House Bill 4224 filed by State Rep. Wayne Christian (R-Center) Friday in the Texas House of Representatives attempts to make an end-run around the curriculum setting authority of the state’s elected State Board of Education over how science, including evolution, is taught in Texas public school classrooms.
The battle over the language used to shape curriculum standards with regard to the teaching of scientific principles has been a hot button issue for Christian conservatives, young earth creationists, intelligent design advocates, and Texas Republicans since the 1990s, when the party first engineered its takeover of the State Board of Education.
The evolution vs. creation battle erupted again in full force late last year because of the decennial requirement that the State Board of Education establish new or revised curriculum standards for science. The SBOE took public comment on the controversial “strengths and weaknesses of evolution” language, favored by creationists, for its new curriculum standards from a well-informed public, parents, teachers and clergy. The SBOE takes its final vote on the curriculum standard on March 27, 2009.
Not satisfied that SBOE can fulfill the creationist agenda for Texas schoolrooms and textbooks, the Christian Right now moves the battle over teaching intelligent design to the floor of the Texas House and Senate with HB 4224. If passed into law the bill would would allow schools to teach whatever they wish, not just on evolution vs. intelligent design, but on any scientific topic from geology to physics to how diseases are transmitted.
--- Click here for REST OF STORY at the Capitol Annex!... ---
Saturday, March 14, 2009
'Fiscally Responsible’ Blue Dog Democrats
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee was successful in recruiting conservative Democrats to run and win in Republican districts in 2006 and 2008. Now Democratic Congressional leaders in the House and Senate are finding it increasingly difficult to get many of those Blue Dog conservative Democrats to vote for Democratic legislation.
The Blue Dogs are particularly complaining of heartburn over what they consider to be President Obama's "big spending" plans, but most also oppose national health care reform and the Employee Free Choice Act. These self-proclaimed ‘fiscally responsible’ Blue Dog Democrats are pressuring President Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress toward the Conservative Republican position that congress should pull back from economic stimulus spending, cut federal spending and pay down the national debt. The conservative drive to immediately balance the budget as the economy grinds to a halt would likely push America in a deeper cycle of economic crisis.
The Hill reports that up to 60 Blue Dogs [,or what the media calls "moderates,"] are banding together in the House and Roll Call reports that a group of 15-20 “Blue Dog” Senate Democrats — boosted by their success in “paring down the more than $900 billion economic stimulus bill to $787 billion” — plan to “formally align as a loose coalition or working group focused on deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility”:
Deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility are important issues that President Obama himself has said are on his priority list. The problem is that federal discretionary spending rose a whopping 75% under Bush and his Republican controlled congresses, according to the conservative Heritage Foundation. (Discretionary spending fell throughout President Clinton's administration who left office with budget surpluses.)
George Bush and his conservative Republican Congresses added trillions to the national debt by turning Clinton’s last annual $155 billion surplus into the current annual $1.2 trillion deficit. Conservative Republicans in congress and George Bush more than doubled the national debt from $5.73 trillion when he took office to $10.66 trillion at the end of 2008, according to Treasury Department data. During fiscal year 2008 alone, which ended Sept. 30, the national debt increased by more than $1 trillion, breaking the previous single fiscal year record of more than $600 billion.
Even after Democrats gained control of the Senate by a single seat after the 2006 mid-term election, Republicans filibustered every attempt Democrats made to regain some measure of fiscal responsibility, including attempts to let some air out of the already ballooning mortgage bubble. President Obama, who inherited a massive debt and an economy in crisis, is now forced into drastic measures to head off complete economic collapse because for the last eight years conservatives all but ignored deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility.
As the economy grinds to a halt the question is whether our current economic situation is best resolved by government pressing harder on the spending brakes to reduce deficit spending or Obama's Keynesian approach to step on the gas to accelerate stimulative spending. Once the economy regains it footing, deficit reduction should be pursued vigorously.
