OurFuture.org Blogs: Bill Scher

Progressive Breakfast: Hunt For Jobs As Unemployment Breaks 10%

Bill Scher — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 06:46:34 -0800

The daily Progressive Breakfast serves up what progressive movement members need to know to start their day.

BREAKING NEWS: Unemployment Breaks 10%, Though Pace of Job Loss Continues To Slow.

Labor Dept. release: "The unemployment rate rose from 9.8 to 10.2 percent in October, and nonfarm payroll employment continued to decline (-190,000) ... The largest job losses over the month were in construction, manufacturing, and retail trade. In October, the number of unemployed persons increased by 558,000 to 15.7 million. The unemployment rate rose by 0.4 percentage point to 10.2 percent, the highest rate since April 1983. Since the start of the recession in December 2007, the number of unemployed persons has risen by 8.2 million, and the unemployment rate has grown by 5.3 percentage points."

Politico on WH struggles to create more jobs without increasing deficit, transportation bill opportunity: "To help the jobless through the holidays, Congress sent Obama a bill Thursday that would add up to 20 weeks in assistance for those who have exhausted their unemployment benefits. But the future of the highway program, hurt by a drop-off in gasoline tax revenues, remains a bone of contention. The White House has said it wants to extend the current program only through the 2010 elections and then address increased funding. But 15 states are already so short of cash they can’t meet their 20 percent matching requirement. And that number could double next year — greatly reducing the chance to let contracts and create jobs. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James Oberstar (D-Minn.) has argued for an upfront investment of $80 billion over two years to get over this hurdle. 'The concrete is cracking,' Oberstar said, laughing, hinting that the administration’s resistance is weakening."

Also from Politico, highway funding could come from tax on Wall Street: "House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) told POLITICO: "We have to reauthorize that highway bill for at least four years. I would prefer five or six,” Clyburn said, even if it meant imposing a securities transaction tax on the financial community to cover the costs ... Rep. Peter DeFazio, a major player on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and a gymmate of Emanuel’s, has been drafting legislation along these lines ... [He] argues that the proposed 0.25 percent excise tax would have a negligible impact on the average investor and yield sufficient revenues to both cover increased highway funding and make a down payment toward reducing the deficit. The financial industry is sure to fight any such levy and enjoys powerful allies, such as Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.). But the anti-Wall Street sentiment in Congress goes well beyond DeFazio’s populist caucus."

Sen. Schumer looks to stop stimulus funds from creating green jobs in China for a Texas wind farm. Green Inc.: "Mr. Schumer said he had sent a letter on Thursday to Energy Secretary Steven Chu, urging him to 'reject any request for stimulus money unless the high-value components, including the wind turbines, are manufactured in the United States.'"

Pelosi Prepares For Health Care Vote Tomorrow

Speaker Pelosi confident before tomorrow's vote, GOP won't accept CBO score. The Hill: "Pelosi insisted 'we will' get the 218 votes Dems needed for passage. She must find supporters within her 258-member caucus because Republicans are united against it ... Meanwhile, Republicans are pressing Rick Foster, Medicare’s chief actuary, for a score of the House bill before the weekend vote..."

CBO scores Speaker Pelosi's final version (PDF file): "CBO and the staff of JCT estimate that, on balance, the direct spending and revenue effects of enacting H.R. 3962, incorporating the manager’s amendment, would yield a net reduction in federal budget deficits of $129 billion over the 2010-2019 period."

Abortion issue not yet resolved. CQ: "Abortion is the most serious problem for the leadership. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., a leading abortion opponent, has warned that up to 40 Democrats might vote against the bill unless stronger language is added to restrict federal funding of insurance plans that cover abortion. With the majority now 258 members strong — once a newly elected Democrat from New York is sworn in on Friday — Democratic leaders can afford to lose up to 40 votes from their party’s ranks. But Thursday night, Diana DeGette of Colorado said the Democrats’ 190-member Pro-Choice Caucus will not accept abortion language more restrictive than that proposed by Democrat Brad Ellsworth of Indiana and accepted by the leadership ... Backers of abortion rights do not like the Ellsworth wording but will not oppose the bill because of it, she said."

W. Post's Dana Milbank chronicles hateful messages at anti-health care Tea Party rally: "In the front of the protest, a sign showed President Obama in white coat, his face painted to look like the Joker. The sign, visible to the lawmakers as they looked into the cameras, carried a plea to 'Stop Obamunism.' A few steps farther was the guy holding a sign announcing 'Obama takes his orders from the Rothchilds' [sic], accusing Obama of being part of a Jewish plot to introduce the antichrist. But the best of [Rep. Michelle] Bachmann's recruits were a few rows into the crowd, holding aloft a pair of 5-by-8-foot banners proclaiming 'National Socialist Healthcare, Dachau, Germany, 1945.' Both banners showed close-up photographs of Holocaust victims, many of them children." Media Matters finds conservatives inflating tiny protest turnout numbers.

Jacob Hacker and Diane Archer urge support for House version of public option. The Treatment: "The public plan is ... critical to reform as a cost and quality benchmark ... should also help keep down the rate of growth of health insurance premiums over time ... the public plan is really the only tool available for testing and implementing reforms in the market for the non-elderly ... pegging rates to Medicare and obligating Medicare providers to accept these rates would be far preferable ... But it’s still immensely valuable to give Americans an out--another choice--to let the insurers feel the heat..."

Latest CNN poll (PDF file) still finds solid support, 55%, for public option.

Boxer Passes Climate Bill Over GOP Boycott

The Vine's Brad Plumer assess Boxer's 11-1 victory in committee: "Basically, the climate bill's out of the hands of Barbara Boxer and [Environment and Public Work Committee] at this point. The Republican boycott was circumvented. A few of the other committees—like Finance—could now take a whack at it, but it's mainly going to be shepherded by Harry Reid from this point forward."

W. Post notes attention is shifting to Kerry-Graham-Lieberman compromise talks, Gore blesses: "Former vice president Al Gore, in a meeting Thursday with The Washington Post's editorial board, said he hopes the negotiations between Kerry and Graham, with the aid of the administration, will 'produce a consensus bill before Copenhagen,' empowering U.S. negotiators at the talks. Gore added that he knows President Obama and his aides are 'having discussions' about Obama attending the climate talks in December. He said, however, that he 'has no indication' that a final decision has been made."

Politico gets Graham's reaction to Boxer bill: "Graham said that he would have voted against the EPW bill. 'Now, it’s time to find a bill that will make good policy,' said Graham. 'Clearly, there are not 60 votes for that product.' Graham said his group would take the 'good pieces' of the work by Boxer and the five other committees ... Boxer (D-Calif.) stressed that her committee was only the first step in a long process."

