Jobs vs. Deficit -- Where the Public Stands

Following President Obama's address before a joint session of Congress on Thursday to lay out a plan to spur jobs creation, the political and policy debate in congress continues to be about stimulus spending to create jobs vs slashing government spending to cut the deficit.

While Republicans, and particularly the new Tea Party lawmakers who joined them on Capitol Hill this year, spearheaded the drive to put deficit reduction front and center, deficit reduction had risen at least modestly in the list of public concerns.

But public support for deficit reduction as the top economic priority over the job situation has been weakening under the weight of increasingly bad economic news in recent months resulting from the fragile recovery and the failure of the jobs market to improve.

A Pew Research Center/Washington Post poll conducted Sept. 1-4 shows a steady rise since March – from 34% to 43% – in the percentage of those saying that the job situation is the economic issue that worries them most. Those citing the budget deficit as their top worry declined from 28% in May and 29% in July to 22% in September.

A mid-August poll by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found a similar trend on a somewhat different measure.

In June, 52% had said the higher priority for government should be reducing the deficit, compared with 42% who favored spending to help the economy recovery. But the August poll showed the public almost evenly divided over whether the higher priority should be spending to help the economy recover (47%) or reducing the budget deficit (46%).

Those results showed the same sharp partisan split that characterized the budget battles throughout the year. Republicans favored deficit reduction over spending to help the economy by 66% to 29% and GOP Tea Party adherents held that view even more strongly, 82% to 16%. Democrats favored stimulus over spending reduction by 61% to 32%.

The big factor driving down overall public preference for deficit reduction over stimulus since June was a change in outlook among independents.

In June, they favored deficit reduction over stimulus by a 54% to 39% margin, but in the August survey, 47% backed spending on the economy while 46% stuck by deficit reduction as the higher priority.

The recent shifts in public opinion on the importance of deficit reduction comes as worsening economic news started to seep into the American conscience during August.

Obama Tells Congress To Pass $447 Billion Jobs Plan

Pres. Obama shares plan to create jobs with joint session of Congress. September 8, 2011

President Barack Obama Thursday challenged Republicans to halt a "political circus" and immediately pass a bigger than expected $447 billion jobs plan he said would jolt the "stalled" economy.

• Click here for a transcript of Pres. Obama's speech
• Click here for fact sheet on the Pres. Obama's Jobs Act

Perry Doubles-Down On Opposing Social Security

Another great post from our blogger friend Ted McLaughlin at the Texas Panhandle blog Jobsanger:

I have to give Rick Perry a little credit -- he actually showed up for the debate yesterday. I had thought he would once again use the wildfires as an excuse to duck appearing on the same stage with his fellow candidates. And he should have, because he made a giant mistake in the debate -- one that will haunt him on the campaign trail.

A few months ago Perry wrote a stupid and very ill-timed book. Evidently he thought at the time he wrote the book that he would never run for another political office, because he wrote in the book that he believed Social Security and Medicare were both unconstitutional. He went on to say that each state should be able to opt out of either or both programs.

This was not too bright, and now that he's a candidate, he should be begging forgiveness for ever saying such a thing. It probably wouldn't work (since he actually put his opposition to Social Security in print), but maybe he could have claimed he was "temporarily insane" when he wrote the book, or maybe it was a mis-print and the fault of his editor -- anything but what he actually did during the debate.

What he did was double-down on his hatred for Social Security. When what he had said about Social Security was brought up, he acted like he was proud of that and even went on to called Social Security a "Ponzi scheme" and say it would not even exist when today's young people need it. That's right, he attacked Social Security on nationwide television. ...

Read the rest @ Jobsanger

Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult

by: Mike Lofgren, Truthout

It should have been evident to clear-eyed observers that the Republican Party is becoming less and less like a traditional political party in a representative democracy and becoming more like an apocalyptic cult, or one of the intensely ideological authoritarian parties of 20th century Europe. This trend has several implications, none of them pleasant.

Virtually every [Senate] bill, every nominee for Senate confirmation and every routine procedural motion is now subject to a Republican filibuster. Under the circumstances, it is no wonder that Washington is gridlocked: legislating has now become war minus the shooting, something one could have observed 80 years ago in the Reichstag of the Weimar Republic. As Hannah Arendt observed, a disciplined minority of totalitarians can use the instruments of democratic government to undermine democracy itself.

John P. Judis sums up the modern GOP this way:

"Over the last four decades, the Republican Party has transformed from a loyal opposition into an insurrectionary party that flouts the law when it is in the majority and threatens disorder when it is the minority. It is the party of Watergate and Iran-Contra, but also of the government shutdown in 1995 and the impeachment trial of 1999. If there is an earlier American precedent for today's Republican Party, it is the antebellum Southern Democrats of John Calhoun who threatened to nullify, or disregard, federal legislation they objected to and who later led the fight to secede from the union over slavery."

A couple of years ago, a Republican committee staff director told me candidly (and proudly) what the method was to all this obstruction and disruption. Should Republicans succeed in obstructing the Senate from doing its job, it would further lower Congress's generic favorability rating among the American people. By sabotaging the reputation of an institution of government, the party that is programmatically against government would come out the relative winner.

