Home » Archives by category » News » Politics (Page 1961)
Swiss Cheese Sanctions

Like a metaphorical piece of Swiss cheese, U.S. sanction policy is allegedly riddled with loopholes. A former Treasury official claims licenses to trade with blacklisted countries like Iran have been distributed to the tune of billions of dollars of profits, all at the behest of lobbying groups. Officials are worried about damaging U.S. “integrity” with such loopholes. —JCL The BBC: US sanctions tend to be riddled with exceptions that are neither humanitarian nor democracy-related, a former US sanctions official has said. Stuart Eizenstat, a deputy treasury secretary in the Clinton era, told the BBC World Service that such loopholes were created by lobbying groups. A New York Times report found evidence of US firms trading legally with blacklisted countries such as Iran. Read more Related Entries December 24, 2010 Award Recognizes Uncompromising Change Makers December 23, 2010 Good News for the Places Where the Wild Things Are

Continue reading …
Raising the debt ceiling will be one of many battles facing President Obama in 2011

Click here to view this media Stuart Varney, a FOX News pro-business a-hole, was on during Megyn Kelly’s show yesterday and was all giddy because Republicans in the House passed a new rule which will make it tougher to pass legislation to raise the debt ceiling, House Republicans set to release their recommended rules changes Wednesday will change the names of several committees and repeal a rule making it more difficult to raise the debt ceiling. They will also require that all bills be posted online three days before a vote. {} The draft rules would repeal the “Gephardt Rule” that allows the House to raise the debt limit automatically when a conference report on the budget is approved. If the rule is repealed, a separate vote on raising the debt ceiling must be held. The Republicans will play chicken with Obama over the debt ceiling and of course the budget, which will come up, I believe, in March. How will the President handle these fights? Dan Pfeiffer says Obama will fight. Pfeiffer described 2011 as a “year with compromise and confrontation,” and on spending issues, he at least talked the language of confrontation. “The President is willing to draw tough lines in the sand… we’re not going to let the Republicans take the country in the wrong direction. You can’t make the car go faster by taking out the engine,” he concluded, referring to spending cuts. The President echoed some of these sentiments in his press conference yesterday , saying “I expect we’ll have a robust debate about this when we return from the holidays — a debate that will have to answer an increasingly urgent question — and that is how do we cut spending that we don’t need while making investments that we do need — investments in education, research and development, innovation, and the things that are essential to grow our economy over the long run, create jobs, and compete with every other nation in the world.” He’s made a distinction between “programs we don’t need” and programs that deserve investment, so the question becomes what programs does the President have in mind that are no longer necessary. As I said, Varney was very pleased that Republicans passed the new rule so they can hold hostage the government, which they hope will allow them to cut as much spending as they inhumanly can from the federal government. Varney makes the case that if Republicans don’t get what they want, they will at least threaten to shut down the government, which includes Medicare, Social Security and those screwed-up wars. Varney: There’s a new sheriff in town, it’s called the Republican Party that now runs the House of Representatives and they’re going to introduce new rules which will make it much more difficult-time consuming to raise that debt ceiling. You know it used to be automatic. That’s gone. Kelly: And if Republicans do freeze the debt ceiling it would mean the immediate succession of more than 40% of all federal government activities including Social Security, military operations in Afghan and Iraq, Homeland security, medicare, unemployment insurance. This would threaten the safety and economic security of all Americans. Why is he wrong? Varney: (Gleefuly) Oh, he’s not wrong. What we’ve done here is to raise the possibility of that happening if the Republicans don’t get their way on spending. It’s a political contest with the Republicans and the Democrats and President Obama. Who is going to win? What’s the price the Republicans will extract from raising the debt ceiling, what’s the price? They want to cut spending…The economist is right, You shut the government down and that’s a very serious thing. They will try to ram down spending cuts of all kinds to justify anything that the President will need when it comes to the purse strings. And Mitch McConnell already said ” just wait till next year ” which means that the GOP must rule or else. Doesn’t sound like Republicans want to be too bipartisan to me. Don’t look for the media to be offended if the government is shut down with some extra crispy obstructionism. They’ll salivate for it and hope it happens. Will the Obama administration finally call their bluff? The debt ceiling is now just a move on the game board for Republicans. The President should make them either shut down the government if they do indeed try to get him to cut spending on anything. Protecting Social Security will be one of my main goals in 2011.