NYT spotlights Baucus' no vote: "Mr. Baucus’s vote against the bill was another ominous sign. He is the influential chairman of the Finance Committee and a senior member of the Agriculture Committee, both of which will have major input in any final climate and energy legislation. He said the bill’s emission reduction targets were too ambitious and its agriculture provisions too weak. He said the measure had a long way to go."

"Boxer avoids repeating Baucus' mistake with dragging out health care talks argues OurFuture.org's Bill Scher.

Enviro strategy to accept compromises attracts criticism. ClimateWire: "...some question whether in their quest to get a bill, environmentalists and their allies are far too willing to compromise on historic priorities such as offshore drilling and nuclear power ... Officials from major environmental groups contend that simply building political momentum for climate change legislation is not an insignificant task, arguing that some lawmakers and voters still need to be convinced of the benefits of a cap-and-trade bill."

W. Post notes dispute on whether to emphasize carbon cap or green jobs: "some groups have muted their alarms about wildfires, shrinking glaciers and rising seas. Not because they've stopped caring about them -- but because they're trying to win over people who might care more about a climate bill's non-environmental side benefits, such as 'green' jobs and reduced oil imports. Smaller environmental groups, however, say this is the wrong moment to ease up on the scare because that might send the signal that a weaker bill is acceptable."

CBO Score? Check. Bill Online For 72 Hours? Check. No Excuses To Vote Against House Healthcare Bill.

Bill Scher — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:09:28 -0800

The House is expected to vote on comprehensive health care reform Saturday. And conservatives have no excuse for voting against it. Their main concerns have been addressed.

Conservatives have continually complained that committee votes occurred without full cost estimates from the Congressional Budget Office. They argued we should not blindly approve legislation that is likely to increase the budget deficit.

Now, the final House bill has been scored by the CBO, and it shows that the bill would reduce the budget deficit. It would cut the deficit more than the Republican alternative that CBO found wouldn't even increase the percentage of Americans with health insurance.

So if cutting the deficit is your concern, you would vote for Speaker Pelosi's bill.

Conservatives have also complained that the congressional leadership hasn't been providing the full text of bills online for the public to review 72 hours before a vote.

On Tuesday, Speaker Pelosi did just that. Seventy-two hours will have passed before Saturday's expected vote.

So if you were concerned that something insidious was being slipped into the fine print at the last minute, now you have no reason for concern.

However, I have yet to hear a single conservative critic give credit where credit is due, let alone announce that since these concerns have been addressed, conservatives can now happily support the legislation.

Could it be that conservatives only like citing CBO data when it serves their immediate political interest?

Could it be that conservatives only wanted the extra time for last ditch obstructionist tactics?

I suppose we have 48 hours to find out.

UPDATE: The Weekly Standard is arguing Speaker Pelosi is breaking the 72-hour pledge because there is still some last-minute haggling over side issues -- abortion and immigration language in particular, and there won't necessarily be another 72-hour wait after those matters are resolved. If conservatives want to hag their hat on that, be my guest. Most reasonable people will be satisfied that the actual health care reform is online with ample time for congressional members and the public to review before a final vote.

Boxer Avoids The Baucus Trap

Bill Scher — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:22:16 -0800

Today, Sen. Barbara Boxer rammed through the Environment and Public Works Committee her version of clean energy jobs and climate protection legislation without any amendments, in order to circumvent the Republican boycott of the committee proceedings.

There's no way that bill will become law without further changes, but Boxer did exactly what needed to done to get any bill passed.

Already we are hearing the tut-tutting. CQ speculated that Boxer risked "alienating Republicans and frustrating moderate Democrats." Primary candidate for compromise GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham declared he would have opposed the Boxer bill if he was on the committee.

None of that matters. In fact, the supposed friction is probably helping.

As we learned in the health care debate, what happens at the committee level is far from the final word. Multiple committees weigh in, and at the end of the day, the congressional leaders and White House make the last calls before sending legislation to the floor of each branch of Congress. The tricky part is just getting through the slog of the committee process, so you can get to point where the top folks can make the last calls.

Sen. Max Baucus failed to understand this. He wasted everyone's time futilely negotiating with people who fundamentally disagreed with the entire premise of reform, giving opponents extra time to organize and spread misinformation.

Sen. Boxer today essentially said, I'm not going to waste everybody's time.

She got her homework done ahead of schedule. One more committee down. The process moves forward.

The fact that so-called moderates will complain about the Boxer bill is simply an additional opportunity to portray the expected "tripartisan" compromise from Sens. John Kerry, Lindsey Grahan and Joe Lieberman -- talks clearly blessed by the Senate leadership and the White House -- as an politically safer alternative.

If Boxer's move somehow made those three scrap their talks -- and getting Graham on board at this point is the only possible way the Senate is going find 50 votes let alone 60 for a carbon cap -- then you could say Boxer was politically reckless. But nothing of the sort is happening.

One can only hope the other relevant committee chairs learn from her example.

Unfortunately, one of the committees with jurisdiction is the Finance Committee, chaired by Sen. Baucus. And because he didn't get a chance to pass his amendments today, he voted "No" in Boxer's committee.

Something tells me he still doesn't get it.

Progressive Breakfast: Boxer Blows Past GOP Boycott

Bill Scher — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 06:39:28 -0800

The daily Progressive Breakfast serves up what progressive movement members need to know to start their day.

Boxer Blows Past Boycott, As Tripartisan Trio Works With WH

BREAKING THIS AM: Sen. Boxer's Environment and Public Works Committee passes clean energy jobs and climate protection legislation 10-1, shoving aside GOP boycott of mark-up session by not including any amendments. (Sen. Baucus was lone No vote, though he pledged to continue working towards compromise.)

Tripartisan trio of Sens. Kerry, Graham and Lieberman offer optimism on climate compromise after WH talks. Wonk Room quotes Graham: "The green economy is coming. We can either follow or lead ... Our country doesn’t have the infrastructure in place to build a green economy and never will until we price carbon."

Climate Progress quotes Kerry on next steps for compromise: "Our effort is to try to reach out to broaden the base of support beyond the six committees of jurisdiction. And we’re going to do that working very closely with the chairs of those committees as well as with members across the Senate. The key here is to really negotiate once in a sense, not negotiate with ourselves and not negotiate just in the Senate and then not have the White House also at the table. ... We will be working closely with the White House over the course of the next weeks with a few to trying to pull together what ultimately could be presented to Sen. Reid and the leadership as a piece of legislation that we hope could get the 60 votes necessary..."

The Vine's Brad Plumer is cautiously optimistic: "...that doesn't mean it's all placid sailing from here on out ... finding common ground between conservatives and liberals on nuclear power could be a devilish task, although there are signs that many nuclear skeptics are softening their stance ... At this point, the odds of a bill passing still look reasonably decent, but it's looking less and less likely the Senate will make much headway before the Copenhagen talks in December."

Vast majority of economists back market-based action on global warming in new survey. Green Inc.: "A New York University School of Law survey found near unanimity among 144 top economists that global warming threatens the United States economy and that a cap-and-trade system of carbon regulation will spur energy efficiency and innovation."