A deeply cynical tactic, to be sure, but a psychologically insightful one that plays on the weaknesses both of the voting public and the news media. There are tens of millions of low-information voters who hardly know which party controls which branch of government, let alone which party is pursuing a particular legislative tactic. These voters' confusion over who did what allows them to form the conclusion that "they are all crooks," and that "government is no good," further leading them to think, "a plague on both your houses" and "the parties are like two kids in a school yard." This ill-informed public cynicism, in its turn, further intensifies the long-term decline in public trust in government that has been taking place since the early 1960s - a distrust that has been stoked by Republican rhetoric at every turn ("Government is the problem," declared Ronald Reagan in 1980).

The media are also complicit in this phenomenon. Ever since the bifurcation of electronic media into a more or less respectable "hard news" segment and a rabidly ideological talk radio and cable TV political propaganda arm, the "respectable" media have been terrified of any criticism for perceived bias. Hence, they hew to the practice of false evenhandedness. Paul Krugman has skewered this tactic as being the "centrist cop-out." "I joked long ago," he says, "that if one party declared that the earth was flat, the headlines would read 'Views Differ on Shape of Planet.'"

Read the full article @ Truthout

The Republican Party Has Been Captured By Far-Right Extremists

by Beverly Bandler - 09-06-2011

That the Republican Party has been captured by the radical right is not news. The 112th Congress has made it clear, however, that the party that calls itself the GOP has brought the United States to a crisis stage.

“One of the biggest changes in politics in my lifetime,” said journalist Bill Moyers, “is that the delusional is no longer marginal. It has come in from the fringe...for the first time in our history, ideology and theology hold a monopoly of power in Washington.” Moyers said this in January 2005.

In 2006, former Republican strategist Kevin Phillips charged that the: “Republican Party has become the first religious party in U.S. History.” Phillips went on further to remind us: “Unfortunately, three of the preeminent weaknesses displayed in past [nation] declines have been religious excess, a declining energy and industrial base, and debt often linked to foreign and military overstretch.”

Texas Faces Massive Wildfires, Record Drought as Gov. Rick Perry Rejects Climate Science

DemocracyNow! speaks with Forrest Wilder, Texas Observer reporter.

Wilder talks about his article "Texas' Permanent Drought: Our water deficit didn't start with this drought. And it won't end with this drought " and Texas Gov. Rick Perry's rejection of climate science at last night's Republican presidential debate.

On Wednesday, Perry announced he was returning home to focus on a historic wildfire season in which some 3.6 million acres have burned — an area larger than the size of Connecticut.

Perry has used the crisis to complain the federal government is not acting fast enough to give the state federal aid, but critics have been quick to note the governor has often bashed the idea of federal assistance programs. Perry this year signed legislation passed by the Republican dominated state legislature that slashed the budget for the Texas Forest Service, the first line of fire defense for most of the state. The wildfires come amidst a record drought. The state has seen its driest consecutive months since record-keeping began in 1895, and the impact on the state's agricultural industry has been devastating.

Obama's Jobs Plan That Doesn't Need Congress

Is President Obama finally testing his administration's muscle? On Wednesday, Obama directed several federal agencies to identify "high-impact, job-creating infrastructure projects" that can be expedited by administrative directive without congressional involvement or approval.

One week before he will make a major address to Congress on jobs, Obama is making sure they know he plans to move forward without them. The president has also directed the Education Department to come up with a "Plan B" updating the 2001 No Child Left Behind law in the absence of congressional action. The message to Congress is clear: Do your work or we'll do it for you.

Under Wednesday's order, the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, and Transportation will each select up to three high-priority infrastructure projects that can be completed within the control and jurisdiction of the federal government.

The effort is labeled as a "common-sense approach" to spurring job growth "in the near term." In practical terms, that means speeding up the permitting and waiver processes for green-building or highway projects to get the government out of the way. One of businesses' foremost complaints with government infrastructure projects is that the paperwork is too cumbersome and creates unnecessary delays, according to White House economic advisers.

What is left unsaid in the administration's rollout of the infrastructure project is that this may be the extent of the president's powers while Congress embroils itself in months-long talks on cutting the deficit and responding to the White House's jobs plan. Obama also pleaded with Congress on Wednesday to pass clean extensions of the Federal Aviation Administration and the surface-transportation laws, both of which expire this month.

Arizona Files Lawsuit Saying 1965 Voting Rights Act Violates 10th Amendment States' Rights

On August 25th Arizona's Republican Attorney General Tom Horne, who took office this year after winning election in the Tea-Party wave of Republican victories in the 2010 Congressional elections, filed a lawsuit challenging the Voting Rights Act (VRA) of 1965. Horne holds in his lawsuit (The State of Arizona v. Holder) that “Arizona does now and has always supported full and open voting rights for all residents and submission to pre-clearance procedures is not only unnecessary, but also unconstitutional.”

Horne's press release says: "Attorney General Tom Horne today filed lawsuit against the federal government for an injunction and a declaratory judgment that the portion of the Voting Rights Act requiring Arizona to pre-clear all voting changes with the Justice Department are unconstitutional..."

The filing itself says, "The State of Arizona, through undersigned counsel, brings this civil action for declaratory judgment that §§ 4 and 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended in 2006 (the "VRA" or the "Act") are unconstitutional..."

Horne filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for Washington, D.C., and asked for a hearing before a three-judge panel. The lawsuit asks the court to either eliminate the original criteria for scrutiny as well as the pre-approval requirement or at least exempt Arizona from the requirement.