During the first Great Depression, President Franklin Roosevelt pushed deficit spending in 1934, '35 and '36 and the economy responded with brisk growth during those years. In 1937 Roosevelt, a fiscal conservative himself, was convinced to end the stimulative deficit spending and focus on deficit reduction through spending cuts. (The FDR Failed Myth)
Those deficit reducing spending cuts in 1937 pushed the economy into recession. When the economy contracted sharply in late 1937 and early 1938, FDR quickly reversed course on his "balanced budget" spending cuts and economic growth rapidly returned.
It took the massive deficit spending of WWII to permanently pull the U.S. economy out of its Great Depression and into an overdrive speed that lasted long after the war ended. In the graph above note the run-up in war debt starting in 1942. WWII deficit spending is equivalent to $10 trillion in today's dollars.
Following the war, the U.S. paid off the national debt for 35 years, while the economy remained generally quite prosperous. It was not until President Reagan took office, starting a 28 year injection of conservative ideology into government fiscal policy, that deficits, as a percent of GDP, began to again increase. President Clinton reversed the deficit growth trend, started by Reagan and continued by G.H.W. Bush, until he left office. Deficit growth returned under President G.W.Bush. (see zfacts National Debt graph above)
When President Obama went to Capitol Hill to meet with House Republicans shortly after his Inauguration, conservative Republicans hit him with a barrage of questions implying that his Economic Recovery and Stimulus plan would add to already out of control deficit government spending [inherited from the Republican congressional and Bush years of fiscal irresponsibility].
According to Republicans in the room, Obama's response hearkens back to the Great Depression as he raised the specter of 1937. 1937 is the year President Franklin Roosevelt succumbed to conservative pressure to cut deficit spending, leading to another cycle of recession.
When Huffington Post asked Democratic congressional members about FDR's 1937 decision to cut spending House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, "We're not going to let it happen again. In the middle '30s -- '36, etc. -- they were concerned about what was happening so they tightened their belts in terms of spending," she said, "and that caused a recession within the Depression, instead of keeping the momentum going."
And, Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman told the Huffington Post that Democrats will be vigilant about cutting spending too soon. "The Keynesian view of the Depression and the way to deal with it is to make up for the lack of private spending by bringing in public spending. And whenever you try to balance the budget, you withdraw public spending. So there are people that speculated the downturn in 1937" was a result of cutbacks, said Waxman.
Yet, 15-20 “Blue Dog” Senate Democrats focused on "deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility" could "short circuit" President Obama's Keynesian strategy to restart the economy by voting against any further stimulative spending. Just as in 1937, stopping the stimulus too soon now would likely push America in a second wave of economic crisis that could rival the The Great Depression.
The Blue Dogs are particularly complaining of heartburn over what they consider to be President Obama's "big spending" plans, but most also oppose national health care reform and the Employee Free Choice Act. These self-proclaimed ‘fiscally responsible’ Blue Dog Democrats are pressuring President Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress toward the Conservative Republican position that congress should pull back from economic stimulus spending, cut federal spending and pay down the national debt. The conservative drive to immediately balance the budget as the economy grinds to a halt would likely push America in a deeper cycle of economic crisis.
The Hill reports that up to 60 Blue Dogs [,or what the media calls "moderates,"] are banding together in the House and Roll Call reports that a group of 15-20 “Blue Dog” Senate Democrats — boosted by their success in “paring down the more than $900 billion economic stimulus bill to $787 billion” — plan to “formally align as a loose coalition or working group focused on deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility”:
Led by Sens. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), Tom Carper (D-Del.) and Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), members said early press reports of their meetings were mis-characterized as an opposition group to President Barack Obama’s agenda and budget. But they acknowledge that they are seeking to restrain the influence of party liberals in the White House and on Capitol Hill. […]Bayh issued a press release detailing the group and its 15 inaugural members. The press release explains that the group “will meet every other Tuesday before the Democratic Caucus lunch to discuss legislative strategies and ideas”:
[Nebraska Sen. Ben] Nelson said the moderate bloc is modeled after the Blue Dogs, but that the realities of the Senate prevent them from being as organized or unified as the House group, which regularly wins concessions from House Democratic leaders.