ClimateWire reports several senators concerned that cap-and-trade approach would lead to market manipulation: "Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) ... has said Congress will probably have to pass financial reforms that regulate the $300 trillion over-the-counter derivatives market before passing carbon cap-and-trade legislation ... Republican leaders, including Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), ranking member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, also said financial reform will probably need to come first to get Republican support ... Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) ... are deeply skeptical about whether a market-based system for reducing greenhouse gas emissions can be safeguarded from abuse and manipulation."

Sen. Sherrod Brown, Blue-Green Alliance release report showing higher renewable energy mandate would create 850,000 jobs. AFL-CIO Blog: "The report says if Congress enacts a federal Renewable Electricity Standard (RES), which would require the nation’s utilities to produce 25 percent of our electricity using renewable sources by 2025, it would stimulate enough demand for the component parts needed to make wind turbines, solar panels and other clean energy technologies to create 850,000 jobs at existing U.S. manufacturers across the country."

HuffPost promotes new report on fierce corporate lobbying to kill international deal: "The Center For Public Integrity just released a blockbuster investigative report that details the intense corporate pressure to block an effective global treaty from being reached at the UN Climate Talks in Copenhagen in December, and to halt efforts in individual countries to limit greenhouse gas emissions. In addition to fierce lobbying behind closed doors, some of the most aggressive tactics deployed by resource giants such as Exxon Mobil, Peabody Coal and other energy and agriculture interests are often the most public: spreading fear and misinformation about the true impact of emissions regulations."

New business group forms supportive of carbon cap: "More than a dozen leading U.S. corporations- including Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG), DB Climate Change Advisors (Deutsche Bank Group), Gap Inc., and National Grid- announced the launch of a new initiative to support Congressional action on clean energy and climate change legislation. The goal of the new group, called American Businesses for Clean Energy (ABCE), is to offer a platform for leading U.S. businesses to express their support for meaningful and effective legislation..."

International dispute over climate insurance proposal. ClimateWire: "Advocates for nations vulnerable to climate change are accusing the United States of trying to 'kill' a prominent global warming provision that would create a massive insurance program for countries that face rising destruction from natural disasters ... The program could cost the United States and other developed nations billions every year, and perhaps amount to an admission that Americans are largely responsible for warming the world."

House Health Care Vote Expected Saturday

AP: "The House is steaming toward a historic vote on President Barack Obama's remake of the U.S. health care system, with Democratic leaders increasingly confident and the powerful seniors' lobby AARP about to get on board ... Leaders stopped short Wednesday of declaring they had the 218 votes needed to pass the bill, and they were still negotiating language on abortion and immigration. But scheduling the vote meant those issues would have to be resolved and undecided lawmakers would have to declare themselves ... Action is slower on the other side of the Capitol, where senators are awaiting an analysis from the Congressional Budget Office..."

GOP alternative covers almost no one, yet doesn't cut the deficit as much. NYT: "The Republican bill, which has no chance of passage, would extend insurance coverage to about 3 million people by 2019, and would leave about 52 million people uninsured, the budget office said, meaning the proportion of non-elderly Americans with coverage would remain about the same as now, at roughly 83 percent ... the Republican bill would reduce future federal deficits by $68 billion over 10 years, compared to a reduction of $104 billion by the House Democrats’ legislation."

Strengthening, Weakening of Financial Reform

Boston Globe reports Rep. Frank may fix loopholes in derivatives reform bill: "House Financial Services Committee chairman Barney Frank, under fire from some fellow Democrats and consumer groups for carving out what they call loopholes in legislation designed to prevent another economic meltdown, said in a letter released tonight that 'there may be a problem here'' and that he wants to reconsider ... Heather Booth, director of Americans for Financial Reform, said in an interview that she raised concerns about loopholes in the legislation and she said Frank responded that he would try to tighten such exemptions. Booth said she left the meeting encouraged. Booth stressed, however, that her group still has concerns about whether all of the loopholes will be closed."

House cmte backs weakening amendment. CQ: "The panel also voted 37-32 to approve an amendment by Scott Garrett, R-N.J., and John Adler, D-N.J., that would permanently exempt businesses with a market capitalization up to $75 million from complying with independent auditing requirements under the Sarbanes-Oxley law (PL 107-204)."

Dodd to release bill next week, hold financial reform markup before Thanksgiving, reports CQ: "Still, passing an overhaul package in the full Senate before the end of the year could be difficult, given serious concerns from the panel’s ranking Republican, Richard C. Shelby of Alabama."

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs

Robert Reich, in Salon, tells Blue Dogs to back additional stimulus or risk losing re-election: "Everything else on the table -- a new jobs tax credit, more loans to small businesses, more help to troubled homeowners, another extension of unemployment insurance, another round of subsidies to first-time home buyers -- are small potatoes relative to the importance and likely effect of a larger stimulus. Some of these initiatives may do some good, but even combined they'll barely make a dent in the growing numbers of jobless Americans ... [The Blue Dogs are] more politically endangered next November if the the job numbers aren't moving in the right direction by then than if they vote for a larger stimulus now."

Senate passes unemployment insurance extension. HuffPost: "The GOP called for the check Wednesday night, having had enough of the fight over an extension of unemployment benefits that the party had held up for several weeks. While the Senate was stuck in parliamentary limbo, some 200,000 people actively looking for work lost their unemployment benefits. The bill extends unemployment benefits for an additional 14 weeks across the country, and in some states with the highest unemployment the extension goes to 20 weeks. The extension itself was not controversial and passed 98-0. Getting there, however, was a Herculean parliamentary task that provides insight into just how hard it is to pass even popular legislation in the Senate with a minority party intent on opposing the majority's agenda step by laborious step." House may vote today, reports Bloomberg.

Biz tax credits included in unemployment bill. The Hill: "Democrats anxious about high unemployment have shifted gears and are poised to expand a stimulus provision that would quickly put $33 billion in the pockets of businesses. The Senate on Wednesday approved a tax break that allows firms to carry back losses to get refunds on taxes paid over the past five years, and the House is expected to follow ... The carryover won’t serve as stimulus and will only give more money to businesses, said liberal economist Dean Baker."

White House Debunks 7 Green Stimulus Bill Myths reports Treehugger.

Concern that IMF too weak to address global imbalances. Bloomberg: " The Group of 20’s effort to shift the global economy away from dependence on U.S. spending and Chinese savings may fail because the International Monetary Fund lacks the power to enforce its policy prescriptions, the IMF’s past three chief economists said."

Election Message: The Progressive Base Needs a Jolt

Bill Scher — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 07:56:42 -0800

What do last night's election results tell us about the electorate? Some numbers from New Jersey, Virginia and Maine.