The pre-clearance rule, included in Section 5 of the VRA, which has been reviewed by the Supreme Court as recently as two years ago, mandates that certain state, county and municipal jurisdictions with a history of racial problems must obtain a review and pre-clearance by the federal Department of Justice (DOJ) on any proposed changes in voting laws. The main reason for the DOJ pre-clearance requirement is to insure that any proposed changes would not "deny or abridge the right to vote on account of race, color, or membership in a language minority group," as guaranteed by the 14th and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

Texas Cites Bush-Era DOJ Approval Of Voter ID Law In Pre-Clearance Petition

Texas officials cited Pres. Bush's Justice Department's approval of Georgia's voter photo ID law as a reason for the Obama Administration's Department of Justice (DOJ) to pre-clear the state's new photo ID law.

Gov. Rick Perry, now in the running for the Republican presidential nomination, signed Texas' voter photo ID bill into law in May. Perry had designated the measure as an "emergency item," despite a lack of evidence that voter impersonation fraud, that the law purports to prevent, is a major problem. The new Texas law requires voters show one of five forms of unexpired ID when they go to vote: a drivers license, military ID, a passport, a concealed handgun license or a voter ID card the state provides for free.

The bipartisan National Conference of State Legislatures reports that altogether this year, 20 states which did not have voter ID laws and 14 states that already had non-photo ID laws have considered legislation requiring citizens have a photo ID to vote.

Of those 34 states which considered voter ID legislation, seven of them enacted laws prescribing a very limited selection of dated and unexpired government issues photo ID cards as acceptable for voting: Alabama, Georgia, Kansas, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin. All must receive pre-clearance from the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division before the laws can be enforced. An estimated one million voting age U.S. citizens in Texas do not have any one of the prescribed unexpired government issues photo ID cards.

Texas Secretary of State Hope Andrade wrote a letter to the chief of the US Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division's voting section in July seeking pre-clearance of the state's new voter photo ID law, as required by section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

Andrade called the Texas law "remarkably similar" to Georgia's pre-cleared voter ID law. "In fact, DOJ pre-cleared Georgia's original photo-identification law even before Georgia enacted its free ID provision and its most recent extensive voter education mandate, which Georgia added in a subsequent legislative session."

But the approval of the Georgia voter ID law was done by political officials in the Bush Justice Department over the objection of career employees in the voting section, who had recommended that the law not be approved. Within a year of recommending that Georgia's voter ID law not be pre-cleared, three of the career employees who made the recommendation had either left or were transferred out of the voting section.

"They weren't really interested in investigating Georgia's submission," former DOJ lawyer Toby Moore told TPM back in 2007. "They were mainly interested in assembling evidence to support pre-clearance. Any attempt to bring up counter-evidence to suggest a discriminatory impact was ignored or critiqued. We were told it was our own bias.... Any evidence in support was embraced uncritically."

The Justice Department's Civil Rights Division alumni joke it is recovering from post traumatic stress disorder following the politicization of the section that took place during the Bush administration.

"It is evident that the Section, at times at the behest of DOJ's highest ranking officials, prioritized a voter fraud prevention and prosecution agenda designed to suppress minority voter turnout; and decisions on some Section 5 submissions were crafted to serve partisan ends," an Obama-Biden transition team report on the Civil Rights Division found.

The two of the states which passed voter photo ID laws during their 2011 legislative sessions - Texas and South Carolina have have file pre-clearance requests with the DOJ. Both states are trying to convince the Justice Department that their laws don't have the intent or effect of suppressing the minority vote.

"There's a lot of reason to think that voter ID laws, depending on how they're constructed, could have a harmful effect on minority voters," University of Michigan Law School Professor Samuel Bagenstos told TPM. Bagenstos was the number two official in the Civil Rights Division until he returned to Michigan this summer.

The VRA, Bagenstos said, "puts the burden on the state to prove that the change in voting isn't discriminatory in purpose and effect."

Even so, in a 2008 ruling the Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s voter photo identification law, which is very similar to Texas' new voter photo ID law, declaring that a requirement to produce photo identification is not unconstitutional and that the state has a “valid interest” in improving election procedures.

In a 6-to-3 ruling in one of the most awaited election-law cases in years, the court rejected arguments that Indiana’s law imposes unjustified burdens on people who are old, poor or members of minority groups and less likely to have driver’s licenses or other acceptable forms of identification.

So, even if the DOJ does not give its clearance for the new voter photo ID laws in Texas and the other states, the court will altimately give its clearance on appeal.

A Tea Party affiliated group True the Vote held a national convention in Houston last March to actively support restrictive voter photo ID measures.

Obama DOJ Questions South Carolina's New Voter Photo ID Law

In an Aug. 29, 2011 letter, T. Christian Herren, Jr., Chief of the Obama DOJ's Civil Rights Division, not only demanded that South Carolina, within 60 days, provide additional information about its recently enacted polling place photo ID restriction law, but stated that if SC failed to provide a timely "response...the [U.S.] Attorney General may object to the proposed changes consistent with the burden of proof placed upon the submitting authority."

Herren noted that SC has the "burden of demonstrating" that the new polling place photo ID law was neither enacted "for a discriminatory purpose nor will have a retrogressive effect."