The Moderate Dems are joined by a shared commitment to pursue pragmatic, fiscally sustainable policies across a range of issues, such as deficit containment, health care reform, the housing crisis, educational reform, energy policy and climate change.In addition to Bayh, Sens. Tom Carper (D-DE) and Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) will lead the group. Other members include: Sens. Mark Udall (D-CO), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Mark Begich (D-AK), Kay Hagan (D-NC), Herb Kohl (D-WI), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Ben Nelson (D-NE), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), and Mark Warner (D-VA).
Deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility are important issues that President Obama himself has said are on his priority list. The problem is that federal discretionary spending rose a whopping 75% under Bush and his Republican controlled congresses, according to the conservative Heritage Foundation. (Discretionary spending fell throughout President Clinton's administration who left office with budget surpluses.)
George Bush and his conservative Republican Congresses added trillions to the national debt by turning Clinton’s last annual $155 billion surplus into the current annual $1.2 trillion deficit. Conservative Republicans in congress and George Bush more than doubled the national debt from $5.73 trillion when he took office to $10.66 trillion at the end of 2008, according to Treasury Department data. During fiscal year 2008 alone, which ended Sept. 30, the national debt increased by more than $1 trillion, breaking the previous single fiscal year record of more than $600 billion.
Even after Democrats gained control of the Senate by a single seat after the 2006 mid-term election, Republicans filibustered every attempt Democrats made to regain some measure of fiscal responsibility, including attempts to let some air out of the already ballooning mortgage bubble. President Obama, who inherited a massive debt and an economy in crisis, is now forced into drastic measures to head off complete economic collapse because for the last eight years conservatives all but ignored deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility.
As the economy grinds to a halt the question is whether our current economic situation is best resolved by government pressing harder on the spending brakes to reduce deficit spending or Obama's Keynesian approach to step on the gas to accelerate stimulative spending. Once the economy regains it footing, deficit reduction should be pursued vigorously.
During the first Great Depression, President Franklin Roosevelt pushed deficit spending in 1934, '35 and '36 and the economy responded with brisk growth during those years. In 1937 Roosevelt, a fiscal conservative himself, was convinced to end the stimulative deficit spending and focus on deficit reduction through spending cuts. (The FDR Failed Myth)
Those deficit reducing spending cuts in 1937 pushed the economy into recession. When the economy contracted sharply in late 1937 and early 1938, FDR quickly reversed course on his "balanced budget" spending cuts and economic growth rapidly returned.
It took the massive deficit spending of WWII to permanently pull the U.S. economy out of its Great Depression and into an overdrive speed that lasted long after the war ended. In the graph above note the run-up in war debt starting in 1942. WWII deficit spending is equivalent to $10 trillion in today's dollars.
Following the war, the U.S. paid off the national debt for 35 years, while the economy remained generally quite prosperous. It was not until President Reagan took office, starting a 28 year injection of conservative ideology into government fiscal policy, that deficits, as a percent of GDP, began to again increase. President Clinton reversed the deficit growth trend, started by Reagan and continued by G.H.W. Bush, until he left office. Deficit growth returned under President G.W.Bush. (see zfacts National Debt graph above)
When President Obama went to Capitol Hill to meet with House Republicans shortly after his Inauguration, conservative Republicans hit him with a barrage of questions implying that his Economic Recovery and Stimulus plan would add to already out of control deficit government spending [inherited from the Republican congressional and Bush years of fiscal irresponsibility].
According to Republicans in the room, Obama's response hearkens back to the Great Depression as he raised the specter of 1937. 1937 is the year President Franklin Roosevelt succumbed to conservative pressure to cut deficit spending, leading to another cycle of recession.
When Huffington Post asked Democratic congressional members about FDR's 1937 decision to cut spending House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, "We're not going to let it happen again. In the middle '30s -- '36, etc. -- they were concerned about what was happening so they tightened their belts in terms of spending," she said, "and that caused a recession within the Depression, instead of keeping the momentum going."
And, Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman told the Huffington Post that Democrats will be vigilant about cutting spending too soon. "The Keynesian view of the Depression and the way to deal with it is to make up for the lack of private spending by bringing in public spending. And whenever you try to balance the budget, you withdraw public spending. So there are people that speculated the downturn in 1937" was a result of cutbacks, said Waxman.
Yet, 15-20 “Blue Dog” Senate Democrats focused on "deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility" could "short circuit" President Obama's Keynesian strategy to restart the economy by voting against any further stimulative spending. Just as in 1937, stopping the stimulus too soon now would likely push America in a second wave of economic crisis that could rival the The Great Depression.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Gov. Rick Perry Rejects Federal Money To Aid Unemployed Texans
Concerns over Texas Gov. Rick Perry's (R) intent to not use federal stimulus money to aid the unemployed have been answered.Gov. Perry announced today he is blocking the state from accepting $550 million in federal stimulus benefits targeted to aid unemployed Texans, even as the Texas jobless rate continues to jump. (see Governor Perry's speech in Houston or the Burnt Orange Report's compendium of reactions to said speech)
Gov. Perry joined fellow conservative Republican governors of Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Alaska and Idaho in opposing the extension of unemployment insurance made possible by the federal stimulus grant.
In his February letter to President Barack Obama Gov. Perry accepted all of Texas' $17 billion share of the federal stimulus money, "to promote economic growth and create jobs in a fiscally responsible manner." However, the language Perry used in his letter and in subsequent public statements left open the question of how he will, in fact, use the stimulus dollars in Texas.
Gov. Perry's plan to turn back stimulus money targeted to aid unemployed workers follows a similar announcement by South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford. ABC News reports that South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford (R), who co-authored an editorial criticizing the stimulus plan with Gov. Perry, will send a letter to President Obama in the next few days asking for permission to use approximately $700 million of South Carolina’s stimulus money for purposes other than the purposes specified in the stimulus legislation.
If Pres. Obama rejects Gov. Sanford’s request to use the money according to his conservative agenda, the governor indicated he will reject the $700 million in stimulus funds, which are under his discretion. Texas Gov. Rick Perry may also turn down federal stimulus money on arguments that government intervention to stimulate the economy and help unemployed workers remain in their homes and put food on the table for their children runs contrary to his conservative principles.
U.S. unemployment will approach 10 percent as the country endures its worst recession since World War Two, leaving more than 13 million Americans jobless, according to a Reuters poll of economists. According to the latest foreclosure stats from research firm RealtyTrac, default notices, bank repossessions and other U.S. foreclosure related activities jumped 30% in February from the prior year. That’s more than 290,000 filings nationally and a 6% increase from January.
According to the Texas Workforce Commission, Texas’ unemployment rate rose to 6.4 percent in January, as the U.S. unemployment rate rose to 7.6 percent. In the Dallas, Fort Worth and Arlington area, the January 2009 unemployment rate was 7.1 percent, up 1.2 percent from the 5.9 percent rate in December of 2008 and up 2.5 percent from the January 2008 rate of 4.6 percent, according to a release. Texas’ seasonally-adjusted non-agricultural employment lost 75,800 jobs in January.
From offthekuff.com:
The Texas Workforce Commission announced that the unemployment trust fund is now expected to be almost depleted by October. The commission issues monthly projections and each has been gloomier than the last. By law, the trust fund must stay above $858 million at the beginning of the fiscal year in October. At the current rate, the fund will be $812 million below the floor, commission executive director Larry Temple told the House special stimulus committee yesterday.
And a $812 million deficit means somebody’s gotta pay – and that somebody, according to Temple, will be Texas employers. Temple said the fund can raise money to pay unemployment benefits in three ways: 1) By borrowing from the feds (and paying interest on the loans) 2) By issuing bonds (also involves paying interest) and 3) By raising taxes on employers. He said the commission’s strategy would probably involve a combination of the three.