In 2008, Sen. John McCain lost the presidential race in NJ after garnering 1,613,207 votes. In 2009, Chris Christie won the governor's race with 1,140,134 votes. (Barack Obama had 2,215,422 votes while Gov. Jon Corzine received only 1,038,170.)

In 2008, McCain lost VA after getting 1,725,005 votes. In 2009, Robert McDonnell won the governor's race with 1,159,003 votes. (Barack Obama got 1,959,532 while Creigh Deeds got a mere 815,350.)

In 2008, McCain lost ME after earning 295,273 votes. In 2009, Maine's gay marriage law was repealed with 292,667 votes. (Barack Obama won Maine with 421,923 votes, but gay rights forces only could get 260,537 to the polls.)

It's not unusual at all for elections in non-presidential years to attract lower voter turnout. And lower turnout elections reward motivated bases. Right now, conservatives are more motivated than liberals.

Of course, local matters loomed very large in the NJ and VA races.

Most incumbent executives -- Republican and Democratic -- are feeling heat because the recession depletes tax revenue, forcing governors and mayors to either raise taxes, cut services or both. This rarely breeds popularity, and doomed Gov. Corzine.

In Virginia, the Republican stressed job creation. The moderate Democrat struggled to deliver a consistent message on economic matters and tried to discredit his rival on social issues. In a recession, that didn't fly. (Nor did it when conservatives forced out a Republican with a liberal record on social issues in the upstate New York congressional race.)

But the above numbers are so striking. It's clear that the big turnout which sent Obama to the White House with a progressive mandate was not stirred yesterday.

While conservatives are amped up to defeat what they see as a socialist government takeover of everything, liberals are conflicted about the compromises being considered to get anything passed by a Senate supermajority and a ideologically diverse Democratic caucus.

As I noted yesterday, the latest CNN poll still shows America is a center-left nation, with 58% of the public seeing the President's programs are either "just about right" ideologically or "not liberal enough."

No one in Congress should view last night's results are reason to delay and dilute health care and energy reform legislation any further. On the contrary, it is a clear signal that the progressive base needs a jolt. The antidote is swift, bold legislative action.

For additional election thoughts, check out Digby.

Progressive Breakfast: Climate Bill Boost Despite GOP Antics

Bill Scher — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 07:32:40 -0800

The daily Progressive Breakfast serves up what progressive movement members need to know to start their day

Kerry-Graham Climate Talks Advance Despite GOP Cmte Boycott

Chamber of Commerce (the real one) moves towards supporting Kerry-Graham climate compromise. Politico quotes top Chamber lobbyist: "Senators Kerry and Graham have set forth a positive, practical and realistic framework for legislation, one that echoes the core principles that the Chamber embeds in all of its communications on climate policy."

WH joins Kerry-Graham deliberations. CQ: "Even as a partisan stalemate has stalled a Senate panel’s markup of climate change legislation, behind-the-scenes efforts to engineer a bipartisan compromise are advancing, with negotiators scheduled to meet Wednesday to plot strategy with Cabinet secretaries and White House officials. The partnership of Massachusetts Democrat John Kerry and South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham, who are trying to write a broader climate bill that can win Republican votes in the Senate, was boosted Tuesday with a cautious endorsement by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce ... Senate Environment and Public Works Chairwoman Barbara Boxer, D‑Calif., called the chamber’s letter a game-changer."

Meanwhile, other Republicans throw tantrum, boycott cmte markup session for specious reason. Politico: "Republicans would like an additional five weeks for the Environmental Protection Agency to complete a study of the legislation ... the EPA has already conducted extensive analysis of the House legislation, and the agency released a second, 38-page analysis of the Kerry-Boxer bill last month ... Another study, said Boxer aides, would cost $140,000 and take roughly five weeks. Amendments passed by the committee would also change any estimates, noted Democrats ... Boxer said that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will commission a full study of the final bill. Six committees are handling sections of the legislation, and Democratic leaders will eventually combine their work into one bill. The additional study of the final bill all but guarantees that the legislation will not be taken up until at least early next year."

Coal-state Dem Sen. Jay Rockefeller suggests climate bill can wait until 2011 reports Politico, but Kerry optimistic: "But even with all these obstacles, Kerry, who has become the lead negotiator on climate change, still thinks a deal could be made by Christmas. 'I absolutely believe it’s possible. It’s Nov. 3 today. We’re talking about seven weeks from now.'"

German Chancellor urges action in address to joint session of Congress, receives polarized response. W. Post: "While the entire Democratic side gave those remarks a standing ovation, most Republicans -- including key swing voters, such as Sen. Richard G. Lugar (Ind.) -- remained in their seats. When Merkel added that curbing greenhouse gas emissions would spur growth in 'innovative' jobs worldwide, the same partisan divide marked lawmakers' reaction. Merkel tried to assuage lawmakers' concerns that any agreement coming out of international climate talks in Copenhagen next month would not include binding commitments from China and India, saying those nations will make serious emissions cuts once the leaders of industrialized nations 'show ourselves ready to adopt binding commitments.'"

Final House Health Care Bill Released

Speaker Pelosi releases "manager's amendment." Abortion still not fully resolved. TPMDC's Brian Buetler: "At a glance I see some tweaks firming up the provisions ending the anti-trust exemptions for insurance companies, and creating some real consequences for violators. Again, at a glance, I see no changes to the public option, particularly one, requested by House progressives, to create a ceiling on the rates negotiated between the government and health care providers. I also see not a single word about abortion--Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) wants to ban any and all federal money--including money spent on subsidies for private insurance plans--from paying for abortions, and he's been raising quite a fuss about it. Seems like Pelosi's calling his bluff."

LA Times suggests an abortion compromise will be reached: "Abortion-rights activists maintain that Stupak's amendment would effectively prevent private insurance companies from offering abortion services through the exchanges, reducing the availability of those services to women nationwide. 'Stupak is basically saying you cannot even participate in the exchange unless your plan does not cover abortion,' said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America. 'He's taking away coverage from women who already have it.' Meantime, another member of the House's Pro-Life Caucus, Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-Ind.), is negotiating with the leadership to toughen the funding restrictions and require at least one insurer in the exchange to offer a plan that doesn't cover abortion. House leaders said that they expected a compromise to be reached with Ellsworth that would satisfy enough of the antiabortion Democrats."

CQ on timing: "The procedural move kicks off a 72-hour review period after which leaders say they intend to bring the health bill (HR 3962) to a vote..."

Dems predict passage in House next week. Reuters: "Democrats in the House pushed ahead with plans to take up a healthcare reform bill later this week, and Democratic leader Steny Hoyer said they had enough support to pass it. 'I am confident that we are going to pass this bill,' Hoyer told reporters, predicting passage before a planned recess begins in the middle of next week."

Sen. Reid suggests health care may not pass until next year, then suggests otherwise. AP: "'We're not going to be bound by any timelines. We need to do the best job we can for the American people,' he said after the weekly closed-door meeting of rank-and-file Democrats. A few hours later, Reid's office revised his remarks. 'Our goals remain unchanged. We want to get health insurance reform done this year...'"

