 Your new post is loading...
This Republican Economy
by PAUL KRUGMAN, New York Times | Opinion
What should be done about the economy? Republicans claim to have the answer: slash spending and cut taxes. What they hope voters won’t notice is that that’s precisely the policy we’ve been following the past couple of years. Never mind the Democrat in the White House; for all practical purposes, this is already the economic policy of Republican dreams.
So the Republican electoral strategy is, in effect, a gigantic con game: it depends on convincing voters that the bad economy is the result of big-spending policies that President Obama hasn’t followed (in large part because the G.O.P. wouldn’t let him), and that our woes can be cured by pursuing more of the same policies that have already failed.
For some reason, however, neither the press nor Mr. Obama’s political team has done a very good job of exposing the con.
What do I mean by saying that this is already a Republican economy? Look first at total government spending — federal, state and local. Adjusted for population growth and inflation, such spending has recently been falling at a rate not seen since the demobilization that followed the Korean War.
How is that possible? Isn’t Mr. Obama a big spender? Actually, no; there was a brief burst of spending in late 2009 and early 2010 as the stimulus kicked in, but that boost is long behind us. Since then it has been all downhill. Cash-strapped state and local governments have laid off teachers, firefighters and police officers; meanwhile, unemployment benefits have been trailing off even though unemployment remains extremely high. [MORE]
by JACKIE CALMES and NICHOLAS KULISH, New York Times The bleak jobs report on Friday predictably had heads snapping toward the White House, looking to President Obama to do something. Yet his proposed remedies only underscore how much the president, just five months before he faces voters, is at the mercy of actors in Europe, China and Congress whose political interests often conflict with his own. That day, Mr. Obama continued his weekly travels around the country,prodding Congressional Republicansto pass his “to-do list” of temporary tax cuts and spending initiatives to help create jobs. The Republicans only mock him, which leaves Mr. Obama free to blame his opponents and their presidential standard-bearer, Mitt Romney. But in doing so, he telegraphs a message of powerlessness that no leader likes to convey — least of all one who ran for office four years ago vowing to bridge Washington’s partisan gulf. Developments overseas have not helped either. American officials have complained as Beijing began letting itscurrency devalue again, making its exports cheaper and those from the United States to China more costly. And administration officials, and Mr. Obama himself, have lobbied leaders in Europe for more forceful action to promote growth or at least contain the threat of financial contagion there. [MORE]
by ADAM PECK, Think Progress
Senior Romney campaign adviser Ed Gillespie appeared on Fox News Sunday this morning and tried to deflect criticism from then-Governor Mitt Romney’s decision to direct$9 million in state funding to clean energy companies around the state, including the now-defunct Konarka Technologies.
The campaign finds itself on the defensive after Konarka, a Romney-backed solar company, went belly up just a day after the governor sought to exploit the Obama administration’s loan to renewable energy company Solyndra. Konarka has filed for bankruptcy and is ceasing operations, laying off its staff of 85 and liquidating all of its assets. [MORE]
Via Lynda Park
|
Scooped by
Don Manning
|
"Resolved Not to Give Up" By Don Manning
Recently while organizing various notes and documents in my computer, I found a small collection of some of my favorite quotes. Among them was one from author John Steinbeck; "Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires. That’s the only reason I can see why people in the US continue to vote against their own interests." Since Steinbeck has been gone for over 40 years, I find it moderately concerning that this could still apply to today's social and political climate. It doesn't seem so long ago that we watched vocal and angered protesters, some of them seniors, complain about government involvement in health care, all the while of course while some were receiving Medicare benefits. Deeper in my files I found a letter to the editor in one of our local papers that was penned by a good
friend of mine, Don Simon. Titled "Resolved not to give up", it contained the following paragraph; "It's true that the rabbit hole we've fallen down is a deep one and that getting money out of our political system may seem like a mission outside our capacity. So, what we may need to remember is that it is always darkest before the dawn and that it's neither time to give up or to give in..." As is the norm in our neck of the woods, his letter brought lots of replies after being published, most of them somewhat vitriolic and lacking an argument. I was one of the few that backed Mr. Simon's commentary and wrote the following; Raise your hard working calloused hand if you are among those that will come to the defense of the very people that couldn't care less if you live, die, or go broke. Raise your well manicured hand and rattle your Rolex if you think you are among the 400 or so that have a combined wealth of the "bottom" 50% of this entire nation. Chances are good that you are only among the brainwashed that ignore the vanishing middle class, that in actuality you are probably a member of. Are you among those that are blaming everything wrong with America on anyone or anything other than the Corporations and organized “entities” that are buying favorable legislation from our elected servants, all while slowly eroding the Constitution from beneath the foundation of our Nation?
