Independents Realize That Republicans Are Hindering Economic Recovery

November 7, 2011 — Ron Chusid

While there has always been conflict between the political parties, Republicans have taken this to a new level. Republicans have made it clear that their number one priority was for Barack Obama to fail, and they have pursued this goal regardless of how much harm is done to the country. While the filibuster has been used for ages, the Republicans have changed the nature of the filibuster in almost routinely forcing the Democrats to have sixty votes to pass bills, resulting in an unprecedented number of filibusters while the Republicans have been in the minority.  Once taking control of the House, they have used their power to pass legislation to kill jobs and block Obama’s plans which would increase jobs and help prevent another recession. Finally, what was once unthinkable is now being openly discussed: the Republicans are using their power to prevent economic recovery in the hope that this helps them win in 2012. This may or may not work as two polls now show that a majority of independents and moderates realize that this is the case.

The first poll was limited to Florida:

With 51 percent of voters saying that jobs and the economy are the most pressing issues in the nation today, 49 percent said they believe that the Republicans are intentionally hindering efforts to boost the economy so that President Barack Obama will not be reelected. Thirty-nine percent disagreed. As expected, most registered Democrats (70 percent) agreed that Republicans are intentionally hindering the economy and hurting Obama, but independents (52 percent) and even some Republicans (24 percent) also agreed.

A national poll found comparable results today:

…the Post poll asks people to choose between two options. This: “President Obama is making a good faith effort to deal with the country’s economic problems, but the Republicans in Congress are playing politics by blocking his proposals and programs.” Or this: “President Obama has not provided leadership on the economy, and he is just blaming the Republicans in Congress as an excuse for not doing his job.”

The toplines: Americans agree with the first statement over the second one, 50-44. According to numbers sent my way by the Post polling team, this is more pronounced among moderates and independents:

* Independents favor statement one over statement two by 54-40.

* Moderates favor statement one over statement two by 57-37.

The overall number is lower, at 50 percent, because a hilariously meager nine percent of Republicans believe this to be the case.

The results are encouraging but do  not mean that Obama won’t have difficulties in running for reelection with a weak economy. I’ve seen multiple elections were polls showed that voters agreed with Democrats on the issues but voted Republican. That result was largely due to voters being unaware of how closely Democratic positions matched their own because of the considerable amount of distortion of Democratic views coming from the right wing noise machine, but unless Democrats do a better job of connecting the dots for less knowledgeable voters, I fear that these polling results will also fail to lead to votes.

Now that there are polls showing that voters are receptive to the facts regarding this argument, the Democrats need to get the message out. Democrats tend to have the facts supporting their case hidden away in intellectual publications while Republicans loudly repeat their misinformation until too many people see their lies as facts. Democrats need to make more noise about what has really been happening with the economy with messages including:

  • Republican ideas have caused the economic problems, and the Republicans are working hard to prevent recovery for political gain
  • The nature of the political system allows the Republicans to block plans for economic recovery
  • Republicans have made passage of needed legislation even more difficult with their unprecedented use of the filibuster
  • There is no evidence that a slight increase in the marginal tax rate on millionaires will hinder the economy–in contrast we have seen considerable economic growth during periods with much higher tax rates
  • The Republican claim that Democrats are putting more regulations on business and hindering the economy are also false.
  • Reducing spending in areas where it either harms the middle class or neglects infrastructure further weakens the economy.

 

Posted in Barack Obama, Congress, Democrats, Economy, Independents, Politics, Polls, Republicans. Tags: , , . 4 Comments »

Obama Mocks GOP Religious Fanaticism While Promoting Government Plans So Sensible That Even Ronald Reagan Would Support Them

November 2, 2011 — Ron Chusid

Modern conservatives typically confuse secularism with opposition to religion. They are unaware of the facts that the Founding Fathers intentionally created a secular republic, and that many early religious leaders supported this because it was the best way to ensure that they would be free to practice their religions without interference from government. Today’s Republican leaders promote fear and hatred by promoting a revisionist history and scare stories that Democrats want to take away both their guns and Bibles. Therefore it is not surprising that the Republicans made a show of spending time in Congress with a bill to reaffirm “In God We Trust” as the national motto, even though there is no effort to try to change this. What is pleasantly surprising is that Barack Obama made fun of the Republicans for doing this. The Hill reports:

President Obama invoked God on Wednesday as he criticized Congress for voting on commemorative coins and a resolution reaffirming “In God We Trust” as the national motto in all public buildings, public schools and other government institutions.

