream. One in two Americans is now in a low-income household. Only about one in three young Americans will complete a college education. Our decaying infrastructure not only hurts competitively, it costs lives.

If we want to compete globally with a high end economy and a broad middle class, we have insure that every child gets adequate nutrition, world class education, advanced job training and access to affordable college. We have to invest in science and technology, build a modern infrastructure, make the transition to clean energy and capture a lead in the green industrial revolution that will be the markets of the future.

A fierce argument can take place on how to do this – but it can’t be done on the cheap. And neither the president’s common sense nor the Republican’s inanity gets us close to where we need to go. Progressives have to challenge the limits of this debate — and that will take a movement.

What Is The Real Agenda Of The Budget-Cutters?

Sourced from:  OurFuture.org

By Dave Johnson

February 23, 2011 – 2:59pm ET

What is the real agenda of the budget-cutters? Are they really trying to bring the country back from the edge of financial ruin? Or did they bring about the appearance of a borrowing crisis to create a public panic that enables them to impose “solutions” that change the very nature of our country — while doing little about the borrowing?

In the news this week, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker “ginned up” a budget crisis, then introduced legislation that removes collective bargaining rights from public employees, and over time effectively destroys their unions. Similar measures have been introduced by Republican governors or legislatures in several other states.

This legislative attack on public employees follows more than a year of “preparing the ground” with a coordinated campaign from conservative organizations to convince the public that public employees are overpaid and that their pensions are “bankrupting” state governments — not the effects of the recession.

In the news soon, the coming strategic “shutdown” of the federal government by Republicans. After decades of forcing through tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, again and again — most recently just a few weeks ago — Republicans and corporate conservatives are engaged in a national campaign promoting the belief that there is a “deficit crisis.” Their solutions involve gutting the things government does for We, the People like consumer, health, safety, labor and financial, retirement and income protections, while keeping things the government does for corporations and the wealthy “off the table.”

We see variations of the same formula over and over. Here is how it works:

1) Cut taxes for the rich and corporations (corporate stock is mostly owned by the top 1%); big deficits result.
2) Claim a deficit emergency and use their domination of corporate-owned media to whip the public into a panic, creating the appearance of demand for corporate-approved “solutions.” Manipulate the appearance of consensus.
3) With taxes and military “off the table” push through cuts in the things government does for We, the People.

Repeat as often as needed to create a plutocracy.

Today’s “debt crisis” is the culmination of the long-term “starve the beast” strategy from an organized corporate-conservative movement. By cutting taxes for the wealthy they have starved the government, created massive debt (guess where the interest payments go) gutted the infrastructure, and put our country on the road to third-world status. This conservative movement has an agenda, and is not interested in working out “bipartisan” compromised.

In an example in the news this week, a hoax call, purported to be from David Koch, one of the billionaire-industrialists helping fund the conservative movement and major funder of efforts to make it appear that Wisconsin is having a budget crisis. In the hoax call, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker clearly understands that he and Koch are in engaged a joint effort, describing a Democratic Senator who could work with him as “not one of us.”

Koch: Now you’re not talking to any of these Democrat bastards, are you?

Walker: Ah, I—there’s one guy that’s actually voted with me on a bunch of things I called on Saturday for about 45 minutes, mainly to tell him that while I appreciate his friendship and he’s worked with us on other things, to tell him I wasn’t going to budge.

Koch: Goddamn right!

Walker: …his name is Tim Cullen—

Koch: All right, I’ll have to give that man a call.

Walker: Well, actually, in his case I wouldn’t call him and I’ll tell you why: he’s pretty reasonable but he’s not one of us…

Elsewhere in the call Walker and faux-Koch talk about whether “planting troublemakers” would “work” or not.

In another example of the self-awareness of this strategy: On public radio’s Marketplace, February 22 Vincent Vernuccio of the Koch/conservative movement/corporate front-group Competitive Enterprise Institute discusses how the real agenda of the state actions is to destroy unions and their ability to fight corporate power politically, not to solve budget problems. (Note, he was not identified on the show as funded by conservative/corporate interests and Koch.)