SC's Republican Attorney General, Alan Wilson, in an apparent recognition that pre-clearance is likely to be denied, told those in attendance at a GOP fundraiser that he had "no faith" that the DOJ "will do the right thing." He vowed to litigate the matter "up to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary."

The ACLU submitted a 15-page letter to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) on August 5, 2011 asking that the DOJ to deny South Carolina’s request for pre-clearance of its new polling place photo ID law under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The ACLU letter argues that proponents’ unsubstantiated claims of "voter fraud" were but a pretext for unlawful discrimination and that statistics suggest that the new law would operate as an illegal poll tax, especially for the disproportionate number of African Americans who live below the federal poverty level in the state.

South Carolina's history of voting rights violations require federal oversight of election law changes, including requiring voters to show photo ID.

Sen. Durbin To Chair Hearings On Voter ID Laws

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) will chair a hearing next week examining the rash of voter ID laws passed by state legislatures this year amidst concerns that such laws could suppress Democratic turnout across the country.

Durbin, who chairs the Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights, announced Friday that the Sept. 8 hearing will feature testimony from Judith Brown Dianis, the co-director of the Advancement Project; Loyola Law School Professor Justin Levittl; and former Bush-era Justice Department official Hans van Spakovsky, who's now with the Heritage Foundation. It's titled "New State Voting Laws - Barriers to the Ballot?"

"These new laws significantly reduce the number of early voting days, require voters to show restrictive forms of photo identification before voting, and make it harder for volunteer organizations to register new voters," Durbin's office said in an announcement. "Supporters of these laws argue that they will reduce the risk of voter fraud. The overwhelming evidence, however, indicates that voter impersonation fraud is virtually non-existent and that these new laws will make it harder for hundreds of thousands of elderly, disabled, minority, young, rural, and low income Americans to exercise their right to vote."

The GOP War on Voting

In a campaign supported by the Koch brothers, Republicans are working to prevent millions of Democrats from voting next year. As the nation gears up for the 2012 presidential election, Republican officials have launched an unprecedented, centrally coordinated campaign to suppress the elements of the Democratic vote that elected Barack Obama in 2008.

Republicans have long tried to drive Democratic voters away from the polls. "I don't want everybody to vote," the influential conservative activist Paul Weyrich told a gathering of evangelical leaders in 1980. "As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down." But since the 2010 election, thanks to a conservative advocacy group founded by Weyrich, the GOP's effort to disrupt voting rights has been more widespread and effective than ever. In a systematic campaign orchestrated by the American Legislative Exchange Council – and funded in part by David and Charles Koch, the billionaire brothers who bankrolled the Tea Party – 38 states introduced legislation this year designed to impede voters at every step of the electoral process.

Brennan Center for Justice On Voter Photo ID Laws

Brennan Center for Justice

While every voter should demonstrate that she is who she says she is before voting, restrictive documentation requirements are not the answer. Burdensome photo ID or proof of citizenship requirements for voting could block millions of eligible American voters without addressing any real problem.

Although most Americans have government-issued photo ID, studies show that as many as 12% of eligible voters nationwide do not; the percentage is even higher for seniors, people of color, people with disabilities, low-income voters, and students. Many of those citizens find it hard to get such IDs, because the underlying documentation (the ID one needs to get ID) is often difficult to come by. Those difficulties will increase substantially if documentary proof of citizenship is needed to vote or to obtain the identification required to vote.

At the same time, voter ID policies are far more costly to implement than many assume. A recent Brennan Center report provides a comprehensive analysis of jurisprudence on the subject, finding that in order to survive court challenges, restrictive voter ID policies would need to be accompanied by an expansion of access to official photo ID and massive public education campaigns. Depending on the state and the details of the proposed policy, this could also involve the purchase of new equipment, expansion of the locations and working hours of government ID-issuing offices, and the provision of official government photo ID to voters without charging a fee.

Right-Wing Commentator: Poor People Voting Is ‘Un-American’

Raw Story: Many conservatives appear to think badly of poor people, but Matthew Vadum of the Capital Research Center takes it a step further. According to the title of his latest article for American Thinker, he believes that "registering the poor to vote is un-American."

"Why are left-wing activist groups so keen on registering the poor to vote?" Vadum asks. "Because they know the poor can be counted on to vote themselves more benefits by electing redistributionist politicians. Welfare recipients are particularly open to demagoguery and bribery."

"Registering them to vote is like handing out burglary tools to criminals," he continues. "It is profoundly antisocial and un-American to empower the nonproductive segments of the population to destroy the country-- which is precisely why Barack Obama zealously supports registering welfare recipients to vote. ... Encouraging those who burden society to participate in elections isn't about helping the poor. It's about helping the poor to help themselves to others' money."

Read the full story @ Raw Story

Political Spending For 2012 Election Year To Be $6 Billion

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Forget the struggling economy. There's one U.S. industry -- Big Politics -- that is looking ahead to a record year in 2012. The U.S. elections will be the most expensive ever, with a total price tag of $6 billion or even more, fueled by millions of dollars in unrestricted donations as Republicans and Democrats vie for control of the White House, Congress and state governments.

Read the full story @ The LA Times

The Growth of Social Media: An Infographic

Say what you will about the tidal wave that is social media: it’s over-hyped, a fad halfway through its 15 minutes of fame, that isn't as effective for influencing and motivating voters as television and print newspapers or old fashioned telephone and door to door canvassing.

