At the time of writing, President Obama’s hoped-for “Grand Bargain” with Republicans is apparently dead. And I say good riddance. I’m no more eager than other rational people (a category that fails to include many Congressional Republicans) to see what happens if the debt limit isn’t raised. But what the president was offering to the G.O.P., especially on Medicare, was a very bad deal for America.
Specifically, according to many reports, the president offered both means-testing of Medicare benefits and a rise in the age of Medicare eligibility. The first would be bad policy; the second would be terrible policy. And it would almost surely be terrible politics, too.
The crucial thing to remember, when we talk about Medicare, is that our goal isn’t, or at least shouldn’t be, defined in terms of some arbitrary number. Our goal should be, instead, to give Americans the health care they need at a price the country can afford. And throwing Americans in their mid-60s off Medicare moves us away from that goal, not toward it.
For Medicare, with all its flaws, works better than private insurance. It has less bureaucracy and, hence, lower administrative costs than private insurers. It has been more successful in controlling costs. While Medicare expenses per beneficiary have soared over the past 40 years, they’ve risen significantly less than private insurance premiums. And since Medicare-type systems in other advanced countries have much lower costs than the uniquely privatized U.S. system, there’s good reason to believe that Medicare reform can do a lot to control costs in the future.
In that case, you may ask, why didn’t the 2010 health care reform simply extend Medicare to cover everyone?
Read the full OpEd @ The NYTimes
Monday, July 25, 2011
Krugman: Messing With Medicare
Gov. Rick Perry To Announce Run In Late August
For months, Republican activists, donors, elected officials, and even voters have dithered about their choices in the 2012 presidential primary contest.
This is especially true of grass-roots conservatives who have clamored for someone else to enter the fray, only to be disappointed by the likes of Indiana Rep. Mike Pence, South Dakota Sen. John Thune, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee -- all of whom declared this year they would not be candidates, in that order.
But they may have their man in Rick Perry, a telegenic and booming political presence who boasts executive experience as the nation's longest serving governor, as well as a healthy level of support from the tea party faithful. The governor's wife, Anita, has given him her blessing for a national campaign, and now that anticipation of a Perry candidacy is reaching a fever pitch, he is poised to jump into the race next month.
Potential donors to Perry's presidential effort met Tuesday in Austin, and those familiar with what transpired there told RealClearPolitics that key players in Perry's orbit indicated the 61-year-old Republican will announce a campaign between Aug. 15 and Aug. 31. Perry himself said on Friday that he'll at least make his intentions known within the next three to four weeks.
In the past month Perry's team has moved swiftly to put the parts in place for a campaign.
Read the full story @ RealClearPolitics.com
Sunday, July 24, 2011
PEW: GOP Makes Big Gains among White Voters
As the country enters into the 2012 presidential election cycle, the electorate's white voters have shifted significantly toward the Republican Party since Obama won office nearly three years ago, according to a Pew Research Center survey released on Friday. In particular, the Democrats hold a much narrower edge than they did in 2008, particularly when the partisan leanings of independents are taken into account.
Glenn Greenwald: Obama Gutting Core Principles Of Democratic Party
Glenn Greenwald - guardian.co.uk, Thursday 21 July 2011 14.30 BST
The president's attacks on America's social safety net are destroying the soul of the Democratic party's platform.
In 2005, American liberals achieved one of their most significant political victories of the last decade. It occurred with the resounding rejection of George W Bush's campaign to privatize social security.
Bush's scheme would have gutted the crux of that entitlement program by converting it from what it has been since the 1940s – a universal guarantor of minimally decent living conditions for America's elderly – into a Wall Street casino and bonanza.
Barack Obama. Photograph:
Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty ImagesProgressive activists and bloggers relentlessly attacked both the plan and underlying premises (the myth that social security faces a "crisis"), spawning nationwide opposition. Only a few months after he unveiled his scheme to great fanfare, Bush was forced to sheepishly withdraw it, a defeat he described as his biggest failure.
That victory established an important political fact. While there are very few unifying principles for the Democratic party, one (arguably the primary one) is a steadfast defense of basic entitlement programs for the poor and elderly – social security, Medicare and Medicaid – from the wealthy, corporate factions that have long targeted them for cuts.
But in 2009, clear signs emerged that President Obama was eager to achieve what his right-predecessor could not: cut social security. Before he was even inaugurated, Obama echoed the right's manipulative rhetorical tactic: that (along with Medicare) the program was in crisis and producing "red ink as far as the eye can see." President-elect Obama thus vowed that these crown jewels of his party since the New Deal would be, as Politico reported, a "central part" of his efforts to reduce the deficit.
