Showing posts with label stimulus plan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stimulus plan. Show all posts

Monday, February 21, 2011

(Updated with video ) "The Coming Shutdowns and Showdowns: What’s Really at Stake"


UPDATE: Richard Wolff looks at this issue from another angle: He asks does "stimulus" work and who should pay when it doesn't, truthout, video, (05:12)?

Robert Reich:
So the problem isn't that "we've" been spending too much. It's that most Americans have been getting a steadily smaller share of the nation's total income.

At the same time, the super-rich have been contributing a steadily-declining share of their own incomes in taxes to support what the nation needs -- both at the federal and at the state levels.

The coming showdowns and shutdowns must not mask what's going on. Democrats should make sure the public understands what's really at stake.

Yes, of course, wasteful and unnecessary spending should be cut. That means much of the defense budget, along with agricultural subsidies and other forms of corporate welfare. MORE...

Monday, September 20, 2010

"The Wrong Tax Cut Debate"

E. J. Dionne:
In any athletic contest, winning teams play their own game and force the other side to play that game, too. The same being true in elections, it's remarkable how timidity leads Democrats to fight this year's campaign on Republican terms.

Nowhere is this more obvious than on taxes, where the entire debate revolves around what to do about the cuts enacted under George W. Bush. Almost no one is talking about extending the progressive tax cuts that were included in President Obama's stimulus program. Nor are we discussing the impending death of a pro-work public assistance program that, for a rather modest sum, has helped provide jobs to 250,000 low-income Americans. MORE...

Friday, September 03, 2010

Obama's "Stimulus Lite"

HuffPo:
THIS (EARLY) MORNING'S FRONT PAGE HEADLINE: "White House Recovery Package Heavy On Business Tax Breaks, Jobs An Afterthought." The headline links to "White House considers pre-midterm package of business tax breaks to spur hiring" (WaPo).
Meanwhile, Krugman pleads for "bold and substantive" measures "since the Republicans will oppose him regardless."

Howie P.S.: Sorry, Paul.

Monday, July 12, 2010

Today's Helpful Thoughts for Democrats from Greg Sargent


Greg Sargent:
* But let's cut through the B.S.: How much will action on energy and even unemployment matter if the economy remains in the tank, which looks more likely now that Dems are giving up on more stimulus spending?

* And absent such action, why would Dems get enthusiastic about this fall, no matter how many times Robert Gibbs warns that there's "no doubt" that the GOP could take the House?

* While we're at it: Wouldn't voters like it if Dems continued pushing for big action on the economy, even if there's no chance of success, rather than throwing in the towel in advance, which accomplishes nothing?

Howie P.S.: The Dems seem to believe there's no point in "playing" each game if you don't have a good chance of winning. Is politics like the World Cup or is it more like a long battle where there are benefits to be gained from "suiting up every day"? If you hate sports analogies, feel free to suggest your own.

Sunday, July 11, 2010

"After Unemployment Extension, White House Shutting Down Stimulus Efforts" (with video)


David Dayen (FDL), with video from ABCNews (08:41):
David Axelrod appeared on This Week and acknowledged that the Administration has little chance of getting anything beyond an extension of unemployment benefits through Congress between now and the election. That extension would appear to have 60 votes whenever Robert Byrd’s replacement gets into the Senate. But that jobs bill that had all the tax extensions and infrastructure funding and summer job money? Forget it. Aid to state Medicaid programs? Isn’t going to happen. Extending the COBRA subsidy to keep the jobless covered? Nope. MORE...

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

One vote short: Menendez is first Obama dissenter on budget vote

WaPo, page one:
Democrats Stung by Dissenters--Unity on Agenda Eludes Party Leaders. Democratic leaders in Congress did not expect much Republican support as they pressed President Obama's ambitious legislative agenda. But the pushback they are receiving from some of their own has come as an unwelcome surprise.
As the Senate inches closer to approving a $410 billion spending bill, the internal revolt has served as a warning to party leaders pursuing Obama's far-reaching plans for health-care, energy and education reform.