“That’s not putting people back to work,” Obama said. “I trust in God, but God wants to see us help ourselves by putting people to work.”

Obama called on Congress to approve his jobs package.

“There’s no excuse for 100 percent of Washington Republicans to say no,” Obama said. “That means Republicans in Washington are out of touch with Republican voters.”

Obama continued: “The American people are with me on this.”

Normally I look down on those who make statements about what God wants, but I’ll forgive Obama this time. Normally when people (these days generally Republicans) talk about what God wants, it is in the context of either an excuse for them to use government to impose their views upon others, or as a reason for why they are running for president.

As for the political message of spending government money on the infrastructure, this is one of many things opposed by modern Republicans but supported by Ronald Reagan. Greg Sargent wrote:

In this morning’s speech calling on Congress to pass his new infrastructure and jobs bill, Obama again invoked Ronald Reagan, claiming he supported the same ideas Obama is now championing — and that Republicans are rejecting. Obama pointed to this as proof of today’s GOP extremism:

“If you don’t want to take my word for it, take it from one of my predecessors. He said that — and I’m quoting here — “the bridges and highways we fail to repair today will have to be rebuilt tomorrow at many times the cost.” He went on to say that rebuilding our infrastructure is common sense — and an investment in tomorrow that we must make today. That President was Ronald Reagan. Since when do we have Republicans voting against Ronald Reagan’s ideas?”I’ve tracked down the 1982 Reagan speech Obama was referring to, and the historical comparison is actually more interesting than this. The speech is right here. In it, Reagan proposed legislation for a new highway and bridge repair program.

Reagan did not call for any income tax hikes to pay for the proposal, so in this sense the historical comparison doesn’t work. However, he did call for a tax on motorists to pay for it — and he explicitly justified this added tax by arguing that infrastructure spending would stimulate the economy:

“The program will not increase the Federal deficit or add to the taxes that you and I pay on April 15th …Good tax policy decrees that wherever possible a fee for a service should be assessed against those who directly benefit from that service.

“So, what we’re proposing is to add the equivalent of five cents per gallon to the existing Federal highway user fee, the gas tax. That hasn’t been increased for the last 23 years. The cost to the average motorist will be small, but the benefit to our transportation system will be immense. The program will also stimulate 170,000 jobs, not in make-work projects but in real, worthwhile work in the hard-hit construction industries, and an additional 150,000 jobs in related industries. It will improve safety on our highways and will make truck transportation more efficient and productive for years to come.”

Posted in Barack Obama, Congress, Economy, Religion, Republicans, Ronald Reagan, Separation of Church and State. Tags: , , . 3 Comments »

More Examples Of Conservatives Pushing Big Government Plans To Restrict Women’s Rights

October 19, 2011 — Ron Chusid

The Republican claim of supporting limited government is often contradicted by the reality of their proposals which seek to impose further restrictions upon the rights of Americans. Opposition to reproductive rights, and the simple concept that each individual has the right to control their own body, is seen in two Republican proposals today.

Rick Santorum is among many on the religious right who not only oppose abortion but also oppose contraception. He is now seeking to defund all government spending on contraception:

SANTORUM: [Sex] is supposed to be within marriage. It’s supposed to be for purposes that are yes, conjugal…but also procreative. That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen…This is special and it needs to be seen as special.

Jim DeMint not only wants to restrict a woman’s right to abortion (which happens to be a legal procedure in this country) but is introducing legislation in the Senate to prohibit discussion of abortion by video conferencing over the internet. Think Progress reports:

Instead of focusing on job creation, congressional Republicans have spent their time passing socially conservative legislation like the “Let Women Die” bill that would allow hospitals that receive federal funds to deny women life-saving abortion procedures.