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Pres. Obama Pushes "Serious Cuts" In His Weekly Address
Conservative Republicans, unable to intellectually accept or unwilling to honestly admit that thirty years of cutting taxes for the rich and cutting regulatory oversight on the financial sector led to financial calamity twice in a period of 80 years, signaled they were as opposed to President Obama's new "New Deal" legislation as their conservative forefathers were to FDR's New Deal legislation.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, the most powerful conservative Republican in Washington, said he intended to delay Obama's proposed $1 trillion economic stimulus legislation and use his 40 Republican Senator cloture vote filibuster power to block all Democratic legislation.
Within two months of taking the oath of office, Republicans had convinced Pres. Obama to push for half the amount of stimulus that his advisers thought necessary and substitute additional massive tax cuts as part of the stimulus plan.
Most economists now say the 2009 stimulus plan was slow to kick in, did little to promote American job growth and unnecessarily added to the deficit because the stimulus plan indeed provided half the amount of spending needed and the added tax cuts have not enticed corporations to reinvest their massive profit gains in U.S. based business growth and job creation.
Republicans continue to claim only more tax cuts for billionaires and mega-corporations will fix the flagging economy. But, will yet more corporate tax cuts really promote job growth in America? As a share of GDP, the U.S. has the second lowest tax rate, behind only Iceland. This statistic flips on its head the often-repeated Republican charge that America has the second highest corporate tax rate in the world (which is only true on paper). In 2009, U.S. corporate taxes had fallen to only 1.3 percent of GDP, from 4 percent in 1965.
The Republican 2010 mid-term election messaging strategy was to falsely claim Obama's Stimulus Spending and Private Health Insurance Reform legislation is depressing the economy just as Roosevelt's New Deal reforms and programs caused the 1930's economy depression. Republicans continue to use this messaging strategy.
Friday, July 22, 2011
Pres. Obama Friday: Town Hall And Debt Talks With GOP Collapse
Addressing the ongoing deficit negotiations, Pres. Obama told the crowd of students, parents and teachers, “this is actually a debate about you and everybody else in America and the choices that we face. ... Neither party is blameless for the decisions that led to this problem, but both parties have a responsibility to solve it. If we don’t solve it, every American will suffer. Businesses will be less likely to invest and hire in America. Interest rates will rise for people who need money to buy a home or a car, or go to college. We won’t have enough money to invest in things like education and clean energy, or protect important programs like Medicare, because we’ll be paying more and more interest on this national debt and that money just flows overseas instead of being spent here on the things that we need.”
"I’m willing to sign a plan that includes tough choices I would not normally make, and there are a lot of Democrats and Republicans in Congress who I believe are willing to do the same thing, " said Pres. Obama. Stressing that debt default is not an option Pres. Obama said, “The United States of America does not run out without paying the tab. We pay our bills. We meet our obligations. We have never defaulted on our debt. We’re not going to do it now. ”
PBSNewsHour: Watch President Obama's Full News Conference on Debt Talks' Latest Breakdown - Jul 22, 2011
Mr. Obama said it was “hard to understand” why House Speaker John Boehner would “walk away from this kind of deal.” The President said they are now out of time.
He said he has called the top Congressional leadership from both parties to a meeting Saturday at the White House to explain to him how the country will avoid defaulting on its payments after the government runs out of money on August 2.
SBOE To Revisit Evolution Debate Under Gov. Perry's New Appointment
Today the State Board of Education voted to adopt the Texas education commissioner’s recommended list of science instructional materials.
Special interest groups and activists on the state board failed in their efforts to force publishers to change their instructional materials to include arguments against evolutionary science.
In addition, the board voted unanimously to reject the adoption of instructional materials from a New Mexico-based vendor that promoted “intelligent design”/creationism. Religious conservatives on the SBOE complained the materials adopted did not adequately address "alternatives to evolution" such as creationism or intelligent design as a theory of how life began.
The vote to adopt the education commissioner’s recommended list of science instructional materials followed several hours of emotional testimony in which science teachers from around the state pleaded with the board not to require them to teach what they saw as non-scientific theories in their classrooms.
The following statement is from the Texas Freedom Network (TFN) President Kathy Miller:
“Today we saw Texas kids and sound science finally win a vote on the State Board of Education. Now our public schools can focus on teaching their students fact-based science that will prepare them for college and a 21st-century economy. And our schoolchildren won’t be held hostage to bad decisions made by a politicized board that adopted flawed science curriculum standards two years ago. Moreover, today we saw that the far right’s stranglehold over the state board is finally loosening after last year’s elections. That’s very good news for public education in Texas.”