Sen. Durbin says timeline depends on CBO, reports CQ: "Are we going to finish by the end of the year? ... How soon will CBO get finished?"

Sen. Landrieu working with Sen. Snowe to resurrect the "trigger" compromise reports W. Post. Sen. Ben Nelson supportive reports TPMDC.

NYT says immigration issues loom: "Some Republicans favor excluding immigrants who have been legal permanent residents for less than five years, as well as all illegal immigrants. Democrats broadly agree that illegal immigrants should be excluded, but many want all legal permanent residents to be able to participate in proposed health insurance exchanges and receive subsidized coverage if they qualify. Latino leaders ... have started an 11th-hour campaign to eliminate waiting periods for them in the proposed legislation and to cancel the existing five-year wait for Medicare and Medicaid programs."

Wonk Room analyzes new GOP health care bill: "The bill includes the word ’shall’ 378 times, but does very little to expand access or lower health care costs ... the amendment shifts the costs and risks of insurance onto individuals and divides the market into low-cost plans for the healthy and high-cost insurance for the sick."

Organizing For America pushes public option, reports The Plum Line: "Obama’s political operation is about to unleash a wave of emails pressuring members of Congress, Democrats included, to vote for the House health care bill. And, notably, it explicitly singles out the bill’s provision containing a public option ... Organizing for America — and Obama himself — have been criticized for not throwing enough weight behind the provision."

W. Post piece claims bills won't cut health care costs because they won't end tax exemption for employer benefits and don't do tort reform. Robust public option never mentioned. Dean Baker rips W. Post: "The Washington Post had a front page news story complaining that the health care reform plans being considered by Congress will not have major savings in part because they do not include tort reform. The Post tells readers that tort reform could save $54 billion over the next decade. Let's see, we will spend about $30 trillion on health care over the next decade, so this comes to less than 0.2 percent in total spending. Is this the best chance to have savings on health care?"

Searching For More Stimulus

WH trying to create more jobs without increasing deficit. W. Post: "On Monday, the Presidential Economic Recovery Advisory Board ... recommended advancing ongoing federal efforts to retrofit and weatherize homes and public buildings, possibly by partnering with mayors. Members also urged establishment of an infrastructure bank, an idea Obama advocated during the presidential campaign. The bank, which would be seeded with federal money, would allow the federal government to float long-term bonds to help finance large projects, such as transit systems, housing developments, water distribution networks, roads and bridges. While the federal government issues bonds to finance its deficits, it does not issue bonds to pay for specific projects. Under the proposals endorsed by Obama during the campaign, and embodied in proposals on Capitol Hill, an independent board would determine which projects are funded..."

Extended unemployment insurance should pass Senate this week. AFL-CIO Blog: "After weeks of obstruction by Republican Senate leaders, millions of jobless workers who have or who will soon run out of unemployment insurance (UI) benefits may finally have a chance to grab an economic lifeline in the form of extended UI benefits. The U.S. Senate yesterday approved a procedural motion that clears the way to a vote on legislation (H.R. 3548) that would provide an additional 14 weeks of benefits to unemployed workers in all states and up to 20 weeks in states with especially high jobless rates. The Senate could vote as early as [Wed.], but a Thursday vote is more likely."

Unemployment bill may also extend homebuyer tax credit. NYT: "The Senate and House are poised to agree on a compromise measure to extend unemployment benefits that also would expand a popular $8,000 tax credit for homebuyers, despite a recent government report on extensive mistakes and suspected fraud in the program ... Democrats are eager to show progress before Friday, when the October jobless report is again expected to show high unemployment ... real estate groups and some economists say the credit has helped stabilize the housing market, critics say it is too costly a subsidy when low interest rates and home prices are incentives enough for most."

Dems Tinker With Reform As Britain Breaks Up The Banks

Sen. Dodd to introduce financial reform bill without Sen. Shelby. W. Post: "The legislation, which is still being finalized, would consolidate federal responsibility for banking oversight, now assigned to four agencies, into a single regulator. And, compared with the plan rolled out by the White House, Dodd's measure would grant less power to the Federal Reserve to curb activities that pose a risk to the entire financial system ... But staff members on both sides of the aisle say [Dodd and Shelby] have yet to see eye to eye on a number of issues, including a proposal to create a new consumer agency and heightened government authority for dealing with large, troubled financial firms ... Dodd hopes his committee will begin the formal process of approving his bill as soon as the week after next..."

Rep. Frank makes tweaks to his bill. CQ: "Frank, D-Mass., told reporters Tuesday that a draft bill designed to mitigate the broad economic risks posed by the largest financial institutions would get a number of tweaks: a new financing provision would be added, a confidential listing of at-risk firms would be eliminated, and the authority of federal regulators to break up teetering conglomerates would likely be enhanced. A separate bill to regulate over-the-counter derivatives will also be amended on the floor to ensure that major banks aren’t able to evade new restrictions." ALSO, W. Post reports Frank wants Elizabeth Warren to head new CFPA.

British breaking up the banks. W. Post: "The British government announced Tuesday that it will break up parts of major financial institutions bailed out by taxpayers, highlighting a growing divide across the Atlantic over how to deal with the massive banks that were partially nationalized during the height of the financial crisis ... the Obama administration has maintained that large banks should be preserved because they play an important role in the economy and that taxpayers instead should be protected by creating a new system for liquidating large banks that run into problems. But Britain's decision already is being cited by a growing chorus of experts, including prominent bankers and economists, who want the United States to pursue a similar approach."

One Year After Election Day 2008: Still A Center-Left Nation

Bill Scher — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 11:43:40 -0800

Today's CNN poll, assessing President Obama one year after election day, confirms that America remains a center-left nation. Yet don't expect pundits to tell you that.

For example, poll analysis from the Wall Street Journal's John McKinnon implies that declining approval for Obama's handling of specific issues is down as perceptions of the president as "too liberal" are up:

In just about every specific policy category, Obama’s approval rating has declined significantly since the last time pollsters checked.

On the economy, it’s down to 46%, compared with 54% in September. On health care, it’s 42%, down from 51% in September. On the federal budget deficit, it’s 39%, versus 46% in September (although up from 36% in August). On Afghanistan, it’s 42% versus 49% in August.

The percentage saying his policies are too liberal (42%) is also up slightly [from 40% in August], although 44% still say his policies are just about right. The poll has a margin of error of four percentage points.

That makes it look like the nation is split down the middle about Obama's program, with conservatism on the rise.

But what the WSJ left out is the percentage of voters who say Obama's "views and proposed programs" are "not liberal enough."

That number is 14% -- up from 5% in March, and 8% in August.

Conservative disapproval is only up 2 points from August, while liberal disapproval is up 6.