Now Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), one of the most die-hard anti-choice lawmakers, has jumped on the bandwagon by sneaking a radical anti-abortion amendment onto a completely unrelated piece of legislation. DeMint’s amendment would ban women and their doctors from discussing abortion over the Internet:

Anti-choice Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) just filed an anti-choice amendment to a bill related to agriculture, transportation, housing, and other programs. The DeMint amendment could bar discussion of abortion over the Internet and through videoconferencing, even if a woman’s health is at risk and if this kind of communication with her doctor is her best option to receive care.

Under this amendment, women would need a separate, segregated Internet just for talking about abortion care with their doctors.

Besides infringing upon the rights of women, this is yet another case of Republicans trying to use government to make health care decisions which should be left between a woman and her doctor. There is a huge gap between the rhetoric of the right wing and their actual policies.

Posted in Congress, Republicans, Rick Santorum, Social Issues. Tags: , , , . 1 Comment »

CBO Finds Obama Plan Will Stimulate Economy and Reduce The Deficit

October 8, 2011 — Ron Chusid

Economists have already analyzed Barack Obama’s job plan and concluded that it will help reduce the risk of another recession and increase jobs. The Congressional Budget Office has now analyzed the report and found that it will help reduce the budget deficit:

The Congressional Budget Office on Friday confirmed that President Obama’s jobs bill would be fully paid for over ten years and also gave its seal of approval to Senate Democrats’ version that includes a surtax on millionaires.

The CBO said that the original Obama stimulus bill would involve $447 billion in tax cuts and new spending—the same estimate given by the administration. It said the bill would raise $450 billion over ten years. The result is a $3 billion decrease in deficits over ten years.

The Senate Democrats’ bill, which replaces Obama’s taxes on the upper middle class with a 5.6 percent surtax on those with annual incomes above $1 million, raises $453 billion over ten years and reduces deficits by $6 billion. The tax kicks in in 2013.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s office highlighted that the CBO affirmed 60 percent of the stimulus comes in the form of tax cuts rather than spending and that most of the tax relief is for workers.

CBO also said that the bill “could have a noticeable impact on economic growth and employment in the next few years.” CBO under its own rules is prevented from factoring in increased unemployment, and the possible increased tax revenue that could result into its cost estimate.

Of course Republicans will continue to oppose the plan for two reasons. First of all, they would prefer that the economy continues to do poorly in the hope that this will cause voters to take out their frustrations on the Democrats as occurred in 2006, which is also why they have used their power in Congress to extend the downturn and reduce job creation. Secondly, Obama’s plan, while good for the country, results in higher taxes for the wealthy. Promoting lower taxes on the wealthy is the primary goal of Republicans, even if we have tax rates below those present when Ronald Reagan was president.

Posted in Barack Obama, Congress, Economy, Harry Reid, Republicans. Tags: , , . 16 Comments »

Approval Of Obama Drops, But Voters Still Prefer His Policies Over Republican Policies–Will That Save Us From A President Worse Than Bush?

September 14, 2011 — Ron Chusid

Republicans are encouraged by headlines, such as at Bloomberg, that Obama Approval Plummets to New Low Among Americans Skeptical of Jobs Plan. This is discouraging news, but I also wouldn’t have expected one speech to bring about an immediate turn-around for Obama. On the other hand, Republicans need to be cautious as their support in the polls has dropped even more than that of Obama. Several polls have findings similar to the CNN polls showing Americans trust Obama more than the Republicans on the economy.

As people are frustrated with both Democrats and Republicans over the state of the economy, 2012 could be a bad year for incumbents. However polls of positions supported by voters often do not correlate well with actual election results, as voters have frequently voted Republican while supporting Democratic policies. Last night’s special elections in New York and Nevada showed that 2011 is still an awful lot like 2010. Democrats have over a year to turn things around, benefited by factors such as that the facts are on their side, and the opposing side is supporting extremist ideas which Americans do not support. Unfortunately, ever since their victories in 2008 Democrats have been losing the messaging wars–badly. If the Democrats do not do a better job of showing what they stand for and why voters must reject the Republicans, I fear that in 2012 many voters in Democratic areas will vote against the incumbent, while  voters in Republican districts will vote against Obama and his party.