I don’t object to capitalism. I wish everyone, Corporations included, every financial success they can legally realize. That said, I will not stand quietly on the sidelines, or point fingers toward the innocent, while someone uses their own capital to buy self serving Democracy, while diminishing the rights, benefits and income of hard working public servants, working poor, and middle class Americans. Some need to turn on a fan and open a window. Get the smoke of lies and stench of the same old scapegoats cleared from the surroundings. Turn off the corporate controlled television “news” you find so factual, and do your own homework. It’s not hard to do. It’s easy to follow dirty money, but you actually have to look for it. Millions of people have. More Americans are waking up & standing up, every day. Some Americans need to pay attention. Some Americans need to join "us". Some Americans need to step aside. The work ahead of us is not for the squeamish or bashful. The cycle of
corruption is this; money has replaced "we the people" as the force that drives and directs our government. That cycle needs to be repaired. It won’t be fast or easy, and the apathetic need not apply. Yet like the old saying goes, “If you aren’t part of the
solution, you are part of the problem”. To stay quietly on the sidelines, is to condone what is happening. The signs of what "we" are up against are out in plain sight,
for all who want to look. Let's "Wake Up & Stand Up"... Let's "Educate, Organize & Mobilize"... Let’s be heard, let's be seen. Let's make a difference. DM
|
|
Scooped by
Don Manning
|
Speaking of America with Don Manning airs on Mondays at 11 pm ET (8 pm PT). This week's focus is the recall election in Wisconsin. Can the Koch Brother's money keep One Percent poster boy Scott Walker in the Governor's mansion to hack away at the rights of working people and organized labor, or will the challenger, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett send him to the U-Haul store? Don wants to hear from you, no matter your perspective!
Monday @ 8pm PT / 11pm ET
CLICK HERE to listen. Or call: (646) 929-2495
by Connor Gibson, EcoWatch
Ohio is in the final stages of making an Exxon trojan horse on hydrofracking into state law, and it appears that the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) connected Exxon’s lawyers with co-sponsors of Ohio Senate Bill 315: at least 33 of the 45 Ohio legislators who co-sponsored SB 315 are ALEC members, and language from portions of the state Senate bill is similar to ALEC’s “Disclosure of Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid Composition Act.” [MORE]
by NICOLE DESAUTELS SCHULTE, Wisconsin Citizens Media Co-op A source in the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development (DWD) has revealed the DWD Secretary Reggie Newson has ordered staff not to discuss new and disappointing data on jobs in Wisconsin until after the June 5th election. Reggie Newson’s assistant, Laurel Steinmeyer, said that Newson was “traveling to Milwaukee” and was unavailable for comment, and would not comment herself. Asked directly for a comment, DWD spokesman John Dipko refused to answer and said he would follow up “later today.” He has not followed up, nor have any members of the DWD Media Relations Department returned any calls asking for comment. [MORE]
Via Coffee Party USA
by Pete Williams, NBC
Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens took a poke at the controversial Citizens Uniteddecision Wednesday night and said his former colleagues have probably already had second thoughts about it.
The 2010 decision paved the way for the SuperPACs to which wealthy individuals, corporations, and labor unions can give unlimited amounts of money to support or oppose candidates. Stevens was among the justices who dissented in the court's 5-4 ruling.
In remarks prepared for delivery at the University of Arkansas, Stevens predicted that the court will soon be forced to issue rulings that will undermine a key part of the Citizens United ruling -- that the First Amendment "prohibits the suppression of political speech based on the speaker's identity," including the fact that the speaker is a corporation. [MORE]
by SARAH CHILDRESS, Frontline Gross Domestic Product: The report notes the massive difference between the actual and potential GDP — now estimated at about $2.6 trillion, according to a January Congressional Budget Office report. Unemployment: The rate peaked at 10.1 percent in October 2009, but it’s still at 8.1 percent today. That’s 12.5 million people who are out of work, not saving for retirement and not contributing to the GDP. Government bailouts: The government has poured about $23 trillion into a host of programs and bailouts. Lost household wealth: With home prices tanking, the report estimates a loss of $7 trillion in the real estate industry. The stock market decline has brought another $11 trillion in losses, and retirement accounts have lost $3.4 trillion. Human suffering: It’s hard to put a dollar value on this. But the report found plenty of grim data to offer some insight: The Census Bureau’s 2010 estimate of 46.2 million people in poverty is the “largest number in the 52 years for which poverty estimates have been published.”