Those goals, spelled out in Obama's 2010 budget blueprint, continue to enjoy broad Democratic support. But as the ideas develop into detailed legislation, they will transform from abstract objectives into a tangle of difficult trade-offs. Crop subsidies, the student loan program and Medicare radiology rules are all currently niche concerns, but any one could become the next crisis for party leaders, with the potential to derail a major agenda item. One major proposal, to limit itemized deductions for wealthy taxpayers, has already raised doubts among prominent Democrats in both chambers.

Some issues that inflamed Democrats in previous years have yet to even register, including the proposal in Obama's budget plan to "means-test" the Medicare drug benefit as a way to pay for health-care reform. Doling out entitlement benefits based on income has long been anathema to most Democrats.

"There are a lot of items in the budget that would normally get a lot more attention, if we were in a normal year," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who heads the House Democrats' fundraising arm. "They've been eclipsed by the tidal wave of the economy." But Van Hollen added: "They are waiting in the wings."

Democrats rejected four GOP amendments to the omnibus spending bill last night, and they will face more today. The additional amendments are the price that Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) was forced to pay Thursday night after he sought to bring an end to debate on the bill and came up one vote short. Several Republicans whose support Reid had anticipated did not deliver, but the most costly defection was that of Sen. Robert Menendez (N.J.), a member of the Democratic leadership, in protest of a little-noticed Cuba provision that would ease U.S. rules on travel and imports to the communist-led island.

The Menendez rebellion was a jolt of political reality for Reid, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Obama, signaling that the solidarity of the stimulus debate is fading as Democratic lawmakers are starting to read the fine print of the bills they will wrestle with in the coming weeks and months, and not always liking what they see.

Reid had been focused on fending off a bloc of conservative Republicans who were seeking to eliminate more than 8,500 pet projects in the bill, many of them inserted by GOP lawmakers. Democratic leaders were hearing some internal grumblings, but those concerns focused largely on the bill's hefty overall price tag.

Menendez knew that his hard-line approach to Cuba was a minority view within his party, and that it was at odds with Obama's approach. But he did not expect to discover a significant policy change embedded in the text on an appropriations bill. His policy aides came across the language when the legislation was posted on a congressional Web site.

"The process by which these changes have been forced upon this body is so deeply offensive to me, and so deeply undemocratic, that it puts the omnibus appropriations package in jeopardy, in spite of all the other tremendously important funding that this bill would provide," the enraged son of Cuban immigrants said last week on the Senate floor. Menendez even slapped a hold on a pair of Obama nominees to draw attention to the issue.

Treasury officials, working with Reid's office, continued yesterday to search for an administrative resolution with Menendez that would ensure a narrow interpretation of the legislative language in order to prevent gaping loopholes from developing. Menendez has pointed out that, had the bill sought significant changes in U.S. policy toward Iran or Venezuela, lawmakers would revolt. "What's the difference with Cuba?" said Menendez spokesman Afshin Mohamadi.

By allowing Republicans to offer a total of 11 amendments last night and today, Reid was hopeful that GOP support for the bill would grow and he would not need his New Jersey colleague's vote when the bill comes to a final vote, which is expected today.

Already, a pair of provisions in Obama's budget have attracted determined, if limited, Democratic opposition. One proposal would overhaul the federal student loan program to guarantee yearly increases in the Pell Grant program. That idea enjoys broad Democratic support. But to pay for the Pell Grant expansion, Obama would end federal support for private lending. And one of the major corporate providers of student loans is NelNet, a company based in Lincoln, Neb., the home state of Sen. Ben Nelson, a moderate Democrat who balked at the stimulus package and teamed up with three moderate Republicans to cut $100 billion from the final bill. Cutting off support for NelNet would cost Nebraska about 1,000 jobs, according to Nelson's office. Nelson said the move could hurt middle-class students who do not qualify for Pell Grants. "I don't support anything that could reduce those benefits," Nelson said.