It would be disastrous if a party which opposes Medicare and Social Security while supporting theocracy and further transfer of wealth to the ultra-wealthy controls the government. Unless Democrats do a better job of winning the spin wars over the next fourteen months, this very well can happen. Further Republican appointees to the Supreme Court can tip the balance away from individual liberty for years to come.

Obama’s major accomplishments, such as reforming health care so that people cannot be denied coverage for preexisting conditions, and keeping us out of a depression with the first stimulus, have been turned from political selling points to negatives for the Democrats. Far too many voters believe a fictional account of what Republicans believe as well as a fictional account of Democratic policies which is spread by the right wing noise machine. When the Democrats do not do an adequate job of defining themselves and their policies, they make it easy for the Republicans to do it instead. Obama shares part of this blame, but this has been a problem with the Democratic Party which existed before Obama was even in the Senate. Responding to this by turning on Obama only increases the chances of Rick Perry taking office in 2013 with both Houses of Congress under Republican control.

The left was far more united when George Bush was in office, as it was far easier to agree on opposing Bush’s destructive policies than it is for the wide variety of individuals on the left to agree as to what should be done.  The one thing we should all agree on is that we cannot have another era of Republican control, which is likely to be even worse than the Bush years. Differences in opinion with Obama, often exaggerated by the limitations upon what he can accomplish, are trivial compared to what a Perry government would do. There is a small number on the left who manage to do incredible mental gymnastics and twist the facts to claim Obama is worse than Bush. Hopefully they will wake up to reality before 2012 or we might really see  the harm that  a president who is worse than Bush can do to the country.

Posted in Barack Obama, Congress, Democrats, Economy, George Bush, Politics, Polls, Republicans, Rick Perry. Tags: , , , , . 3 Comments »

Video Of President Obama’s Speech Presenting the American Jobs Act

September 9, 2011 — Ron Chusid

Video above. Text and my comments on the speech were in the previous post. It must have been a good speech if Paul Krugman liked it, despite thinking Obama should have gone further.

Posted in Barack Obama, Congress, Economy. Tags: , . 3 Comments »

Obama Versus The Do-Nothing Republicans

September 8, 2011 — Ron Chusid

Tonight’s speech was an opening round in a new phase of Obama’s struggle to save  the economy as well as his presidency. Going into the speech, I wondered whether he would concentrate on gaining support from the  Democratic base or independents. Obama has concentrated on independents during much of his presidency, and far too often has seen independents swayed by misinformation of the right as centrist policies were called socialist.  Often going towards the center has often left Obama in an unfortunate position of losing the left  without receiving political benefit from the middle for this. It was beginning to look like perhaps Karl Rove was right and the way win most elections these days is to get out the base and ignore the middle. The problem is that the Democratic base is not large enough to win without independents.

Obama won by uniting the left and middle in 2008.  He may have now found a formula for doing this again, not accepting the choice of restoring relations with the left versus the center. He managed to come up with an approach which should both regain support from the center while also restoring support from liberals (excluding those portions of the left who have been so out of touch all along that they could not distinguish between the policies of Barack Obama and George Bush).

There is one group who Obama received little applause from–Republicans. Hasn’t Obama learned anything from the GOP debate? If he wants applause from Republicans, he must promise executions.

Obama once again directly took on the Republican idea that government should do nothing, a far better frame for the 2012 election than the short-term state of the economy. Obama remains too conciliatory to openly say in an address before Congress that Republican policies caused the recession, and in the past year Republican (along with Tea Party) actions have hindered recovery. It is clear from today’s speech that if Congress does not pass his jobs act they will pay for this next year. Not only is  Obama getting ready to go to the Harry Truman playbook and campaign against a do-nothing Congress, he is willing to take on the whole do-nothing philosophy of the right wing.

Give ‘em hell, Barry

The full text of the speech is under the fold.

(more…)

Posted in Barack Obama, Congress, Economy, Politics. Tags: , , . 16 Comments »

Obama And The End Of The Post-Partisan Era

August 31, 2011 — Ron Chusid

Barack Obama attracted many independents in 2008 with his “post-partisan” approach to politics, but this turned out to be far more effective for campaigning against an unpopular incumbent as opposed to governing. Regardless of how much Obama wanted to compromise, the Republicans made opposing everything Obama supported their major goal. Obama’s support of moderate economic policies and a moderate health care reform plan did not prevent bogus claims that Obama is a socialist who supported a government take-over of health care.