The Texas Freedom Network is a nonpartisan education and religious liberties watchdog. The grassroots organization of religious and community leaders support public education, religious freedom and individual liberties.
Additional:
Originally posted 7/17/2011 @ 11:45pm
Gov. Perry's newly appointed chair of the State Board of Education, Barbara Cargill (R-The Woodlands) is already under fire by critics who say she is signaling she intends to push the same religious conservative anti-evolution young earth ideology as her predecessor, chairman Don McLeroy. Cargill, a biology teacher considered to be one of the more conservative board members, disputes the theory of evolution and voted in 2009 to require that the theory of evolution's weaknesses be taught in classrooms.
Annual Gov. Ann Richards Dinner Sponsored By The Democratic Party of Collin Co.
The annual dinner honoring Governor Ann Richards sponsored by the Democratic Party of Collin County is scheduled this year for Saturday August 6, 2011.Governor Richards is admired as a person who stood up for everyday citizens in Texas throughout her life. A video at the bottom of this article presents Richards speaking at the 1988 Democratic National Convention where, in the first 16 minutes of the speech, she explains why it is important that our elected representatives in government stand up for everyday citizens.
According to Shawn Stevens, Chair of the Democratic Party of Collin County, that is why the 2011 Richards Dinner planning committee selected, "Standing Up for Everyday Citizens," as the theme for this year's fund raising dinner.
In keeping with that theme, the featured speakers for the fund raising dinner this year are Wisconsin Democratic State Senator Jon Erpenbach, better known as one of the "Wisconsin 14," and Texas Democratic State Representative Rafael Anchia. According to Leaca Caspari, Chair of the 2011 Richards Dinner planning committee, the reason both Erpenbach and Anchia were invited to speak at the dinner this year is that they are widely regarded as elected officials who are known for taking a principled stand for everyday citizens.
For Texans who may not be familiar with the story behind the Wisconsin 14, here are some excepts from a NYTimes article published on March 12, 2011:
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Rush Limbaugh Says Heat Index Is A Government Plot
Cenk Uygur: I Left MSNBC Because They Don't Challenge Power’
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Obama Endorses Budget Plan That Cuts Soc Sec, Medicare And Corporate Tax Rates
Yesterday, President Obama, ignoring the Congressional Progressive Caucus' proposed budget that balances the budget in just ten years without cutting Social Security and Medicare, all but endorsed the deficit reduction plan outlined by the Gang of Six conservative Republican and Democratic Senators.
President Obama Briefs the Press on the gang of six proposal
Cenk Uygur on The Young Turks breaks it down
The plan recommends “reforming” (i.e. cutting) Social Security in ways that will even affect current retirees. But not a penny of the money saved will go to deficit reduction, which begs the question — why include Social Security at all?
The gang of six plan proposes a chained CPI adjustment to Social Security, which may not be a bad idea when combined with other measures to boost benefits and strengthen the program, but on its own is tantamount to a $1,300 cut each year for recipients over their lifetimes. Strengthen Social Security co-chair and former Obama adviser Nancy Altman has denounced the idea as an overly harsh cut. “The chained-CPI is poor policy, and given that seniors vote in disproportionately high numbers, it is equally poor politics,” she said.
The Gang of Six has said all the changes will go toward securing the long-term financial security of the program, but Social Security is already solvent until 2037 and does not contribute to the deficit.
The plan also lowers the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to between 23 and 29 percent, eliminates the alternative minimum tax, and lowers personal income tax rates, even though the United States is already a low-tax country. That’s true for individuals and for corporations, and it’s true whether you compare us to other countries or the America of the past. No matter how you slice it the conclusion is the same.
Conservatives like to claim that our budget deficits are purely a “spending problem.” Said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY): “We don’t have this problem because we tax too little. We have it because we spent too much.”
It’s a popular talking point, but it simply isn’t true. Deficits do not stem from spending levels alone. They are the product of a mismatch between spending and revenue. And when revenue is as low as ours is, you end up with big deficits.
Click here to view 10 charts demonstrating the simple, clear truth that federal taxes in the United States are very low.
Nearly 10 Years Ago Today, The U.S. Began Borrowing Billions To Pay For The Bush Tax Cuts
As debates about deficit reduction continued to be heavily tilted toward cutting spending, which threatens to undermine a fragile recovery, rather than raising revenue from those who can afford it, it’s important to remember the budgetary impact of the Bush tax cuts.