While the combined percentage of voters of who deem Obama's agenda "just about right" or "not liberal enough" is 58% -- roughly parallel to Obama's overall approval rating of 54%. That's the center-left governing majority.

Which is not new to us. Institute for America's Future has been chronicling the underreported news of America's Progressive Majority, with reports earlier this year and last year.

So the declines in approval of Obama's handling of specific issues should not be interpreted as a wholesale rejection of the president's policy direction.

Quite the opposite. What we're seeing is a growing, albeit still small, frustration that Obama isn't moving far enough or fast enough to turn his progressive mandate into legislative reality.

I would argue that the president is taking the brunt of the failures of Congress to move the President agenda strongly and swiftly, thanks to the continuing delaying and weakening tactics of the right-leaning minority of the Democratic caucus.

So Congress should not interpret these numbers as cause to delay further, but to get moving.

Progressive Breakfast: Boxer Stares Down GOP

Bill Scher — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 07:17:24 -0800

The daily Progressive Breakfast serves up what progressive movement members need to know to start their day

GOP Boycotts Today's Climate Bill Mark-up. No One Cares.

Sen. Boxer to proceed with climate bill markup today despite Republican delay tactics, after offering procedural concessions. Climate: "Boxer still plans to begin the markup at 9 a.m. with opening statements. But she agreed to suspend the markup at 2 p.m. for an open-door meeting with U.S. EPA officials to answer committee members' questions about the economic modeling of the legislation ... Republicans, who ignored yesterday deadline for filing amendments, also now have until 5 p.m. today to submit any suggested changes to the bill ... [GOP Sen. George] Voinovich declined to say whether he would attend the question-and-answer session ... But Voinovich did say he had no plans to back down on the boycott until he gets a more complete assessment of the climate bill from EPA..."

CQ notes an in-depth analysis will take weeks, and other studies are already completed. "EPA officials said they would need another four or five weeks to produce a more in-depth analysis — which Republicans say is a necessity before they attend a markup. But waiting would put Boxer under pressure from the White House. President Obama wants the Senate bill to show movement before a U.N. climate change summit in Copenhagen begins Dec. 7. Democrats say there have been ample studies of the legislation. The EPA, Congressional Budget Office and Energy Information Administration conducted in-depth studies of the House legislation that Boxer says largely apply to the Senate bill, which she describes as '90 percent the same.' ... Inhofe said one Republican will attend Tuesday’s session to keep an eye on things, but he declined to name that senator. He said committee rules require the presence of two members of the minority to constitute a quorum."

Kerry and Graham to meet with top White House climate officials. ClimateWire: "Kerry and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) are scheduled to meet tomorrow with several top Obama administration officials on the climate bill, including White House energy and climate adviser Carol Browner, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and Energy Secretary Steven Chu. 'We have to get back some of the things we've been requesting from them, which will help to be able to determine what's real in terms of options and negotiations and so forth,' Kerry said. Asked what materials he is waiting for, Kerry replied, 'Ah ha! You'll have to see.'"

Carbon market consulting firm concludes oil industry cost under cap-and-trade is manageable, picture mixed for power companies. WSJ's Environmental Capital: "Oil companies are mightily exposed to the legislation—but the final bill will be just a drop in the bucket compared to their huge sales. Exxon, for instance, accounts for 6.5% of all the U.S. greenhouse-gas emissions covered by the Senate bill. The oil giant’s initial 'carbon bill' would be about $5.9 billion. But it can get almost all that back through slightly higher prices at the gas pump, leaving its net carbon bill at $277 million. Chevron and ConocoPhillips face similar, if smaller, bills. The picture for power companies is a bit different—the final bill is a bigger portion of their smaller sales and profits. Utilities with lots of coal will be hit hardest, Point Carbon notes. That means Duke (a net carbon bill of $129 million), Southern Company ($393 million), and American Electric Power ($252 million). Other power companies would actually come out ahead—those that have lots of renewable energy or low-emissions nuclear power plants. That group includes Exelon (net carbon gain of $1.7 billion), FirstEnergy ($494 million) and Edison ($279 million)."

Chairwoman of next month's Copenhagen meeting maintains hope for international agreement: "I know it's difficult, and I know the time constraint. But I also know from conversations with many American friends that a lot can be achieved in a few weeks, provided that the health care bill is dealt with in the not-too-distant future. They must find out how to avoid coming empty-handed to Copenhagen ... The momentum is so big that something will come out of Copenhagen. The involvement from ministers is as strong as ever, and they will expect their negotiators to be able to come up with a text that marks clear political choices."

Copenhagen pre-game negotiations in Barcelona yet to make progress. Treehugger: "...initial reports aren't exactly encouraging: An IEA official says negotiators aren't ready to solve any of the problems on the table; while pressure builds on the United States to actually commit to a meaningful 2020 emission reductions target ... Yvo de Boer, head of the UN Climate Change Secretariat: 'We need a clear target from the United States in Copenhagen. That is an essential component of the puzzle.'"

de Boer told Barcelona negotiators time is running out: "On Monday he reminded negotiators in Barcelona that there were only five days left to narrow down options and come up with working texts before they regrouped in December."

Health Care Grinds On

House floor action won't begin this week. CQ: "Differences among House Democrats over issues related to abortion and immigration have forced Democratic leaders to delay floor action on health care legislation until the end of the week as they attempt to satisfy moderate members of their caucus. A manager’s amendment that is expected to include compromise language on both issues will not be ready until Tuesday at the earliest, Democratic leadership aides said Monday. Because Democrats have agreed to allow House members — and the public — to see the amendment 72 hours before debate begins, floor action likely will not begin until Nov. 6, the aides said."

Politico speculates health care may not finally pass until 2010: "The House could take up reform on the floor as early as this week, with a good shot at passing something by Veterans Day. But in the Senate, Majority Leader Harry Reid is still wrangling with his moderate members to corral 60 votes just to get the debate started. And on Monday, Reid sent a letter to Republicans acknowledging that he is waiting on the Congressional Budget Office’s cost estimates and analysis to finish drafting a bill. Democrats signaled that those estimates would not be ready this week, casting further doubt on their ability to finish reform this year."

The Hill reports House "centrists" are gradually coming around: "'We’re not there yet, but we’re in a better spot than we were a week before the climate change vote,' said a Democratic leadership aide..."

Beltway view is Lieberman won't filibuster. The Hill: "Reid’s staff has told anxious liberals that Lieberman has given the Democratic leader assurances that he will not wreck the reform bill because of Reid’s decision to include the public option, according to two sources briefed on the issue. As a result, well-connected liberals inside the Beltway who are in touch with Reid’s office have taken a more optimistic view of Lieberman’s position, while activists and bloggers outside the loop have seethed over his statements from last week."