Nelson is also one of several Democrats who have objected to changes Obama has proposed in the farm subsidy system. By stopping direct payments to farms with annual sales of more than $500,000, the White House expects to save about $10 billion over 10 years. But along with Nelson, another Democratic opponent of Obama's annual-sales model is Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (N.D.).

Similar revolts are building against tax changes Obama has proposed, including one to limit deductions that many Democrats privately consider to be a non-starter. Climate-change legislation is months away from emerging, but some Democrats already worry about the political consequences of creating a cap-and-trade system that could result in higher utility bills. Some House Democrats have floated the issue of tariffs on foreign companies -- potentially an explosive trade issue -- to equalize the cost of a carbon cap.

Obama's proposal for Medicare means testing has received surprisingly little attention so far, beyond plaudits from Republicans who have supported the idea for years. The debate over an income scale was especially heated when Congress created the Medicare drug benefit, known as Part D, during President George W. Bush's first term. As a senator, Obama voted against a Medicare means-testing proposal in March 2007.
But times have changed, said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), who also voted no two years ago. The growing consensus among Democrats that health-care costs must be contained, and that coverage must be expanded to everyone, has redrawn the battle lines. "In the past, we've dealt with Part D on its own, and that tends to be polarizing. So the thought here is, that's much less likely if people think we're all in this together," Baucus said.

Saturday, March 07, 2009

"Obama in Columbus, Ohio talking about the unemployment numbers and stimulus package" (video and transcript)

MSNBC, video (10:04). Here's the transcript.

Howie P.S.: Howard Fineman joins Keith Olbermann to discuss "Economy on slippery slope," video (08:19).

Friday, March 06, 2009

"Stimulus Spending by State"

Wall Street Journal:
Government departments have started to announce how some of the major spending in the stimulus legislation will be shared among the states. About one-sixth of the money in the bill has been allocated so far. Mouse over a state for details, or sort the rows in the chart here.

Monday, February 23, 2009

"CLEAN TECH SCORES WITH STIMULUS" (video)

Evergreen Film, with video (03:32):
What’s NOT controversial about the new economic stimulus package is its extraordinary support for clean technologies and green jobs.
Howie P.S.: Jay Inslee narrates this video about the green energy funding in the stimulus bill that was signed into law last week.

Saturday, February 21, 2009

Morning Joe: "From everybody I've talked to, Howard Dean comes closer to a common sense approach to get us out of this mess" (video)

Howard Dean: "I cringe," but stimulus a 'good something to do' ("Morning Joe"-MSNBC, video-05:21).

Friday, February 20, 2009

Howard Dean: GOP stuck back in 1994 on stimulus response (video)

MSNBC, video (07:03).

Howie P.S.: John Nichols, writing in The Nation, gives the progressive seal of approval to the idea of Sibelius @ HHS.

Thursday, February 19, 2009

"Map Of Potential High-Speed Rail Built By The Stimulus" (with graphic)

Think Progress:
After much clamoring by energy hawks, who knows what it was that finally brought high-speed rail to the stimulus -- perhaps a little nudge from ol' Amtrak Joe? -- but it got in, to the tune of $8 billion.

And now the question is, where will the expansion be? Matthew Yglesias reports on possible new high speed rail expansion:

In a last-minute change, the total quantity of funds available was increased. But there's no special plan for Las Vegas. The money will be spread all across the country. As it happens, I think an LA-Vegas HSR line is a perfectly reasonable project. But in practice the areas that will get a leg up should be the Federal Railroad Administration's officially designated high-speed rail corridors. As it happens, LA-Vegas doesn't make the cut. But guess who does have such a corridor? Ohio!
Howie P.S: H/t to Gus Gravot.

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Daniel Schorr: Doing change "in the dark of night" (with audio)


NPR, with audio (02:31)
Signing his stimulus package in Denver on Tuesday, President Barack Obama spoke of lifting 2 million Americans from poverty into the middle class.