But take a look below at the steep curve of the user growth rate in all age ranges and demographics, and the continuing pervasiveness of social networking into every facet of work, play, politics and life in general. It’s hard to argue that social media hasn’t changed forever how we interact and connect with each other. See for yourself: (below the fold - click more)

The U.S. Government Is Not Broke

by Beverly Bandler

To tell Americans that the United States Government is broke, as the Republican Party and some Democratic conservatives do, is not only a lie it is irresponsible and just plain idiotic propaganda. Too many Americans believe this hokum that defies common sense.

Political Activism With Social Media

Social Media Engagement Will Decide Election 2012

Social networking tools such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and blogs have forever changed how people communicate and how they organize for social and political change.

21st century political candidates and community organizers have swapped yard signs for social media. With Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and other new media tools, the traditional relationship between political authority, the main stream news media and "we the people" has been upended, making it easier for "we the people" to collaborate, coordinate, and have a voice in the politics that affect the life of ourselves and our families.

To hear more about how social media engagement has become a critically important strategy for political candidates and community organizing come to the Social Media Day cosponsored by the Texas Democratic Women of Collin County and the Democratic Blog for News.

The Social Media Day will be at the Plano Centre on Saturday September 10th from 9:00am to 12:00pm in the Hillhaven Room. (map)

Suggested Donation of $5 to the TDWCC – pay at the door.

RSVP to events@tdwcc.org

Event sponsors:

Texas Democratic Women of Collin County

Democratic Blog of Collin County

More:

• Social Media Engagement for the 2012 Election
• Political Campaigns in the Digital Age
  
• Texas Democratic Women of Collin County
• The Democratic Blog - News
  

The Mobile Election 2012

Campaigns and Elections: Apps and video will move mobile forward for campaigns in 2012. For campaigns looking to make their mark with mobile in 2012, it’s no longer just about text.

Many online strategists expect SMS to actually take a backseat next year as the presidential cycle ushers in a new world of mobile apps and an expanded use of video.

The reason is simple: Smartphone use has grown exponentially over the past two years, making this coming election cycle the one in which mobile use by campaigns should explode.

In December of 2008, just 14 percent of wireless customers in the U.S. were using smartphones. Now, according to the latest numbers from the Pew Internet and American Life Project, more than a third of all Americans are using smartphones.

“Research has shown that by the end of 2011, smartphone usage will reach 50 percent,” says Cami Longstreet Zimmer, president of Campaign Touch Mobile Solutions. “Mobile doubles every six months, so having a mobile strategy for your campaign is a must.”

65% Of Online Adults Use Social Networking Sites

Pew Research Center: The pace with which users have flocked to social networking sites has been staggering; in a first survey about social networking sites in February 2005, just 8% of internet users -- or 5% of all adults -- said they used them.

Now, a new survey by Pew internet & American Life Project finds that 65% say they use a social networking site like MySpace, Facebook or LinkedIn, up from 61% one year ago. Only email and search engines are used more frequently than social networking tools.

That's more than double the percentage that reported social networking site usage in 2008 (29%). And for the first time in Pew Internet surveys, it means that more than half of all adults (51%) use social networking sites.

Among internet users, social networking sites are most popular with women, young adults under age 30, and parents.

Young adult women ages 18-29 are the power users of social networking; fully 89% of those who are online use the sites overall and 69% do so on an average day.

As of May 2011, there are no significant differences in use of social networking sites based on race and ethnicity, household income, education level, or whether the internet user lives in an urban, suburban, or rural environment.

See the full report for a more detailed analysis of how Americans use social networking sites at pewinternet.org.

Billions Meant for Struggling Homeowners Diverted By House Republicans

A new report by the investigative website Pro Publica publicizes that Congress diverted $30 billion in bailout money allocated to help struggling homeowners prevent foreclosure in order to pay down the national debt instead.

There were more than 1 million foreclosure filings in the first half of 2011 alone, yet only a fraction of the government aid that was supposed to reach homeowners has been spent:

Instead, Congress has mandated that the leftover money be used to pay down the debt.

Of the $45.6 billion in Trouble Asset Relief Program funds meant to aid homeowners, the most recent numbers available show that only about $2 billion has actually gone out the door.

The low number reflects how little the government’s home loan modification and other programs have actually helped homeowners deal with the foreclosure crisis.

Read the full report @ Pro Publica.

Sen. Sanders Introduces Bill To Lift Social Security Payroll Tax Cap

On Thursday, Sanders announced that he will introduce legislation that would fully fund Social Security to the end of this century without cutting benefits to any of its beneficiaries. Sanders’ legislation would eliminate the income cap that currently exists in the payroll tax that does not tax income above $106,800:

To keep Social Security strong for another 75 years, Sanders’ legislation would apply the same payroll tax already paid by more than nine out of 10 Americans to those with incomes over $250,000 a year. [...] Under Sanders’ legislation, Social Security benefits would be untouched. The system would be fully funded by making the wealthiest Americans pay the same payroll tax already assessed on those with incomes up to $106,800 a year.

Last week, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) was a featured speaker at the United Steel Workers 2011 conference in Las Vegas.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)

Sanders focused much of his speech on the Social Security system, blasting suggestions by Democrats and Republicans alike that, for example, we should adjust the cost of living adjustment to cut Social Security payments to working class Americans or raise the retirement age. “When [Social Security] was developed, 50 percent of seniors lived in poverty.