As long as Obama’s popularity was soaring far above that of Congress, it was difficult to criticize Obama for maintaining this approach despite my fears that he would eventually suffer in the polls if the economy remained bad. In recent weeks his popularity has dropped, even if it remains well above that of Congress and of Republicans. A recent Pew Research Center survey showed that “Currently, 57% of Democrats say Obama should challenge the Republicans more often, while 32% say he is handling relations with the GOP about right. ” This is up from 37% in April who said Obama should challenge the Republicans more. The number of Independents who want Obama to stand up more to the Republicans has increased from 30% to 36% since April.

The importance of doing this extends beyond these poll numbers. Considering that public opinion regarding the economy typically lags actual improvement by several months, it is likely that a poor economy could cause an incumbent president to lose votes in 2012. It is essential that Obama make the case that it was Republican policies which caused the recession, actions of Congressional Republicans which have hindered recovery, and that further Republican polices will make matters worse.

Perhaps I am overly concerned, considering Obama’s other advantages as an incumbent. Allan Lichtman, an American University professor who has a formula which predicted every presidential race correctly since 1984, has predicted Obama will win reelection. However there really have not been many presidential elections which were very difficult to predict since then, and I also think there is wisdom to the old Clinton mantra that, “It’s the economy, stupid.”

Of course the Obama political team which beat Hillary Clinton and then went on to an easy victory in the general election is not stupid either. Presumably they were continuing the same strategy as long as Obama was doing well in the polls, and  now realize that they must change their message. I have seen a number of indicators that they plan to take a harder line against the Republicans, including today’s article in The Hill:

President Obama is preparing to fight a political war this fall on two fronts — the first against Republicans who want his job and the second against Republicans who want to make his job more difficult.

Obama is taking dead-aim at the latter group, targeting Congress in a fall offensive that the president’s reelection campaign hopes will bruise the overall GOP image beyond repair…

When GOP lawmakers return, the president and his team are ready to deliver a flurry of attacks, castigating Congress for inaction on jobs, being on the wrong side of taxes and eager to destroy social safety net programs. If Obama and his team have their way, Americans will come to see every Republican as a Tea Party extremist.

The president previewed this effort when he started throwing jabs while on the road in August.

At a stop in Michigan and repeatedly during his Midwest bus tour, Obama lashed out at Congress for imperiling the economic recovery and playing politics that caused the country’s credit rating to be reduced at a time when he was working for a grand compromise.

The president is still talking about compromise, but his tone and posture indicate he is more — or at least as — interested in combat…

And there’s a bonus to beating Congress to a pulp that officials think will pay off next year.

By forcing the GOP to take positions on such key economic issues as the payroll tax cut and tax cuts for the rich, Obama and his team are hoping to draw out and lock down the president’s 2012 challengers.

Example: If the debate turns on Republicans trying to gut Social Security, then expect the Democratic National Committee to connect the dots from Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) to Texas Gov. Rick Perry, the new GOP presidential front-runner, who once wrote that Social Security was “a Ponzi scheme.”

Posted in Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Congress, Economy, Hillary Clinton, Independents, Politics, Polls, Republicans, Rick Perry. Tags: , , , , . 1 Comment »

Voters Have Increasingly Negative View Of Influence Of Tea Party On Congress

August 10, 2011 — Ron Chusid

With the tea party and other right wing Republicans leading us on a path towards potential financial doom, including precipitating the recent downgrading of the nation’s credit rating, the question remains as to how this will play with the voters. The Republican strategy is essentially to use their power in Congress to wreck the economy as much as possible in the  hopes they can blame this on the incumbent president.

The poll cited in the previous post is an early indicator that the tea party strategy is failing. Another poll conducted by the Washington Post and Pew Research Center also shows decreased support for the tea party among Democrats and independents:

When the 112th Congress started in January, more Americans anticipated a positive rather than negative role for the newly elected members affiliated with the tea party political movement. Now, a new Washington Post-Pew Research Center poll finds public opinion tilted the other way.