VINCENT VERNUCCIO: Union bosses want to inflate these budgets so they can get more members, so they can get more dues. And in turn, they take that dues money they have and give it to politicians who are going to give them more favors in the future.

Several states are considering bills that would allow workers to opt-out of a union. Again, Vincent Vernuccio.

VERNUCCIO: The main focus of this isn’t just the budget cuts. It’s actually giving workers the right to say no to the union if they so choose.

Professor Bruno also sees broader implications for the debate. Since union money helps support the Democratic party, he argues changes in collective bargaining could shake up the political landscape far beyond the Midwest.

These are just two small examples, in the news on the same day, showing the difference between the public pronouncements of concern for the country and a private agenda to fool the country. It is one thing when responsible leaders disagree on the best way to solve the country’s real problems. It is quite another thing when organized wealth pursues a strategy to scare the country into handing over our remaining wealth and power.

The Gop’s Hooey To America

washpost.com

By Eugene Robinson

Friday, September 24, 2010

The Republicans were doing pretty well as the Party of No. So why did they decide to rebrand themselves as the Party of Nonsense?

All right, I’m being slightly disingenuous. Inquiring minds demanded to know just what the GOP proposed to do if voters entrusted it with control of one or both houses of Congress. But if the “Pledge to America” unveiled Thursday is the best that House Republicans can come up with, they’d have been better off continuing to froth and foam about “creeping socialism” while stonewalling on specifics.

The problem with the pledge is that the numbers don’t remotely add up. The document is such a jumble of contradictions that it’s hard to imagine how it could possibly pass muster with anyone who survived eighth-grade arithmetic — unless, perhaps, the Republicans have something in mind that they’re not prepared to talk about quite yet.

The pledge bills itself as a plan to “create jobs, end economic uncertainty, and make America more competitive.” These sound like worthy initiatives, but the GOP also promises to “stop out-of-control spending and reduce the size of government.” Most economists would contend that right now, given the level of economic distress throughout the nation, those goals are mutually exclusive. No matter, I suppose, since the pledge wouldn’t really do either.

Continue reading »

The Gop Breaks Its ‘Pledge To America’

By Dana Milbank

Thursday, September 23, 2010; 5:07 PM

In a lumber yard near Dulles International Airport Thursday morning, House Republicans handed out copies of their pledge, which, among other things, promises to rein in an “arrogant and out-of-touch government of self-appointed elites.”

Yet moments after taking the stage to face the cameras, Republican leaders appointed themselves arrogant elites. They compared themselves to the founding fathers and likened their actions at Tart Lumber Co. to the signing of the Declaration of Independence in Philadelphia.

Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) told the reporters he would speak slowly and with clarity, “just as John Hancock boldly signed his name to the Declaration of Independence so even Britain’s King George could read it.”

Continue reading »

Republicans Demand a Government Takeover and Bailout of the Oil Spill

June 1, 2010

By Bob Cesca

from the Huffington Post.

The words “government takeover” were originally injected into the discourse by Frank Luntz in the early stages of the health care reform process and have been repeated in the pejorative sense by Republicans across the board.

Despite the fact that thousands of Americans die every month from a lack of affordable health insurance, the Republicans have argued that the government isn’t allowed to “takeover” the industry. It goes without saying that the president wasn’t proposing any such thing and, in fact, publicly denounced single-payer health insurance, but okay. The Republicans truly believe the health care reform bill is socialism and a total takeover of the industry. It’s not.

Likewise, the Republicans and tea party people have been screeching about the bailouts. They insist that the banks and financial institutions (and GM) should have been allowed to fail, rather than receiving emergency loans from the government in order to, at the time, prevent the American economy from being dragged down along with these institutions had they not been hoisted with an infusion of cash.

Continue reading »

We Have a Winner! Sarah Palin’s “Death Panel” Fallacy Named “Lie of the Year”

Posted by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly at 3:30 PM on December 22, 2009.