ThinkProgress: Nearly 10 years ago today, on August 1, 2001, the Associated Press reported that the Treasury Department was tapping $51 billion of credit in order to pay for the budgetary cost of the first round of Bush tax cuts’ rebate checks. The AP reported at the time that Democratic Party opponents of the tax cuts worried that they’d return government budgets to “red ink“:
The opponents of the tax cut turned out to be right. The 2001 and 2003 tax cuts combined have blown a $2.5 trillion hole in America’s budget and created deficits stretching on for years.
President Obama, Elizabeth Warren and Progressives In General
There were a variety of factors holding her up, from the administration's perception that she was prone to speaking her mind publicly -- even if her position contrasted with that of the administration’s.
The internal debate that led to President Barack Obama passing her over as head of the agency, commonly known as the CFPB, pitted one set of advisers -- longtime confidantes Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod -- against the trio of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, and current Chief of Staff William Daley.
Jarrett and Axelrod supported Warren, not least because of the impact she’d have on the Democratic Party’s liberal base, sources said. Geithner, Emanuel and Daley opposed the idea because of a variety of factors, both personal and political.
Ultimately, it was Obama’s call. Sources said an anecdote about a 2010 meeting provides clues to Obama’s thinking.
Last summer, during a White House meeting with first-term Senate Democrats, Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont, asked Obama whether he'd nominate Warren for the role.
Obama held up a half-full glass of water and told him: "That's the problem with you progressives. You see this as half-empty."
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Meet the Pea Party
"Enough with the peas and the tea. What America needs at the present moment is a We the People Party -- a We Party. Instead of trying to dismantle the New Deal, like both the Tea Partyers and the Pea Partyers, the We Party would campaign to modernize and, where necessary, expand the system of middle-class social insurance on which most working families rely.
Instead of further slashing taxes on the rich, as the Tea Party proposes, or cutting benefits for the middle class, as the Pea Party proposes, the We Party would raise taxes on the rich substantially, before raising taxes on working families, if that should be necessary.
Rejecting the characterization of elderly Americans as "greedy geezers" enjoying a "subsidized vacation," the We Party would maintain or even increase Social Security benefit levels and avoid future shortfalls by means of slightly higher payroll taxes or an infusion of other tax revenue.
The We Party would demand that the federal government stand up to the medical-industrial complex and impose fee schedules on doctors, hospitals and drug companies in the U.S., in order to control medical costs the way other democratic nations do -- thereby eliminating the danger that Medicare and Medicaid budgets will wreck the federal budget.
Above all, a We Party that represented Main Street rather than Wall Street would reject the claim, made by Tea Party and Pea Party alike, that the greatest threat facing America is long-term budget deficits, instead of short-term unemployment and lack of growth. The We Party would focus on what should be the real priority of this moment in our national history: putting America back to work.
America doesn't need the Tea Party or the Pea Party. It needs the We Party."
TDWCC July Meeting Speaker – SBOE Rep. Thomas Ratliff
| TDWCC general meeting July 25, 2011 6:45 pm to 8:30 pm Collin College |
Mr. Ratliff won the State Board of Education seat for District 9 in 2010. Mr. Ratliff will speak about how the SBOE works, what issues he has faced, the upcoming Science curriculum discussion, and will be open to our questions.
In a recent letter to the Austin American-Statesmen, Ratliff focused on the difficulties schools have faced as the number of students has grown, but the revenue available to schools hasn’t. A few numbers:
Record Heat Wave Gripping Central U.S.
A Record heat wave is gripping the central part of the U.S. From Texas to the Dakotas, and east to Illinois and Indiana, temperatures and humidity levels soared on Monday and were expected to remain high through at least the end of the week, by which time forecasters say the East Coast will get to share the misery. Seventeen states issued excessive-heat watches on Monday, with a number of upper Midwest states expecting temperatures higher than 105 degrees. The heat wave is sending people to the hospital, damaging roads and causing air-conditioning bills to skyrocket.
It felt like 126 degrees in Newton, Iowa, on Monday; 120 degrees in Mitchell, S.D.; and 119 degrees in Madison, Minn., according to The Associated Press.
The Mexican-American Boom: Births Overtake Immigration
Births have surpassed immigration as the main driver of the dynamic growth in the U.S. Hispanic population. This new trend is especially evident among the largest of all Hispanic groups-Mexican-Americans, according to a new analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data by the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center.
More Confidence In Obama Than Congressional Leaders
The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press and The Washington Post, conducted July 14-17 among 1,006 adults, finds that the public expresses far more confidence in President Obama than it does in congressional leaders of either party when it comes to the debate over the debt ceiling. Nonetheless, only about half of Americans (48%) have even a fair amount of confidence in Obama to do the right thing when it comes to dealing with the debt ceiling, while nearly as many (49%) say they have not too much confidence or no confidence at all in the president on this issue.