However, combo or no combo, even if TWC borrows from the feds or floats bonds, the employers will be the ones funding the debt.
Dunnam made this clear when he asked Temple, “Do any of [the scenarios] involve anyone other than employers paying for the deficit?” Temple responded, “No.”
Here’s where the stimulus comes in: Don Baylor, a senior policy analyst at the Center for Public Policy Priorities, said if Texas changes its eligibility statute and accepts the stimulus funds, employers will still have to pay an additional $294 million in 2010 to make up for the deficit. But without the federal funds, employers will pay an additional $935 million to make up for the deficit in 2010.
Sure does sound like taking all of the federal stimulus money available for unemployment insurance would be a good deal all around, doesn’t it? It eases the tax burden on businesses, it helps many more people, and by helping more people it has a stimulative effect on the economy. Which was the point, after all. You’d have to be a blinkered partisan zealot not to see the benefits. You know, like Bill Hammond, the president of the Texas Association of Business:[Hammond] presented a bold proposal to “save” $630 million a year in unemployment benefits payouts, which included measures such as greatly restricting or eliminating benefits for people who receive severance pay. He also said the commission didn’t do enough to ensure people are looking for work while they’re receiving benefits: “The commission is allowing [unemployed] people to sit on their laurels.”Or we could just eliminate the idea of unemployment insurance altogether. Who cares what happens to these people that get laid off, anyway? They’re just a bunch of lazy bums who want to suck Bill Hammond’s blood. Where’s the compassion for that, I ask you?
Well, I suppose it’s all academic, since Governor Perry has now officially rejected the unemployment insurance funds. Hope all you business owners that will see your taxes go up more than they needed to will appreciate that. Perry made the announcement right here in Houston, which is somewhat ironic.Houston’s growth advantage over the rest of the nation during the past five years–oil and natural gas–has not only evaporated in the face of a global commodity bust but has turned into a definite liability. The coming year will see significant job losses in Houston, led by the energy sector.Via Texas Politics. Too bad Governor Perry won’t be joining any of these folks on the unemployment line until at least 2011, by which time one hopes the job market has improved. It’s good to be the king. A statement from Texas AFL-CIO President Becky Moeller in response is beneath the fold. BOR has more, including Kay Bailey Hutchison’s timid response.Texas AFL-CIO President Becky Moeller today issued this statement in reaction to Gov. Rick Perry’s announcement that he opposes acceptance of $555 million in federal economic stimulus funds for jobless workers in Texas: “Today Gov. Rick Perry said to the workers and employers of Texas: ‘What crisis?’ The governor’s decision to reject $555 million in federal unemployment insurance funds available in the economic stimulus package amounts to a callous statement to tens of thousands of Texans who are losing their livelihoods that Texas does not have their backs.”
“Playing 2010 or 2012 politics when Texans are suffering in 2009 has nothing to do with good public policy. The Texas AFL-CIO has worked with lawmakers who are carefully exploring the ramifications of accepting the UI funds. The stimulus package essentially covers for seven years any cost associated with making UI benefits more accessible to workers who have lost jobs through no fault of their own. If today’s decision stands, employers will start paying an additional $555 million in taxes in January, courtesy of the governor, and Texas workers who desperately need help will be left to fend for themselves.”
“In short-circuiting the legislative process, Gov. Perry is telling employers that it is better to pay $555 million extra to keep the current lousy UI system than to pay an incremental increase seven years from now for a better system.”
"Here’s hoping the Legislature sees this issue differently. This is no time to demonize workers who are victims of the worst economy America has seen since the Great Depression.”
Monday, March 9, 2009
Last Chance Reminder
 On March 12, Planned Parenthood of North Texas will gather volunteers in Austin for a Lobby Day, to ask State Representatives to support "Education Works!" legislation. Volunteer TODAY! No experience is necessary. (More...) |
 On March 10, the Texas Freedom Network will gather volunteers in Austin for a Lobby Day, to ask State Representatives to support "Sound Science Education" legislation. Volunteer TODAY! No experience is necessary. (More...) |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)