Continue reading …
Best Notable Quotables of 2010: Demanding Respect for Obama While Still Bashing Bush

Even as the public grew increasingly disenchanted with Washington's full-throated liberal policies in 2010, the media elite's partisanship remained on full display. The Media Research Center's Best Notable Quotables of 2010 captured the highlights, as journalists continued to blame America's misfortunes on George W. Bush, even as they also insisted that Barack Obama deserved more credit for his amazing accomplishments. In the MRC's ” They Don't Miss Him Yet Award for Still Bashing Bush ,” Time's Joe Klein took the prize for insisting that the April 2010 Gulf oil spill was really Bush's fault: “This is more Bush’s second Katrina than Obama’s first,” Klein lamely insisted on The Chris Matthews Show. Klein made his crack on May 30, nearly 500 days after Bush left the Oval Office. read more

Continue reading …

The CBPP has a disturbing report out today on the new rules expected to be adopted by the Tea Party House of Representatives. It’s going to be a long two years. The new rules announced December 22 would replace pay-as-you-go with a much weaker, one-sided “cut-as-you-go” rule, under which increases in mandatory spending would still have to be paid for but tax cuts would not. In addition, increases in mandatory spending could be offset only by reductions in other mandatory spending, not by any measure to raise revenues such as by closing unproductive special-interest tax loopholes. For example, the House would be barred from paying for continuation of a provision enacted in 2009 (and extended in the just-enacted tax compromise) that enables many minimum-wage families to receive a full, rather than a partial, Child Tax Credit by closing wasteful tax breaks for multinational corporations that shelter profits overseas. Use of such an offset would violate the new House rules because the provision expanding the Child Tax Credit for working-poor families counts as spending and hence could not be paid for by closing a tax loophole. Yet the same new rules would enable the House to expand tax loopholes for multinational corporations and wealthy investors without paying for those tax breaks at all, because any tax cut, no matter how costly or ill-advised, could now be deficit financed. The new rules would stand the reconciliation process on its head , by allowing the House to use reconciliation to push through bills that greatly increase deficits as long as the deficit increases result from tax cuts, while barring the use of reconciliation in the House for legislation that reduces the deficit if that legislation contains a net increase in spending (no matter how small) that is more than offset by revenue-raising provisions. Under the Democratic-led House, reconciliation could only be used if it was deficit-neutral. The health care bill, for example, had effective dates pushed way out in order to spread out the cost in a way that would be offset by revenues coming in against it. Otherwise they couldn’t have gotten it through. Under this new House of Representatives, it won’t matter whether the deficit increases as the result of tax cuts provided they slash spending elsewhere. Basically, they’re rolling back everything to the Bush years when it comes to the budget and spending. I predict an ugly 2 years ahead, with battles over everything but defense spending.

Continue reading …

It’s all about jobs, jobs, jobs, as Obama likes to say. Only they’re going overseas: Amid all the goodies for ethanol producers, NASCAR racetracks and the like, the tax-cut compromise legislation approved by Congress this month also includes a little-noticed sop for Wall Street banks and major multinationals. And it only costs U.S. taxpayers $9 billion. Under the provision, financial services firms and manufacturers can defer U.S. taxes on overseas income from a type of financial transaction known as “active financing.” Boosters say the two-year exemption helps level the playing field with foreign competitors by ensuring that U.S. corporations aren’t taxed twice. Major business groups and financial companies consider the exemption a key lobbying priority in Congress, which has regularly extended it on a temporary basis for more than a decade. Those lobbying in favor of the policy include dozens of the largest U.S. companies, from General Electric to J.P. Morgan Chase to Caterpillar, records show. The Active Financing Working Group, a coalition of companies and trade associations focused on the issue, has paid $540,000 in lobbying fees to Elmendorf Strategies since last year, according to Senate disclosure forms. The exemption ensures “that U.S.-based financial services [businesses] are able to continue to operate competitively and provide the funds needed for investment and economic growth,” the working group wrote in a letter to the Treasury Department. But the provision has long been opposed by watchdog groups and labor unions as a needless tax break that encourages companies to create jobs overseas instead of within the United States.

Continue reading …
Krugman’s Cracked Complaint: Left Has ‘Nothing Comparable’ To Conservative Media

Someone check the cider bowl at the New York Times Christmas party.