[MORE]
Via Jessica English
|
Suggested by
Shelly Bernal
|
By CLAIRE A. HILL and RICHARD W. PAINTER, The New York Times
EXCERPT: Requiring settlements to include an admission of guilt is not the best way to proceed. A more effective approach would be to make senior, highly compensated officers of the bank pay some portion of the fine.
The Congressional hearing addressed the fact that a penalty assessed against an entity is effectively paid by its shareholders. The shareholders neither caused the behavior that led to the fine nor were they responsible for preventing it. By contrast, the Citigroup officers who were responsible do not bear a significant portion of the penalty, except to the extent they are shareholders or their bonuses are tied to earnings, now reduced by the penalty. They thus have little incentive to change their behavior.
To change that incentive, all of a bank’s most highly compensated officers — those making more than $1 million a year — should be personally and collectively liable for paying a significant portion (perhaps 50 percent) of S.E.C. fines levied against their bank, a liability that could not be waived by the commission. Officers should be liable for an amount in proportion to the size of their compensation that year. [MORE]
|
|
Suggested by
Shelly Bernal
|
By BOB IVRY, Bloomberg
EXCERPT: In November 2004, Hunt, now 55, joined Citigroup (C) Inc. as a vice president in the mortgage unit. It looked like a great career move. The housing market was booming, and the New York- based bank, the sixth-largest lender in the U.S. at the time, was responsible for 3.5 percent of all home loans. Hunt supervised 65 mortgage underwriters at CitiMortgage Inc.’s sprawling headquarters in O’Fallon, Missouri, 45 minutes west of St. Louis.
EXCERPT: By 2006, the bank was buying mortgages from outside lenders with doctored tax forms, phony appraisals and missing signatures, she says. It was Hunt’s job to identify these defects, and she did, in regular reports to her bosses. Executives buried her findings, Hunt says, before, during and after the financial crisis, and even into 2012.
In March 2011, more than two years after Citigroup took $45 billion in bailouts from the U.S. government and billions more from the Federal Reserve -- more in total than any other U.S. bank -- Jeffery Polkinghorne, an O’Fallon executive in charge of loan quality, asked Hunt and a colleague to stay in a conference room after a meeting.
The encounter with Polkinghorne was brief and tense, Hunt says. The number of loans classified as defective would have to fall, he told them, or it would be “your asses on the line.”
Hunt says it was clear what Polkinghorne was asking -- and she wanted no part of it.
[READ ARTICLE]
By LEE DRUTMAN, Sunlight Foundation
The more a company lobbies, the better its publicly-traded shares perform. At least, that’s the conclusion of an academic research paper that analyzed share prices and corporate lobbying from 1999-2006.
“Lobbying firms significantly outperform non-lobbying firms,” write professors Matthew D. Hill, G. Wayne Kelly, G. Brandon Lockhart, and Robert A. Van Ness in a paper entitled “Determinants and Effects of Corporate Lobbying.” (the paper is not yet published). They also note that “Excess returns are directly associated with the number of years that firms lobby.”
So the more years a firm lobbies, the better it does. The professors’ statistical analyses led them to estimate that if a company lobbied for five years, its stock price would be 3.9% higher than if it had not lobbied at all. Which is a pretty remarkable return, when you think about it. And among the firms that lobby, those who spend more get an even better return.
They also find that, in particular, 2001, 2002, and 2005 were good years to be lobbying. The pay-off to lobbying was generally higher in those years.
Interestingly, though, only about 15% of publicly-traded firms in the United States spend any money on direct lobbying (though many do contribute to trade associations). This seems surprising given what seems like very high returns. [MORE]
Via Shelly Bernal
|
NATIONAL COFFEE PARTY WEEK KICKS OFF MONDAY
Local organizers seek accountability through public awareness [MORE]
WISCONSIN RECALL
Craig Dunigan says the historic recall of Gov. Walker is a collective refusal to let go of the Wisconsin way of life [MORE]
BE THE MEDIA
Eric Byler invites you to speak your truth through on of the largest "99 Percent Media" microphones in the nation — you know: the one you helped us build.[MORE]
WE ALL DIE A LITTLE
Cheryl Hatch, Jeanene Louden, and Debilyn Molineaux reflect on the meaning of Memorial Day. [MORE]
HOW WALL STREET MANIPULATES GAS PRICES, CHEATS OUR FAMILIES, AND HURTS OUR ECONOMY
Jessica English interviews Tyson Slocum of Public Citizen on how the price of oil is manipulated by Wall Street speculators, and what We the People can do to stop them. [MORE]
THREE REASONS WHY CONSERVATIVES SHOULD JOIN THE COFFEE PARTY
by Michael Charney [MORE]
Via Jessica English, Coffee Party USA
|
|
Scooped by
Don Manning
|
By Ruth Coniff, The Daily Page; With the recall election less than two days away, federal prosecutors are closing in on Governor Scott Walker, according to veteran political reporter David Shuster, former Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager, and former district attorney..... (more)
by Denise Oliver Velez, Daily Kos
As the right wing increases its efforts to turn back time and force us back into the past with concerted drives to restrict voter registration and disenfranchise those of us who are already registered, new efforts are being mounted to fight back.