In the new poll, 29 percent say congressional representatives associated with the tea party have had a “mostly negative” effect, 11 percentage points higher than the number expecting a negative impact at the beginning of the term. Now, 22 percent see a “mostly positive” effect, down five points.

Still, as anticipated in January, about half of all Americans say the tea party supporters in Congress have either had “not much of an effect” or expressed no opinion.

The see-saw in public opinion on tea party-affiliated members is particularly apparent among Democrats and independents. In January, 30 percent of Democrats and 14 percent of independents said tea party members would have a mostly negative effect; those numbers have jumped to 49 and 28 percent, respectively.

Republicans, by contrast, are little shifted since the beginning of the year. By more than 4 to 1 Republicans see tea party members as having a more positive than negative effect.

Posted in Congress, Independents, Polls, Republicans. Tags: , , . 6 Comments »

White House Points Out How GOP Policies Caused Downgrading By S&P

August 6, 2011 — Ron Chusid

The lowering of the nation’s credit rating by Standard and Poor’s is the latest evidence of how reckless Republican economic policies are harming the country. S&P directly referred to the uncertainty in the political process (created by Republicans who prevented an agreement on raising the debt limit until the last minute) as well as the difficulty in resolving the deficit crisis because “the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act.”

Republicans, who created the deficit crisis, and who have an excellent history of winning the spin wars in recent years due to their expertise in distorting the facts and their domination of the news media, immediately began to distort the report in their favor. The White House has responded:

Over the past weeks and months the President repeatedly called for substantial deficit reduction through both long-term entitlement changes and revenues through tax reform, with additional measures to spark jobs and strengthen our recovery,” press secretary Jay Carney said in a statement.

“That is why the President pushed for a grand bargain that would include all of these elements and require compromise and cooperation from all sides.”

Rather than Obama, who is now the target of more fallacious attacks from the right, Matthew Yglesias sees  John Boehner as the big loser here:

The person who looks bad here, in my view, is John Boehner. President Obama wanted to do a “grand bargain.” The Gang of Six Senators wanted to do a “grand bargain.” And it looked for a moment like Speaker Boehner was going to be part of a grand bargain. But ultimately he decided that he didn’t want to sign a deal that would fracture his caucus, so the grand bargain talks fell apart. And yet the little bargain that did eventually pass the House ultimately couldn’t pass with Republican votes alone. So what did Boehner really achieve? If he was ultimately destined to strike a deal with the White House that needed Democratic votes to pass the House, why not go for the grand bargain? According to Boehner “When you look at this final agreement that we came to with the white House, I got 98 percent of what I wanted. I’m pretty happy.” How happy is he now?

Far more people than John Boehner will be big losers here if the facts get out over the propaganda from the right wing noise machine. Besides Boehner, the big losers here include the Republicans who voted for the massive increase in the deficit under George Bush, listening to claims that “deficits don’t matter,” while opposing Obama’s plans to rescue the economy. The losers also include the extremists, including the Tea Party supporters, who played hostage with the economy and made default a real possibility, precipitating the reduction on the credit rating. Unfortunately this turned out to be a hostage crisis where the right wingers killed the hostage.

Posted in Barack Obama, Congress, Economy, John Boehner, Republicans. Tags: , , , , . 20 Comments »

Avoiding Depression Over The Debt Ceiling Deal

August 1, 2011 — Ron Chusid

Yes, the news is pretty bad, but we all expected that once we started negotiating with terrorists the outcome would not be the greatest. I’m avoiding depression by remembering that things really could have turned out far worse. In other words, the Republicans could have won even more if they were  prepared to negotiate seriously before the last minute as opposed to having their own hostage situation with the Tea Party people.

There’s no point in writing about all the negatives. Many people have already done that. I figure it is worth linking to a couple of the stories which do find some positives in this. For example, Jay Newton-Small has five things for liberals to like:

The 2012 budget: At one point in the negotiations, the 2012 budget was to be slashed by $36 billion. The final number of cuts: just $7 billion. And just to ensure we don’t have another bruising government shutdown fight over cuts in September, the deal deems and passes the 2012 budget. Yes, that’s right, the old Gephardt Rule or Slaughter Solution, is back. What’s deem and pass? It’s a legislative trick that essentially means that Congress will consider the budget passed without ever actually having to vote on it.