Continue reading …
Marsha Blackburn Accuses the FCC of Usurping the Power of Congress with Net Neutrality Ruling

Click here to view this media As Karoli already informed us about , the FCC passed some fairly milk toast regulations on Net Neutrality this week and as expected we got the usual freak out from the right wing. Think Progress has more on some of the reaction from conservatives here. Conservatives Freak Out Over Mild Net Neutrality Laws: ‘It’s Total Government Control Of The Internet’ They missed Rep. Marsha Blackburn’s carping on Sean Hannity’s show the other night where she basically repeated the same fear mongering she has posted on her Congressional web site. FCC Internet Grab a Christmas Nightmare : There’s no such thing as hospice for federal bureaucracies. No quiet corner where bureaus who have outlived their usefulness can go to bravely face the end. The undead need no such niceties; not when they can leap vampire-like upon the next great sector of American life and proceed to suck it dry in the name of “public interest”, “fair play”, or any other euphemistic glamour the Executive and Legislative branches can be lulled into. This may sound like a Halloween tale, but the FCC’s Christmas Week takeover of the Internet is the best example of President Reagan’s maxim that the nearest thing to eternal life on Earth is a federal program. Just four days before Christmas, the FCC will make its vampric leap from its traditional jurisdiction- the terrestrial radio and land line telephones that have fallen into disuse; onto the gifts piled neatly under our trees. The iPads and iPhones, Androids, Wiis, Webbooks, and WiFi will all feel the federal bite in a way they never have before. Today the FCC, in spite of Congressional opposition and public outrage, is expected to adopt “net neutrality” regulations over the Internet. They will impose thousands of pages of rules on the most prosperous, creative, and exciting sector of the American economy. They’ll do it- and then Congress will have to undo it. The FCC’s blind impulse to regulate before the new Congress can restrain them ignores a host of consequences that will prove ill for America’s Creative Economy. First, in detaching the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from the Internet architecture they have built, the FCC is effectively nationalizing the web. The FCC does this in the name of “fairness”, “non-discrimination”, and “leveling the playing field”. The consequence will be a restriction of bandwidth for users and a deterioration of the online architecture that ISPs no longer have an interest in expanding or maintaining. The underserved communities in this country who don’t yet have access to broadband are now much less likely to get it. Second, the FCC’s hysterical reaction to the hypothetical problem of anti-competitive online behavior is also redundant. By asserting jurisdiction over the Internet as a communications platform, the FCC is shortsightedly ignoring the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) who already has sufficient rules in place to contain the bad behavior in the virtual marketplace the FCC seems so worried about. This sets up a real jurisdictional fight and points out what happens when the bureaucracy decides to create work for themselves, rather than wait for Congress to dictate to them. Finally, when the FCC moves to regulate the Internet, they focus on those issues they understand: bandwidth, spectrum, and to a lesser extent content. They ignore emerging issues of fair trade, property rights, privacy, and copyright. In my view a more comprehensive approach to the new Creative Economy and how it can be protected is the most appropriate. Such a comprehensive approach can only begin on Capitol Hill. The real issue here is not that the Federal Government lacks the authority to sensibly regulate the Internet. Nor, even, that the Internet is in desperate need of regulation- it isn’t. The issue is that the FCC is running out of useful things to occupy their time. There is a real bi-partisan consensus that Congress should act first to regulate the Internet (or not regulate as the case may be). Industry and creative content providers who were coerced into this deal by an over zealous FCC Chairman should take heart. Like the breaking of dawn, the new Congress will prove a swift antidote to the federal bloodsucker you found at your throat this Christmas. Yeah, that’s the ticket Marsha. It’s the federal government and the regulators that are the bloodsuckers, not the telecom companies that want to overcharge people for their Internet access or potentially censor sites they don’t agree with. I’m sure her campaign donors will be very pleased with this appearance. This is the crap we’re going to get to look forward to in the next two years… endless hearings on laws and policies that Republicans would have supported in the past before their party lost their damned mind since they’re corporate friendly and calling them “government takeovers” and “socialism” because Democrats passed them. Good grief these lying hacks make my head hurt.

Continue reading …

The New York Times put its full weight behind liberal New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand on the front page on Thursday, after she fought for open homosexuality in the military and a measure extending health care to first responders to the 9/11 attacks. In this article, it's clear they're happiest about her gay advocacy. Reporter David Halbfinger hailed a new heroine in explicitly gushy terms: When that measure, too, won approval on Wednesday, it not only marked a victory of legislative savvy and persistence. It also signaled the serious emergence of Ms. Gillibrand, the 44-year-old successor to Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Continue reading …

By Nicholas Jahr As the freshly shellacked President cuts deals with a triumphant Republican Party, the annual Puffin/Nation Prize for Creative Citizenship was awarded to two uncompromising activists. Related Entries December 24, 2010 Obama’s ‘Evolving’ Position on Same-Sex Marriage December 23, 2010 Christmas Present

Continue reading …
Obama’s ‘Evolving’ Position on Same-Sex Marriage

President Obama’s take on gay marriage may get less absurd . Obama told the Advocate that his view is “evolving” and he struggles with his oft-repeated belief that marriage ought to be between a man and a woman (because such marriages never fail and are the will of the same supreme being who digs slavery ).

Continue reading …