The award was bequeathed by Politifact, an independent fact-checker.

blogimage_palin2_thumbs_600x413_thumbs_200x138.jpg

THE POOR WOMAN CAN’T HELP HERSELF…. Just yesterday, Politifact’s independent fact-checking feature announced its “Lie of the Year.” It was a fairly obvious choice, but nevertheless well deserved — the ignoble award went to former half-term Gov. Sarah Palin (R).

“The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care,” Palin wrote over the summer, in her award-winning missive.

It was one of the stupidest things ever written by anyone on any subject. It also cemented Palin’s reputation as a crazy person with an acute allergy to the truth.

Just one day after her deranged “death panel” nonsense was named the “Lie of the Year,” Palin decided to raise the specter of her insane accusation all over again.

“NOW w/the Prez “threatening” &Congress “rushing” is when we MUST pay more attention than ever 2what this HealthCare Takeover is all about,” Palin wrote in one tweet. “[M]erged bill may b unrecognizable from what assumed was a done deal:R death panels back in?”

To translate this into English, the former half-term governor believes President Obama is “threatening” someone — she wasn’t clear on who — while lawmakers are “rushing.” Given that the health care reform debate lasted nearly as long as Palin’s entire tenure as governor, it’s hard to believe the process really has been “rushed.”

Nevertheless, she believes it’s important that “we” carefully scrutinize what the “takeover is all about.” Who, exactly, is taking over what is, alas, still unclear.

She goes on to suggest the conference report may be “unrecognizable” from the legislation, and “death panels” — which never existed in our reality — may be “back in” after the White House’s intervention.

As Alex Koppelman put it, “[B]ecause Democrats are just dying to sneak in a provision that would allow them to kill your loved ones.”

Any chance she’s a performance artist, making a bold statement about the intellectual bankruptcy of modern-day conservatives?


Steve Benen is “blogger in chief” of the popular Washington Monthly online blog, Political Animal. His background includes publishing The Carpetbagger Report, and writing for a variety of publications, including Talking Points Memo, The American Prospect, the Huffington Post, and The Guardian. He has also appeared on NPR’s “Talk of the Nation,” MSNBC’s “Rachel Maddow Show,” Air America Radio’s “Sam Seder Show,” and XM Radio’s “POTUS ’08.”

The Time for GOP Shenanigans on Health Care Is Over, Now It’s Up to the Dems — Will They Deliver a Public Option?

Posted by Kos , Daily Kos at 4:34 PM on October 1, 2009.

Will it be a robust public option, or some piece of crap? Time will tell, but at least we have a fighting chance with Democrats monopolizing the process.

Republicans have been whining recently about being shut out of the drafting of health care reform legislation.
President Obama has cut off communication with Republican leaders, going more than four months without hosting the bipartisan congressional leadership at the White House to discuss his health care proposal, the No. 2 Republican in the House said Wednesday.
Maybe that has something to with the fact that Republicans have made clear that as many concessions as Obama was willing to make, Republicans didn’t have a single one of their own. Not one. There was nothing Democrats could do to get GOP support. They simply wouldn’t vote for anything remotely infringing on the insurance companies’ ability to screw patients over.
Satisfying every Republican demand short of scrapping the entire project, said Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), would still not capture GOP support.
“Senator Kyl and some of the others have talked about some of the things that are happening in committee,” McConnell told reporters, referring to Senate Finance Committee Republican Jon Kyl of Arizona.
“But the core point is this: At the end of the day, if the government plan is either in the bill or out of the bill, whether they will be able to argue successfully or not whether tax funds are gonna be provided for abortion, whether or not they will be able to argue at the end that dollars for health care for illegals is in or out, what we do know is what the core of the bill is going to look like. We know that for sure,” he said.
So they’re not willing to make concessions, they’re not willing to vote for anything, make up outrageous lies about killing grandmothers, and then they whine about being cut out of the process? The only frustration has been Democrats’ insistence on making something work. Cantor may not be getting any phone calls from the White House, but Olympia Snowe is now co-president, and don’t get me started on Max Baucus.
But it looks as Republicans are pretty much finished. Democratic patience has run out.
Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin said today Republicans will not be at the table when the Senate merges the health-care bills from two committees before sending one to the floor.
Harkin, a Democrat and chairman of one of the committees, also said any bill that passes Congress will include a government-run insurance option for Americans to buy.
“We will have a bill on the president’s desk before Christmas, a health-reform bill. It will have a lot of good stuff in it. It will have a lot of prevention and wellness programs in there that I’ve been fighting for,” Harkin told reporters in a morning conference call. “And it will have a public option.”
“The question of if it doesn’t isn’t even an option,” he added [...]
Asked whether Republicans would be at the table when Harkin’s committee’s bill is merged with legislation pending in the Senate Finance Committee, Harkin said no.
“No, this will be a proposal by the Democrats to bring a bill on the floor. And that’s what I have said before, that the people of this country — I keep saying — the people of this country pretty overwhelmingly elected Barack Obama last fall and to make changes,” he said. “The people of this country overwhelmingly elected Democrats to the House and Senate.”
Definitely progress. Will it be a robust public option, or some piece of crap? Time will tell, but at least we have a fighting chance with Democrats monopolizing the process. The time for GOP shenanigans is over (including Olympia Snowe’s games). This will be a Democratic bill, so scrap all idiotic compromises trying to bring GOP support along, and draft the best possible bill. Then twist some arms to get the 60 Democrats to vote for cloture, even if a bunch defect on the final vote. This is the reason Obama and Reid told us we had to tolerate Lieberman. Time to deliver.