Until he had his bill, he talked little of poverty, preferring to cite benefits for middle class families, those struggling to pay tuition fees, and those who have lost jobs through no fault of their own. He did not make a point of the fact that the plan contains large benefits for the poor in the form of food stamps, services for the homeless, expanded Medicaid coverage and housing allowances.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities tells me that the number of people living in poverty has reached 37.3 million and is growing. But poverty has become the great no-no in political discourse, associated with that other frowned-upon word: welfare.

It was not that way in the Depression of the 1930s, when President Roosevelt spoke of rescuing the "one-third of a nation" who suffered in poverty. And in the 1960s, President Johnson launched a war on poverty, which left us with permanent institutions like Head Start and community health centers.

But President Reagan scored political points by mocking the war on poverty as a war that poverty won. Since then, the Clinton administration made some big changes in welfare, and the Bush administration made some small ones.

During the recent presidential campaign, we heard a lot from the candidates about aiding the middle class. But not so much, if anything, about aiding the persistent poor. Clearly, if the Obama administration wants to do something about repairing the social safety net, it will have to be done quietly.
So now, one can see signs of social policy development lurking behind the economic shock treatment. Conservative think tanks are watching carefully, suspecting that, in the dark of night, new entitlements are being created. But maybe that's the way they do change these days.
Howie P.S.: Another version of pragmatism is at work here.

"ON THE ORIGIN OF REPUBLICANS" (graphic)

R.J. Matson, St Louis Post-Dispatch.

Wednesday Roundup (excerpts, with video)

"Inside the Meltdown" (Frontline-PBS, video-56:23):
On Thursday, Sept. 18, 2008, the astonished leadership of the U.S. Congress was told in a private session by the chairman of the Federal Reserve that the American economy was in grave danger of a complete meltdown within a matter of days. "There was literally a pause in that room where the oxygen left," says Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.).
"Dem ‘family politics’ blocks Dean at HHS" (The Hill):
“I would question whether Dean would be able to reach across the aisle to work with Republicans,” said one Democratic senator. “The debate over the stimulus shows that you’re not going to be able to ram something as big as healthcare reform through without bipartisanship.”
"Ending the Hidden Agenda Behind Tax Cuts" (truthout):
The progress of our nation is being held hostage by a malicious metaphor. Treating taxation as nothing more than a burden is tantamount to declaring that citizenship is nothing more than getting all you can for yourself … everyone else be damned. Conservative elites have undermined the responsibilities we have to one another to advance their agenda. They are fully committed to crafting the world in their image, as we've seen all too clearly these last eight years and throughout the current debate about economic recovery under the Obama administration.
"Good Money After Bad" (Robert Scheer-Truthdig):
The Republican-engineered controversy around the stimulus is a phony.

The stimulus package that President Obama signed into law Tuesday is a modest effort, actually too modest, at arresting the free fall of the American economy. It’s just not that expensive in light of the dimensions of the economic crisis, most of it is quite conservatively aimed at tax cuts for a suffering public and bailouts for beleaguered state programs, and it pales in comparison with the trillions wasted on the bloated military budget during the Bush years.
"Obama OKs 17,000 more Afghanistan troops" (AP):
President Barack Obama approved adding some 17,000 U.S. troops for the flagging war in Afghanistan, his first significant move to change the course of a conflict that his closest military advisers have warned the United States is not winning.

"This increase is necessary to stabilize a deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, which has not received the strategic attention, direction and resources it urgently requires," Obama said in a statement.