The trigger: This is counterintuitive, but the trigger is actually pretty good for Democrats. For all that MoveOn thinks that it would force benefit cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, it actually wouldn’t trigger benefit cuts to any entitlements. The only cuts it would force would be a 2% or more haircut for Medicare providers. And House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, along with most Democrats, has never opposed provider cuts. Not only that, most progressives actually want the Pentagon cuts. So if the committee deadlocks and the trigger is pulled, Democrats won’t be miserable.

The commission: Again, for all the liberal carping about a “Super Congress,” the commission of 12 members — three from each party in each chamber — set up to find the second phase of $1.5 trillion in cuts by Thanksgiving is actually rigged to force some revenue increases. Yes, the Bush tax cuts are off the table. But there are plenty of loopholes, subsidies and other corporate welfare programs that are on the table. And with such a strong trigger, it’s hard to imagine at least one Republican not voting to kill corporate jet subsidies over slashing $500 billion from the defense budget – even if the revenues aren’t offset. The question is: who are Republicans more afraid of, Grover Norquist or the joint chiefs? Democrats’ money is on the joint chiefs.

The immediate cuts: It may seem like a lot, but the $917 billion in the first phase of cuts were carefully negotiated by Vice President Joe Biden and his group. They include $350 billion in Pentagon cuts – a win for liberals. They don’t touch entitlement benefits, another win. And they set top line numbers for the next decade of budgets that aren’t draconian. It still cuts where liberals might prefer to spend, but most of the savings are backloaded to avoid extreme austerity in next few years of fragile economic recovery.  Just $7 billion would be cut in 2012, and only $3 billion in 2013. And of that combined $10 billion, half would come from the Pentagon. On top of that, the discretionary spending caps on budgets in future Congresses are subject to revision by those bodies.

The debt ceiling: Raising the debt ceiling through 2013 will not be contingent on the second round of cuts. There will merely be a vote of disapproval. This avoids another messy fight in January and another round of painful forced cuts.

Nate Silver has more on the good parts in the fine print of the deal.

I have my doubts as to whether the commission will accomplish anything worthwhile.  GOP leaders will choose members hey are sure will not go for any tax hikes and want to limit spending cuts to areas  where we would least want to see cuts. This means we will probably to to the trigger. Cutting defense spending wouldn’t be all bad. As a physician, I am not thrilled by the trigger of a 2% cut in Medicare, but I still need to check out the details. Worst case scenario is an across the board cut in the fee schedule for all Medicare services.  In the past, percentage increases or decreases in Medicare have been a total for the program, with some services changing by more or less than the overall percentage. As long as they have some leeway legally, I bet that they would prefer to cut more than 2 percent in some areas in order to avoid a cut in primary care services (sparing me from the cuts). I’m also not going to worry about a possible 2 percent cut when cuts of more than ten times this are scheduled under  the sustainable growth formula. If Congress can overrule the sustainable growth formula every year, they can also intervene to alter the effects of the triggers.

Posted in Congress, Economy, Republicans. Tags: , , , , . 11 Comments »

Quote of The Day

July 30, 2011 — Ron Chusid

BREAKING: Round-the-Clock Congressional Sessions Bad for Business, Say Prostitutes –Andy Borowitz

Posted in Congress, Humor and Satire. Tags: , , . No Comments »

Boehner Passes Bill Which Never Had A Chance

July 29, 2011 — Ron Chusid

In perhaps one of the most brazen demonstrations of incompetence and lack of concern for one’s nation from a government leader we have ever seen, John Boehner has devoted the last few days to pass a bill which had zero chance of becoming law, as opposed to seriously working to prevent a crisis next week. Boehner got his bill passed and, as expected, the Senate voted it down. The Senate has also been searching for a deal which could pass:

Senate Democratic and Republican leaders are having intense discussions to come up with a bipartisan solution for raising the debt ceiling.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters that he needs ideas from Republicans sometime Friday if Congress is to meet the Aug. 2 deadline.

A Senate GOP leadership aide said the two sides have until early Sunday morning to reach an agreement.

The two sides are discussing trigger mechanisms that could be used to build bipartisan support. Such triggers would force Congress to carry out another round of deficit reduction before the 2012 election.