Kos is the blogmaster of Daily Kos

Where’s Obama the Populist?

whitehousewatchbanner.jpg

Barack Obama campaigned as a champion of the little guy — and kicked off his presidency on decidedly populist notes. The marquee event of inauguration night was a “neighborhood ball” open to everyday Americans. The next morning, the president and first lady welcomed people off the street into their new home for an open house.

But as Obama takes on the enormous challenge of trying to right a perilously listing economy, he seems to be abandoning at least some of that populism in an attempt not to upset Republicans and Wall Street.

whhoneywell250.jpg

Obama shakes hands with Honeywell Chief Executive Officer Dave Cote yesterday. (AP Photo/Ron Edmonds)

In his first days, Obama has spent more time jawing with — and making concessions to — Republicans than Democrats. His photo ops are with corporate CEOs, not labor leaders or laid-off workers. His senior economic team represents the dominant Wall Street culture, and is apparently considering a financial rescue plan that will most directly help the same fat cats who gave themselves more than 
$18 billion in bonuses last year, even as they tanked the economy. Despite dramatic new ethics policies, Obama is peppering his administration with lobbyists. And he appears to be in no hurry to repeal Bush’s tax cuts for the rich.

At the same time, the Obama team is eschewing even the easiest appeals to populism, responding with discreet pressure rather than more public outrage earlier this week when it was revealed that executives at Citibank — who received a $45 billion infusion of tax dollars — were buying a $50 million corporate jet.

And what does Obama have to show for all this outreach and restraint? So far, not much. He got his stimulus bill passed in the House yesterday — but without a single GOP vote.

My Live Online audience yesterday was in high dudgeon about Obama’s concessions on the stimulus bill — first loading it up with business tax cuts, then bowing to GOP pressure and cutting funding for family planning and the restoration of the Mall. Continue reading »

Why Obama Has Pulled Ahead on Taxes and Economic Issues

By Mark Weisbrot, AlterNet. Posted October 25, 2008.

Republicans push policies that redistribute income from working and middle-class Americans to the rich. No wonder people are turning to Obama.

Senator Barack Obama’s campaign for the White House pulled ahead of his opponent, Senator John McCain, as soon as the current financial crisis hit the headlines. As one of McCain’s top strategists recently blurted out, “If we keep talking about the economic crisis, we’re going to lose.”

There’s a reason for this well-established trend that the Democrats tend to win among those who vote on economic issues. Although both parties are subject to undue influence from powerful corporate interests, the Republicans have been much more consistent in advocating government policies that redistribute income from working and middle-class Americans to the rich. They are also much less friendly to the most important government programs that insure people against economic catastrophe, such as Social Security and Medicare. Continue reading »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.