Today, poverty among seniors is too high, but that number is ten percent. Social Security has done exactly what it was designed to do!”

Sanders points out that President Obama himself endorsed this idea on the campaign trail in 2008. “What we need to do is to raise the cap on the payroll tax so that wealthy individuals are paying a little bit more into the system. Right now, somebody like Warren Buffet pays a fraction of 1 percent of his income in payroll tax, whereas the majority…pays payroll tax on 100 percent of their income. I’ve said that was not fair,” said Obama during the campaign.

The Social Security system is currently fully funded until 2037. Lifting the payroll tax cap would virtually eliminate funding shortfalls the program would experience over the next 75 years.

Hurricane Irene A Dangerous Storm For The Eastern Seaboard

The expected arrival of the nearly 600-mile-wide Hurricane Irene this weekend means that states of emergency have been declared along the length of the eastern seaboard. Dangerous Irene is an usually wet and large hurricane in its overall size with tropical storm force winds extending out nearly 300 miles from the center. Climate scientists studying hurricanes have documented a 35-year warming trend of 1 degree Fahrenheit in ocean surface temperature. That 1 degree rise in surface temperature increases atmospheric water vapor available to feed hurricanes, increasing the area of tropical storm force winds and total rainfall amounts.

Depending on numerous factors, it could take New York City “weeks or months” to return to normal if the densely-populated city suffers a direct hit from Hurricane Irene. Apart from the potential loss of life in the most densely populated part of the America, history suggests that the economic damage could run into the tens of billions of dollars, depending on the severity of the storm and how close it comes to the City of New York. Unlikely but theoretically plausible scenarios could have the damage entering the realm of the costliest natural disasters of all time, and perhaps being large enough to have a materially negative effect on the nation’s gross domestic product.

The storm is poised to hit New York at a time when high tides reach their highest levels, which could amplify flooding in the city built around bays and rivers. Some experts predict a storm surge of five feet or more. Lower Manhattan could see streets under a few feet of water.

"In many ways, a Category 2 or stronger storm hitting New York is a lot of people's nightmare, for a number of reasons," said Susan Cutter, director of the Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute at the University of South Carolina.

Even if the winds aren't strong enough to damage buildings made largely of brick, concrete and steel, a lot of New York's subway system and power lines are underground. The city's airports are close to the water, too, and could be inundated, as could densely packed neighborhoods. Hospitals were told to make sure generators were ready.

Fox News: ‘Facts Are Certainly’ On The Side Of Global Warming, But ‘It Doesn’t Matter’

On Fox & Friends Sunday, anchor Clayton Morris admitted that Fox News factcheckers have confirmed that man-made global warming is “certainly” real, but argued that it “doesn’t matter” because climate denial is popular among Fox News-watching conservatives. Morris contrasted Jon Huntsman’s defense of the National Academy of Sciences with Rick Perry’s claims that scientists have “manipulated data” to concoct manmade global warming:

MORRIS: If you dive into the weeds a little bit on this global warming thing, you see that it seems that facts are certainly on Huntsman’s side on all of this and fact checkers have come out, we’re actually having our own brain room look look at this right now that any of Perry’s comments don’t seem to hold a lot of water. It doesn’t matter. What’s resonating right now in South Carolina is helping Governor Perry tremendously and he fired back at Huntsman on global warming and gaining traction, facts or not.

Fox & Friends Sunday with anchor Clayton Morris

Americans care deeply about energy, weather disasters, food prices, clean air, and a safe future for their children.

Maybe if Clayton Morris and his Fox News colleagues decided that facts should matter, they’d be able to rally Americans to fight global warming pollution before it’s too late.

Skepticism and outright denial of climate changing global warming are among the articles of faith of the Tea Party movement across the country. To a large extent, of course, those articles of faith were intentionally fostered by the constant bombardment of anti-science propaganda from Fox News and other right-wing media.

For some, the denial of scientific facts are a matter of religious conviction; for others, it is driven by distrust of those they call the elites. And for others still, efforts to address climate change are seen as a conspiracy to impose world government and a sweeping redistribution of wealth.

Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) trades that fear and distrust of scientists in his proclamation that climate science is a "contrived phony mess" based on “so-called science” in a “secular carbon cult.”

Global Warming’s Heavy Cost

As Irene takes aim on the Eastern Seaboard toward New York City, the mainstream news media should ask: what’s a “tropical” storm doing heading for the snow belt? Category 3 Storms have rarely hit Long Island since the 1800s; one was the great unnamed storm of 1938, which sent 15-foot storm waters surging through what are now multimillion-dollar seaside homes.

Normally, says Jeff Masters of Weather Underground, it’s “difficult for a major Category 3 or stronger hurricane crossing north of North Carolina to maintain that intensity, because wind shear rapidly increases and ocean temperatures plunge below the 26°C (79°F) level that can support a hurricane.” The high-altitude wind shear may help knock the storm down a little this year, but the ocean temperatures won’t. They’re bizarrely high—only last year did we ever record hotter water.