The same way that black church leaders played a key role in voter registration during the civil rights movement of the sixties, once again they will step up to the pulpit, move their congregations to get out the vote and join efforts to push back against repressive restrictions.
Wednesday, May 30th, a Faith Leaders Summit was held in Washington D.C. by theCongressional Black Caucus (CBC) in conjunction with the Conference of National Black Churches (CNBC). [MORE]
by LEE FANG, Republic Report Fox News has taken flak for airing a four-minute political attack ad against President Obama during its regular programming this week. The ad wasn’t purchased by any outside group; it was simply produced by the network and aired as part of regular Fox News content. Though the network has tried to deflect criticism for the ad by blaming an associate producer, we tried to get more direct answers. Yesterday on Capitol Hill, Republic Report ran into Griff Jenkins, an on-air reporter for Fox News. Although he covers politics and campaigns for the network, Jenkins told us he had no opinions on the ad and couldn’t comment. Asked about how average Americans can ever have their voice heard if billionaires and multi-billion dollar corporations continue to expand their role in shaping elections, Jenkins incredulously told Republic Report’s Zaid Jilani, “I don’t know, but I’m glad you’re looking into it!”
Via Lynda Park
By David Edwards, The Raw Story Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) on Friday suggested that Republicans were outsourcing their “principles and convictions” by signing Grover Norquist’s pledge to never raise taxes. During a House Budget Committee hearing, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) asked the former governor if he agreed with the Americans for Tax Reform pledge. “No,” Bush said, shaking his head. “OK, so I ran for office three times. The pledge was presented to me three times. I never signed the pledge. I cut taxes every year I was governor.” “I don’t believe you outsource your principles and convictions to people,” he added. “I respect Grover’s political involvement. He has it every right to do it, but I never signed any pledge.” [MORE]
Via Lynda Park
|
Suggested by
Diane Owens
|
OPINION By RICHARD L. HASEN | 5/31/12 You’ve got to feel bad for the rich and powerful in America. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and a variety of big business groups say if Congress goes back to letting the American people know who is behind campaign attack ads, businesses will face the “palpable” threat of “retaliation” and “reprisals.” Former Federal Election Commission Chairman Bradley Smith warns in The Wall Street Journal that boycotts based on political beliefs — made possible by the public disclosure of campaign finance data — “endanger the very commerce that enriches us all.” Even the chief justice of the United States, John Roberts, apparently is being “intimidated” (Kathleen Parker), “pressured” (George Will) and “threatened” (Rick Garnett) by that most powerful force in America (law professor and New Republic legal editor) Jeffrey Rosen. On the right these days, the rhetoric is all about a liberal siege. Despite Republicans’ majority in the House, its filibuster power in the Senate, a sympathetic Supreme Court and the great power of business groups — the language of threats is pervasive. But look beyond the rhetoric and you can see what’s really going on: Those with power want to wield it without being accountable for their actions.
A letter we received in response to the video above:
"Good day,
I recently watched and shared [16 Corporations or We The People]. Though the names of the 16 corporations are not the point of the video......"
Our reply:
"The US Chamber of Commerce has done some good things for America. One thing that the Coffee Party doesn't care for, however, is that they keep those 16 corporations and all of their donors secret. They go to great lengths to achieve this level of secrecy, even going so far as to alter their political ads so that they get around the election laws we do try to enforce. ......"