Ezra Klein flags Jon Gruber analysis that House bill will reduce premiums: "...the CBO projected that, absent reform, the cost of an individual policy in the nongroup market would be $6,000 for a plan with an actuarial value of 60 percent. This implies that the same plan that cost $6,000 without reform would cost $4,540 with reform, or almost 25 percent less ... This conclusion is consistent with evidence from Massachusetts ... the results have been an enormous reduction in the cost of nongroup insurance in the state: The average individual premium in the state fell from $8,537 at the end of 2006 to $5,143 in mid-2009, a 40 percent reduction, while the rest of the nation was seeing a 14 percent increase."

House Dems argue their bill will reduce premiums. NYT: "As the House moved toward climactic votes on legislation to remake the health care system, the Congressional Budget Office said Monday that middle-income families might be required to pay 15 percent to 18 percent of their income on insurance premiums and co-payments under the proposal. Democrats cited the figures as evidence that the legislation would reduce premiums for many low- and middle-income families who currently lack affordable coverage."

Senate analysis challenges where private insurance revenue goes. NYT: "The health insurance industry likes to cite figures showing that 87 cents of every dollar in premiums is spent on medical claims. But a new Senate analysis suggests that for-profit insurance companies are spending much less than that, especially for policies sold to individuals and small businesses. Instead, as little as 66 cents of each dollar paid in premiums goes toward doctor and hospital bills, while the rest covers administrative expenses, marketing and company profits..."

Republican plan won't even ban discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions: "Republicans plan to offer a measure much narrower in scope and more modest in its goals. GOP leaders are unable to say yet how much their bill would cost or how many Americans would gain health insurance under their plan, but Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) said Monday that his party's bill was sent to the Congressional Budget Office for scoring ... Boehner said Monday that the measure would not include language banning insurance companies from denying coverage to consumers with preexisting conditions..."

Nebraska poll shows support for public option, despite Sen. Nelson's opposition: reports HuffPost.

Economic Breakfast Sides

Bloomberg speculates Congress may stop Fed from endings its intervention in the housing market: "Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke is gambling that come March, he can stop the purchases of mortgage-backed securities that have propped up the U.S. housing market. Congress may have other ideas ... Bernanke ... is counting on private investors to fill the void left by the Fed when its purchases end. If he’s wrong, he may come under pressure from politicians to maintain support for housing or even extend credit programs for small businesses and consumers. That would threaten the Fed’s ability to conduct an independent monetary policy."

HuffPost's Shahien Nasiripour reports WH Chief of Staff Emanuel backs Rep. Maloney amendment to weaken financial reform: "White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has been telling Democratic members of the House Financial Services Committee that he supports amending the Investor Protection Act of 2009 -- a bill designed to beef up protection for investors -- in order to exempt small businesses from a requirement in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act that mandates audits of internal controls ... Emanuel is said to support an amendment proposed by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) that would exempt firms with a market capitalization of less than $75 million from the reporting requirement."

Politico reports on pushback against House too-big-to-fail bill: "...House Financial Services Committee chair Barney Frank may postpone today's scheduled committee consideration of systemic risk legislation and instead call for further hearings ... postponement would come following 'significant' concerns from Dems on the committee over how the bill is structured. The main dispute centers on who would pay -- and when -- if the federal government is forced to dismantle a giant bank whose collapse would threaten the financial system. The White House and Frank initially preferred language that would place the cost on the failing company's competitors but would give the competitors 60 months from the time of the wind-down to pay back the government, sticking tax-payers with the bill for five years. Some Democrats and other opponents of the White House/Frank plan would rather assess fees on banks with $10 billion or more in assets. The fees would go into a fund to be used to wind down failing firms if necessary. Banks are not thrilled with the idea of paying into this fund ... Frank yesterday indicated he would be willing to push an amendment that would require firms to pre-pay. Treasury Secretary Geithner has warned that such a fund would create moral hazard, encouraging excessive risk-taking on the part of banks who know they have such a fund to rely on."

Senate reform bill may come next week. CQ: "Dodd, D-Conn., and his aides have confirmed several major tenets of the pending proposal, including many that break from ideas put forth by the Obama administration and House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass. Most notably, Dodd has said his proposal will include a consolidation of federal banking regulators, an idea that has been panned as politically untenable by Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner and Frank."

Fed discussed exec pay with top bankers. NYT: "In 20-minute sessions, Fed officials told bankers that they might need to fundamentally reform their pay practices as the agency moved forward with a comprehensive review of 28 large financial institutions. Fed officials imposed a Feb. 1 deadline for them to submit a written plan of any changes, but urged them to begin the overhaul now as they considered bonuses for 2009 ... Some analysts questioned whether the meetings — and the Fed’s newfound focus on pay — were largely a public relations exercise ... "

Progressive Breakfast: Health Care Up, Climate Down?

Bill Scher — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 05:13:35 -0800

The daily Progressive Breakfast serves up what progressive movement members need to know to start their day

Health Care Advancing, Bit By Bit

NYT offers optimistic update on health care legislation: "... President Obama’s arms-length strategy on health care appears to be paying dividends ... The bills have advanced further than many lawmakers expected. Five separate measures are now pared down to two. But the legislative progress has come at a price. In the absence of specific guidance from the White House, it has moved ahead in fits and starts. From here on, the challenges will only grow more difficult ... In the House, where leaders have vowed to pass a bill by Nov. 11, a fight over abortion coverage could still imperil the legislation, and Mr. Obama could lose some votes from liberals upset that the bill includes a weakened 'public option,' ... Last week’s back-and-forth in the Senate was emblematic of a process that has at times seemed on the brink of anarchy."

HuffPost's Art Levine observes the House-Senate differences on taxing expansive insurance plans may be a major stumbling block: "abor unions, joined with other progressive organizations like Health Care for America Now, will be pushing to strengthen the legislation when the bills come to floor votes, but they're also focusing their efforts on ensuring that midde-class families and union members aren't slammed by a whopping 40% tax on insurers offering so-called Cadillac plans."

E.J. Dionne notes incremental, immediate reforms will have the biggest political impact in 2010: "...since most of the changes don't become effective until 2013, the next few years will be a time of uncertainties and unknowns. Citizens typically want to know what's in this for them, and what they'll get right now. That's why the most important document House Democrats released when they unveiled their bill last week was a list of 14 benefits that would be created immediately. These include insurance reforms to ban lifetime limits on coverage and an end to 'rescissions,' under which insurers abruptly nullify patients' policies after they file claims. One of the most popular reforms in the bill -- barring insurers from denying coverage to those with pre-existing conditions -- wouldn't take effect until later. So the House bill creates an interim high-risk pool to help those who need coverage in the meantime. There are also particular benefits for Medicare recipients, including an immediate reduction in drug costs, and a very popular provision that would allow parents to keep their children on the family health plan through age 26. Especially important are new investments in community health centers and in efforts to increase the number of primary care doctors."