At the moment, it is difficult to see them reaching an agreement, but perhaps Republicans will be more willing to compromise when we get down to the last minute. The failure of Boehner’s bill might at least serve the purpose of allowing them to argue that they had no choice but to accept a compromise Senate bill to prevent economic catastrophe.  On the one hand, one would think that country club Republicans aren’t anxious to see their investments wiped out.  On the other hand, the Tea Party members who have been pressuring Boehner don’t show any signs of ever facing reality.

Posted in Congress, Economy, John Boehner. Tags: , , . 3 Comments »

President Obama’s Press Conference On The Debt Ceiling Talks

July 22, 2011 — Ron Chusid

President Obama’s press conference on the breakdown of the debt ceiling talks (video above). Summary of the news conference here. Nancy Pelosi has offered another compromise.

Posted in Barack Obama, Congress, Economy, John Boehner, Nancy Pelosi. Tags: , . 1 Comment »

NPR Reports on Bipartisan Opposition to Medicare Independent Payment Advisory Board

July 12, 2011 — Ron Chusid

NPR’s Morning Edition reported on the opposition to the Medicare Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) from Republicans and a growing number of Democrats. The problems with the IPAB in the Senate version of the Affordable Care Act were one of the reasons that the original House version of the bill was preferable. Some House Democrats who never supported this structure of the IPAB which eventually passed are now supporting repeal of the board.

Morning Edition reports that Republicans have been attacking the IPAB with their usual hyperbole while Democrats have had more reasoned criticism:

Democrats don’t use such hyperbole, but more than half a dozen have signed on as cosponsors of a bill that would repeal the board. And many more, particularly Democrats in the House, never supported creating the board in the first place.

What the law actually calls for is a board of 15 health experts, to be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Their task is to make recommendations for ways to reduce Medicare payments without cutting benefits or increasing costs to Medicare beneficiaries.

That’s not much different from an existing panel of expert Medicare advisers, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, or MedPAC. Except for one thing. Congress is free to ignore MedPAC’s recommendations. And it does, routinely.

That won’t be the case with the new IPAB. Its recommendations will take effect unless both houses of Congress override them with a two-thirds vote. Republicans – and more than a few Democrats – find that excessive.

“Even if the Congress could muster up, both the House and the Senate, a two-thirds vote, which is virtually impossible, but in the remote possibility that we could; we would have to find cuts somewhere else other than what they recommended in the Medicare program, said Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA), co-chair of the GOP Doctors Caucus.

Jay Rockefeller, who supports the IPAB, argues:

You want to have the Gail Wilenskys…and the Bruce Vladecks,” he said, referring to former heads of the agency that runs Medicare. “People who have broad health care policy experience making those decisions.”

Yes, listen to Gail Wilensky and Bruce Vladeck. Both oppose the IPAB as structured in the Senate version of the Affordable Care Act which became law:

Both Wilensky and Vladeck – the former a Republican and the latter a Democrat — think the IPAB is a bad idea.

Wilensky, who oversaw Medicare for the first President Bush, says she’s sympathetic to Congress’s desire to insulate itself from the lobbying onslaught. But she worries that the board is limited to looking only at payments to health providers, which she says “could fundamentally alter the incentives involved in physicians and providers participating in Medicare.”

In other words, it could end up driving Medicare payments so low that providers will simply leave the program, or else go bankrupt if they can’t.

Vladeck, meanwhile, who headed Medicare under President Clinton, has a different problem with the board. He worries that eventually the lobbyists who are now so influential with members of Congress will become equally influential with the unelected members of the board.

“In the short term, it might theoretically work,” he said. But the history with other independent regulatory agencies, like the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Civil Aeronautics Board is that over time “the regulated industries tend to capture them; and they tend to do more to protect the regulated industries than they do to protect consumers.”

The reality is that nobody knows for sure what the IPAB will do, which is why their decisions should at very least be subject to an up or down vote by Congress. An unelected board should not be able to  make major decisions regarding a program as important as Medicare without the approval of our elected representatives.

Related:  Opposition Growing To Medicare Payment Board

Posted in Congress, Health Care. Tags: , , . No Comments »
« Older posts «
Newer posts » »