“Sea surface temperatures 1° to 3°F warmer than average extend along the East Coast from North Carolina to New York. Waters of at least 26°C extend all the way to southern New Jersey, which will make it easier for Irene to maintain its strength much farther to the north than a hurricane usually can,” says Masters. “These warm ocean temperatures will also make Irene a much wetter hurricane than is typical, since much more water vapor can evaporate into the air from record-warm ocean surfaces. The latest precipitation forecast from NOAA's Hydrological prediction center shows that Irene could dump over eight inches of rain over coastal New England.”

Remember—this year has already seen more billion-dollar weather-related disasters than any year in U.S. history. Last year was the warmest ever recorded on planet Earth. Arctic sea ice is near all-time record lows. Record floods from Pakistan to Queensland to the Mississippi basin; record drought from the steppes of Russia to the plains of Texas. Just about the only trauma we haven’t had are hurricanes plowing into the U.S., but that’s just luck—last year was a big storm year, but they all veered out to sea. This year we’re already on letter I—which in a normal year we don’t get to until well into October. Every kind of natural system is amped up, holding more power—about ¾ of a watt extra energy per square meter of the Earth’s surface, thanks to the carbon we’ve poured into the atmosphere. This is what climate change looks like in its early stages.

But you’d never guess that anything was amiss if you asked the Obama administration. In one of those ironies of timing, Friday saw the release of the environmental impact statement (EIS) for the most contested energy project in many years, the so-called Keystone Pipeline that would connect the tar sands of northern Alberta with the Gulf of Mexico. Those tar sands are the second-biggest pool of carbon on the continent; if we tap into them in a big way, says the federal government’s premier climate scientist James Hansen, it’s “essentially game over for the climate.”

Read the full story @ The Daily Beast

Widespread Dissatisfaction With National Conditions And GOP

Pew Research Center: The public is profoundly discontented with conditions in the country, its government, political leadership and several of its major institutions. Fully 79% are dissatisfied with the way things are going in the country. Even more (86%) say they are frustrated or angry with the federal government. Favorable ratings for both political parties are in negative territory and have declined since the beginning of the year.

Just 22% approve of the job performance of Republican congressional leaders, down from 36% in February. Ratings for Democratic leaders are only somewhat better (29% approve). More generally, the Republican Party's favorable rating has declined from 43% in early February to 34% currently. At 43%, the Democratic Party is viewed more favorably than the GOP, but it too was rated a bit better earlier in the year (47% in February).

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Aug. 17-21 among 1,509 adults, finds that Barack Obama's job approval rating has declined markedly since the killing of Osama bin Laden in early May.

For the first time in his presidency, significantly more disapprove than approve of the way Obama is handling his job as president (49% vs. 43%), and the margin of strong disapproval over strong approval has widened; currently, 38% strongly disapprove of Obama's job performance while 26% strongly approve.

Fewer Democrats and independents now view Obama as a strong leader than did so in May (down 10 points, eight points, respectively).

Democrats also want Obama to get tougher in his dealings with congressional Republicans. Currently, 57% of Democrats say Obama should challenge the Republicans more often, while 32% say he is handling relations with the GOP about right. In early April, just 39% of Democrats said Obama should do more to challenge Republicans and 47% said he was handling things about right.

The better news for Obama is that he continues to be seen by majorities as someone who stands up for what he believes in (71%), as caring (63%) and trustworthy (59%). Moreover, his 43% job approval rating, while much lower than his rating just a few months ago, is relatively strong given the widespread dissatisfaction with national conditions, increasingly negative views of the economy, and broad distrust of government. And Obama’s approval rating continues to be much higher than those for congressional leaders of both parties.

Obama continues to run even in a 2012 match up against a generic Republican presidential candidate. Currently, 43% of registered voters say they would like to see Obama reelected while 40% would prefer a Republican. That is little changed from a month ago (41% Obama, 40% Republican), but in May Obama held an 11-point lead in the generic ballot.

Voters remain unimpressed by the GOP field. As was the case in late May, prior to the Ames straw poll and Rick Perry’s entry into the presidential race, only about a quarter of voters (26%) say they have an excellent or good impression of the possible GOP candidates. Most (64%) say as a group the candidates are only fair or poor.

Troubled Economy Top Story For Public And Media

Pew Research Center August 23, 2011: Americans focused most closely last week on news about the nation’s troubled economy amid concerns about the stalled recovery and fears of a possible new recession.

About four-in-ten (42%) say they followed reports about the condition of the U.S. economy more closely than any other news. That is three times the number saying their top story was news about the candidates for the 2012 presidential election (14%), according to the latest weekly News Interest Index survey, conducted Aug. 18-21 among 1,007 adults by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press.

Economic news topped coverage as well, accounting for a quarter of the newshole (25%), according to a separate analysis by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ). News about the 2012 elections made up 13% of all news coverage.

Melding Economic and Political News

Economic story lines top the public’s news interest. At the same time, the debate over what the federal government can or should do to help the economy has become a key issue in the 2012 race for the White House.

More than four-in-ten (44%) say they followed news about the economy very closely last week, approaching the year’s high of 49%, while 42% say this was the news they followed most closely. Another 12% say they very closely followed news about the debate among European leaders over how to address the region’s debt crisis. This was the top story for 4% and accounted for 3% of coverage.

More than a quarter (27%) say they very closely followed news about candidates for the 2012 presidential elections, up from 19% the previous week and a high point for the year so far. With Texas Gov. Rick Perry stepping up his campaign for the GOP nomination and President Obama making a campaign-style bus trip, election news made up 13% of coverage, which was little changed from 15% the previous week, when Michele Bachmann won the Republican straw poll in Iowa and Perry officially entered the race.