Sen. Snowe tells AP he "trigger" proposal doesn't have the votes to pass, won't bother introducing it. (via FDL)

Change.org's Tim Foley notes the House health care bill cuts the deficit more "than the Senate Finance Committee bill."

Senate Climate Bill Faces Committee Debate This Week

W. Post delivers a pessimistic update on Senate climate bill before tomorrow's committee debate: "With Democrats deeply divided on the issue, unless some Republican lawmakers risk the backlash for signing on to the legislation, there is almost no hope for passage ... Democratic leaders, with the support of the Obama administration, are trying to sway at least half a dozen Republicans by offering amendments to speed along their top priority: building nuclear power plants ... it remains unclear whether that approach will hold currency in the current era of political polarization."

CQ reports Sen. Stabenow looking to advance agricultural interests in climate bill offset program: "The two-term Democrat has been negotiating closely with farm groups and the bill’s sponsors, John Kerry, D-Mass., and Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., to craft language that favors farmers and can win support from colleagues representing rural regions ... Stabenow envisions Michigan cashing in on an offset program. The state has many forests, which release carbon when cut down. Landowners could earn offset payments by keeping the forests intact. The senator even envisions ways for Michigan’s economically depressed cities to generate cash from a carbon offset program ... Boxer said flatly: 'She’ll write the agriculture title.' But it’s not clear that Agriculture Chairwoman Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., agrees ... [Farm groups] want the Agriculture Department — which is likely to be more sympathetic to farmers’ interests — to oversee a farm offsets program instead of the EPA. Environmentalists say this could undercut the program’s value as a conservation tool. ... An early draft of Stabenow’s legislation aims to straddle the agency line, giving the Agriculture Department chief jurisdiction of the program while creating a consultation role for the EPA and establishing a scientific panel to evaluate the environmental integrity of offset projects."

Al Gore predicts Obama will go to Copenhagen next month, reports EnviroKnow.

Climate Progress praises Al Gore's latest climate book: "a must-read book for those who want a primer on all the key solutions countries will be considering at Copenhagen."

Texas 600-megawatt wind farm creates more than 6 times the number of Chinese jobs than US jobs. NYT's Green Inc.: " The total cost of the project, which was brokered in part by the U.S. Renewable Energy Group, an American private equity company, was estimated at $1.5 billion. At an event after the announcement in Washington on Thursday, Cappy McGarr, a managing partner at the company, was beaming. 'This planned $1.5 billion investment in wind energy will spur tremendous growth in the renewable energy sector,' Mr. McGarr was quoted in a news release as saying, 'and directly create hundreds of high-paying American jobs.' ... The group’s calculations last week put the number of American jobs at a little more than 300 — most of them temporary construction jobs, along with about 30 permanent positions once the wind farm is operating. Mr. McGarr told The Wall Street Journal that more than 2,000 Chinese jobs would be created by the deal. That, along with the fact that the project was hoping to secure 30 percent, or $450 million, of its financing from U.S. stimulus funds, was enough to send tempers flaring."

Goldman Sachs Quietly Behind Subprime Housing Crisis

McClatchy uncovers Goldman Sachs secretive role in foreclosing on subprime mortgage homeowners: "Goldman spent years buying hundreds of thousands of subprime mortgages, many of them from some of the more unsavory lenders in the business, and packaging them into high-yield bonds. Now that the bottom has fallen out of that market, Goldman finds itself in a different role: as the big banker that takes homes away from folks such as the Beckers. The couple alleges that Goldman declined for three years to confirm their suspicions that it had bought their mortgages from a subprime lender, even after they wrote to Goldman's then-Chief Executive Henry Paulson — later U.S. Treasury secretary — in 2003. Unable to identify a lender, the couple could neither capitalize on a mortgage hardship provision that would allow them to defer some payments, nor on a state law enabling them to offset their debt against separate, investment-related claims against Goldman."

GOP sees fresh opening to end TARP. Politico: "...Republicans are moving to use yesterday’s bankruptcy filing by business lender CIT to score political points against TARP -- which Senate Republicans are pushing to end with an amendment to unemployment benefits legislation this week. House Financial Services ranking Republican Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.) said in a statement that CIT’s filing 'highlights the folly of a legislative proposal that makes the Federal Reserve the unchallenged arbiter of systemic risk, capital adequacy, and financial stability.'"

We Can Not Afford Not Passing More Stimulus

Krugman sounds the alarm: "Suppose that the economy were to keep growing at 3.5 percent. If that happened, unemployment would eventually start falling — but very, very slowly. The experience of the Clinton era, when the economy grew at an average rate of 3.7 percent for eight years (did you know that?) suggests that at current growth rates we’d be lucky to see the unemployment rate fall by half a percentage point per year, meaning that it would take a decade to return to something like full employment. Worse yet, it’s far from clear that growth will continue at this rate. The effects of the stimulus will build over time — it’s still likely to create or save a total of around three million jobs — but its peak impact on the growth of G.D.P. (as opposed to its level) is already behind us. Solid growth will continue only if private spending takes up the baton as the effect of the stimulus fades. And so far there’s no sign that this is happening. So the government needs to do much more. Unfortunately, the political prospects for further action aren’t good."

American Prospect's Jake Blumgart reports ME and WA may pass anti-tax anti-stimulative initiatives tomorrow that will gut state government services: "TABOR bills are designed to restrict government spending by capping taxes at the previous year's levels, and allowing them to grow only in relation to population plus inflation. This idea can be problematic in boom years, but critics fear it would be disastrous now, when state and local budgets have already been cut to the marrow. If TABOR passes in Maine or Washington, the states would have to cap their budget at the 2010 revenue baseline. If the recession continues eating into revenues, the TABOR cap would only continue dropping, forcing governments to cut more programs. If the economy improves, Maine and Washington would still be trapped by the previous year's spending limit -- in this case, the trough of the worst recession in a generation. Essentially, both states -- along with every county and city within them -- would be locked into recession-era spending. 'TABOR would make it impossible for either state to ever recover any of the public services that were cut during this recession,' says Iris J. Lav, senior adviser for state fiscal policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 'In a recession, revenues drop. When revenues drop under TABOR the inflation and population allowances are applied to those reduced revenues, you don't get to go back to your previous base.'"

Fed rate decision Wed., unemployment numbers Fri. notes W. Post.

Possible positive manufacturing news. Bloomberg: "Factories in the U.S. probably grew at a faster pace, while the number of people signing contracts to buy houses showed no improvement, signaling a shift to manufacturing as the driver of the expansion, economists said before reports today ... 'Manufacturing is back in expansion territory on a sustained basis,' said Adam York, an economist at Wells Fargo Securities LLC in Charlotte, North Carolina."

Live Coverage of the Building The New Economy Conference

Bill Scher — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:00:29 -0700

LISTEN LIVE!
Click the logo to launch player.

The Building The New Economy conference is convening today in Washington, DC. Follow the action via Twitter below. LIve audio stream also available from The Guy James Show.