[MORE]
Circus Act Conservative (Donald Trump), True Conservative (George Will) in War of Words
After George Will dubbed Donald Trump a “bloviating ignoramus,” the real estate mogul shot back by calling the columnist the “dumbest (and most overrated) political commentator of all time.” ABC News’ Will on Sunday blasted Trump during an appearance on “This Week” as he questioned why Mitt Romney would host a fundraising event with someone who continues to give credibility to birtherism. “I do not understand the cost benefit here,” Will said. “The costs are clear. The benefit — what voter is going to vote for him because he is seen with Donald Trump? The cost of appearing with this bloviating ignoramus is obvious, it seems to me. Donald Trump is redundant evidence that if your net worth is high enough, your IQ can be very low and you can still intrude into American politics.” Trump jumped on Twitter to lash out against Will, writing that “George Will may be the dumbest(and most overrated) political commentator of all time. If the Republicans listen to him, they will lose.” [MORE]
Via Eric Byler
|
|
Suggested by
Shelly Bernal
|
By MATT TAIBBI, Rolling Stone
If you want to see a perfect example of how completely broken our regulatory system is, look no further than a speech that Daniel Gallagher, one of the S.E.C.’s commissioners, recently gave in Denver, Colorado.
It’s a speech whose full lunacy is hard to grasp without some background.
It’s by now been well-established that the S.E.C.’s performance in policing Wall Street before, after, and during the crash has been comically inept. It would be putting it generously to say that the top cop on the financial services beat has demonstrated particular incompetence with regard to investigations of high-profile targets at powerhouse banks and financial companies. A less generous interpretation would be that the agency is simply too afraid, too unwilling, or too corrupt to take on the really dangerous animals in this particular jungle.
The S.E.C.’s failure to make even one case against a high-ranking executive involved in the mass frauds leading to the 2008 crash – compare this to the comparatively much smaller and less serious S&L crisis twenty years earlier, when the government made 1,100 criminal cases and sent 800 bank officials to jail – became so conspicuous that by the end of last year, the “No prosecutions of top figures” idea became an accepted meme in mainstream news media coverage of the economic crisis.
The S.E.C. in recent years has failed in almost every possible way a regulator can fail to police powerful criminals. Failure #1 was that it repeatedly fell down on the job even when alerted to problems at big companies well ahead of time by insiders. Six months before Lehman Brothers collapsed, setting off a chain reaction of losses that crippled the world economy, one of Lehman’s attorneys, Oliver Budde, contacted the S.E.C. to warn them that the firm had understated CEO Dick Fuld's income by more than $200 million; the agency blew him off. There were similar brush-offs of insiders with compelling information in cases involving Moody’s, Chase, and both of the major Ponzi scheme scandals, i.e. the Bernie Madoff and Allen Stanford cases. [MORE]
|
|
Suggested by
Shelly Bernal
|
By JOHN BRESNAHAN, Politico
A one-sentence bill worth $300 million to a bank owned by a politically connected family that has doled out hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign donations is about to get a big push forward.
Set to be approved by the House Financial Services Committee on Thursday, the legislation would help Emigrant Savings Bank of New York sidestep a costly mandate of the Dodd-Frank financial reform law. No other bank in the country would be affected. The bill was introduced by Rep. Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.), but it’s backed by members of both parties on the financial services panel. Emigrant Bank is owned by billionaire Howard Milstein, a bundler for President Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign and a major Empire State political player.
The bill has drawn no objections so far from bank regulators or the Obama administration, and proponents argue it is narrowly designed to help a community bank unfairly harmed by the controversial Dodd-Frank law.
But it is also an object lesson in how the rich and powerful — backed by a team of high-powered lobbyists — can get Congress to act on their issues, even as Capitol Hill wages partisan warfare on everything else.
The bill was first reported on by American Banker, a trade publication, but otherwise has received scant media attention. [READ ARTICLE]
|
|
Suggested by
Shelly Bernal
|
By DAN EGGEN, The Washington Post
Watchdog groups cheereda federal court ruling earlier this year aimed at revealing the secret donors behind many political interest groups, calling it a bold step in favor of disclosure.
But the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which plans to spend more than $50 million during the 2012 election cycle, said this week that it has a simple strategy for getting around the ruling: By changing the focus of its ads to specifically support or oppose candidates, it will not have to disclose any of its donors.
The announcement marks a sharp escalation in the battle between corporate interests and pro-disclosure groups who have been trying with limited success to force corporations and business groups to reveal more details about their political spending.
The move also means that the chamber is poised to become more directly involved in specific congressional races by explicitly telling people how they should vote. It’s a notable shift in strategy for the nation’s largest business lobby, which has long characterized itself as focusing primarily on policy rather than politics.
“We will have a vigorous, unchanged election program,” chamber President Tom Donohue told reporters Monday, adding that the push for disclosure is “all about intimidation. They want to intimidate people from participating.”
Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who brought the lawsuit that led to the ruling, said “It’s extraordinary what lengths these groups will go to in order to hide the sources of their funding. They’re going to twist themselves into knots to prevent voters from knowing who’s financing their ads.” [MORE]
|