That was a slap at his predecessor, George W. Bush, whom Obama has accused of slighting urgent national security needs in Afghanistan in favor of war in Iraq.
"Obama's Justice: Reconciliation, Not Retribution" (truthout):
For starters, the Obama administration has taken as its primary goal the mission of reconciliation, not retribution. Although his efforts have been thus far frustrated by a small but dogmatic segment of the Republican Party, Obama is, in the truest sense, a unifier. It is simply not the style - politically or personally - of this president to seek the same sort of "justice" desired by the pitchfork-wielding villagers. In the mind of this president (I imagine, anyway) emphasis on punishing wrongdoers runs the risk - especially in this very politically contentious climate - of only promoting divisions and inflaming precisely the wrong emotions necessary for a culture of healing - namely, anger, hostility and the desire for vengeance. To wit: one caller to a progressive radio show stated (apparently oblivious to the irony) that "Bush should be publicly shamed." Surely this person - and others like him - do not seriously believe that the appropriate response to the culture of imp unity we've been subject to for the past eight years is the subsequent creation of a culture of retribution.
"Obama’s War on Terror May Resemble Bush’s in Some Areas" (NY Times):
Even as it pulls back from harsh interrogations and other sharply debated aspects of George W. Bush’s “war on terrorism,” the Obama administration is quietly signaling continued support for other major elements of its predecessor’s approach to fighting Al Qaeda.

In little-noticed confirmation testimony recently, Obama nominees endorsed continuing the C.I.A.’s program of transferring prisoners to other countries without legal rights, and indefinitely detaining terrorism suspects without trials even if they were arrested far from a war zone.

The administration has also embraced the Bush legal team’s arguments that a lawsuit by former C.I.A. detainees should be shut down based on the “state secrets” doctrine. It has also left the door open to resuming military commission trials.
"How Banks Are Worsening the Foreclosure Crisis" (Business Week, with video-02:06):
The Obama Administration is expected within the next few weeks to announce an initiative of $50 billion or more to help strapped homeowners. But with 1 million residences having fallen into foreclosure since 2006, and an additional 5.9 million expected over the next four years, the Obama plan—whatever its details—can't possibly do the job by itself. Lenders and investors will have to acknowledge huge losses and figure out how to keep recession-wracked borrowers making at least some monthly payments.

So far the industry hasn't shown that kind of foresight. One reason foreclosures are so rampant is that banks and their advocates in Washington have delayed, diluted, and obstructed attempts to address the problem. Industry lobbyists are still at it today, working overtime to whittle down legislation backed by President Obama that would give bankruptcy courts the authority to shrink mortgage debt. Lobbyists say they will fight to restrict the types of loans the bankruptcy proposal covers and new powers granted to judges.
Howie P.S.: If you look at nothing else, watch "Inside the Meltdown:"
"Many Americans still don't understand what has happened to the economy," FRONTLINE producer/director Michael Kirk says. "How did it all go so bad so quickly? Who is responsible? How effective has the response from Washington and Wall Street been? Those are the questions at the heart of Inside the Meltdown."
(H/t to Joe Trippi).

Stimulus-at-a-glance (graphic)

H/t to News Dissector Blog.

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

"State-by-State Breakdown of the Economic Stimulus Plan"

ProPublica:
How much will your state get from the economic stimulus plan? The Senate Democratic Policy Committee has created fact sheets for each state [1] with data on everything from school computers to senior meals. If you want to dig deeper, the Congressional Research Service has a spreadsheet on how much your school district will get [2] for special education and to help failing students. The Center for American Progress has a map [3] that compares overall funding to each state's gross state product.
H/t to Kim Schwarzkopf.

Monday, February 16, 2009

"MoveOn Members Make Their Voices Heard" (video)


karinmoveon, video (03:08):
MoveOn members delivered more than 325,000 petition signatures and more than 30,000 questions and comments for bank CEOs appearing before the House Financial Services Committee on 2/11/2009. They demanded accountability and transparency that are only afloat because of an infusion of Americans' hard-earned dollars.

Several representatives, including Reps. Cleaver, Ellison and Grayson read their questions in the hearing. And Rachel Maddow featured MoveOn members' questions on her show that night.
Howie P.S.: This is some liberal pushback that appears to have been successful. This post appeared on Kos this afternoon: "Obama unhappy with executive pay restrictions in stimulus." Could it be that Obama is underestimating the populist anger, as in the Daschle appointment?