Coverage and interest have both increased since early August. And, as the economic news has worsened, the GOP contenders have focused their criticism on Obama’s efforts to improve the situation. Perry made news last week with blunt criticism of Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke.

There are no partisan differences in attention to news about the economy with 48% of Republicans, 45% of Democrats and 47% of independents saying they followed economic news very closely. Republicans and Democrats also express similar interest in news about the 2012 elections: 36% of Republicans and 30% of Democrats followed this news very closely. Just more than two-in-ten independents (22%) say the same.

ThinkProgress: The Mess In Texas — Debunking Rick Perry’s ‘Texas Miracle’

ThinkProgress video

Having only entered the race last week, Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) has already jumped to the top of the GOP presidential field.

Fueling his momentum is the so-called “Texas miracle” — the myth that Perry’s governorship has led Texas to weather the recession better than other states, maintaining a healthy economy and brisk job creation.

According a the video produced by Think Progress, these claims are often built on incomplete analysis, or by cherry picking statistics while overlooking other relevant factors that fill in the full picture, which is a much more mixed and middling economic performance than he and his supporters would like you to believe.

National Science Foundation: No Evidence Supporting 'Climategate' Allegations

Making unsubstantiated allegations against thousands of climate scientists, many in his own state of Texas, Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) claims that climate science is a “contrived phony mess” based on “so-called science” in a “secular carbon cult.” Speaking at a Politics and Eggs breakfast in Bedford, New Hampshire Wednesday August 17, 2012 Gov. Perry further said, “There are a substantial number of scientists who have manipulated data..."

In contrast to Perry's unsubstantiated allegations, three major UK investigations previously exonerated the so called "Climate-Gate" scientists of any wrongdoing. Pennsylvania State University also conducted its own investigation of "Climate-Gate" allegations against its own climatologist Michael Mann and dismissed them lacking any substance of fact.

Now, this week, the National Science Foundation has closed its investigation into Penn State climatologist Michael Mann after finding no evidence of scientific misconduct related to his research.

No direct evidence has been presented that indicates the subject fabricated the raw data he used for his research or falsified his results.

National Science Foundation
Inspector General report

Climate Daily: It is the latest in a string of investigations to exonerate scientists involved in the so-called "Climategate" email scandal.

Mann was a central figure in the fracas, where a sampling of correspondence from climate scientists purloined from a computer server at the University of East Anglia in Britain supposedly showed climate scientists colluding to fabricate data and smear critics.

But a successive series of investigations and inquiries since the emails were released in 2009 have exonerated the scientists. The final conclusion from the NSF's Office of Inspector General is no different [PDF; enter Case No. A09120086].

"No direct evidence has been presented that indicates the subject fabricated the raw data he used for his research or falsified his results," the report concludes.

Gov. Perry Struggles To Defend Abstinence-Only Sex Ed

After spending more federal abstinence-only education money than any other state in the country over the last decade, Gov. Rick Perry's Texas is left with the highest teen birth rate and fourth-highest teen pregnancy rate in the country.

Listen to Gretch Sanders of KUT News report on Texas teen pregnancy

Texas accounts for 8 percent of the U.S. population, but its teen pregnancies accounted for 11 percent ($1.2 billion) of the $10.9 billion cost to U.S. taxpayers in 2008. Of those 2008 costs federal funds paid 57 percent and state and local taxes the remaining 43 percent through Medicaid and other support programs. After the Republican controlled Texas legislature cut Texas Department of State Health Services and Medicaid funding in the 2011-13 state budget, teen mothers and their babies now have few support options.

According to the Austin American-Statesman, Texas received almost $18 million in federal "abstinence-only" funding in 2007, matched by $3 million in state funds in that year. But, by the summer of 2010, Texas was choosing to pass on $4.4 million in federal funds aimed at comprehensive abstinence-plus with fact-based safe-sex education for adolescents in the state, The Texas Tribune reported. The Texas Health and Human Services Executive Commissioner Tom Suehs consulted with Gov. Perry's office before deciding to pass on the federal sex education funds.

Last October, The Tribune's Evan Smith asked Texas Gov. Rick Perry why almost all Texas school districts focus on abstinence-only education when it doesn't to produce results. The only answer Gov. Perry would give is, "Abstinence works... it is the best form to teach our children."

According to the Texas Freedom Network, over 96 percent of Texas school districts taught abstinence-only in sex education classes in 2008.

When George W. Bush became president in 2001, he was a vocal proponent of abstinence-only sex education programs.

Bush increased federal spending on abstinence-only education in U.S. schools, with the hope that it would reach $320 million a year. Federal abstinence-only education funding reached a maximum level of approximately $214 million per year before Bush left office in 2009. (graph)

Pres. Obama's 2010 budget cut federal abstinence-only sex education funding and called for $164 million in funding for a new fact-based teen sex education and pregnancy prevention initiative. The switch from "abstinence-only" to fact-base "abstinence-plus" programs included competitive grants for evidence-based programs, research and evaluation, and an authorization for $50 million in new mandatory teen pregnancy prevention grants to states, tribes, and territories. The budget eliminated funding for Community-Based Abstinence Education and the mandatory Title V Abstinence Education program.