* Republicans believe in “NO” government, and they will obstruct everything to achieve it; when will Americans wake up?

The National Labor Relations Board is an independent federal agency created by Congress in 1935 to administer the National Labor Relations Act, the primary law governing relations between unions and employers in the private sector. The statute guarantees the right of employees to organize and to bargain collectively with their employers, and to engage in other protected concerted activity with or without a union, or to refrain from all such activity.

Sam Hananel (AP) writes (2-9-10) …

• The Republicans’ first test of their new Senate clout could come in a vote to block President Barack Obama’s choice of a union attorney for a seat on the National Labor Relations Board.
• Senate Democrats need 60 votes, one more than they control since Scott Brown of Massachusetts was sworn into office last week, to clear a GOP procedural hurdle to advance Craig Becker to a final Senate confirmation vote.
• Republicans have held up Becker’s confirmation for months, saying they fear he will push an aggressive union agenda at the agency that referees labor disputes between unions and management.
• The tussle over Becker is also another setback for the NLRB, which has been waiting for more than two years with vacancies in three of its five seats.
• That has forced the agency to postpone hundreds of cases that could have a wider effect on the workplace.

Read the entire article at … http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100209/ap_on_bi_ge/us_senate_nlrb

******

see Lew Weinstein’s CASE CLOSED blog at …

http://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/

for a vibrant discussion of the FBI’s failure to solve the 2001 anthrax murders

read Lew’s novel CASE CLOSED

for one fictional scenario as to why the FBI failed to solve the case

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

* Wouldn’t it be something if, at the end of the day, President Obama achieves healthcare reform … it could happen

President Obama dissects Republicans in nationally televised exchange

******

Charles Babington (AP) writes (2-9-10) …

• Even as Republicans publicly welcome President Barack Obama’s call for a bipartisan confab on health care, some privately worry that he might be laying a trap to portray their ideas as flimsy.
• If so, a shaky showing by GOP leaders could possibly embolden congressional Democrats to make a final, aggressive push to overhaul the nation’s health care system, with or without any Republican votes.
• The House’s top two Republican leaders openly questioned Obama’s sincerity and hinted they might skip the meeting if he uses the Democratic bills as the starting point for discussions.
• “What I want to do is to look at the Republican ideas that are out there,” Obama said. “And I want to be very specific.”
  • How do you guys want to lower costs?
  • How do you guys intend to reform the insurance markets so people with preexisting conditions, for example, can get health care?
  • How do you want to make sure that the 30 million people who don’t have health insurance can get it?’”
• Republicans say their health care proposals are frugal and practical.
• But Obama may be able to cast unkind lights on some details, such as nonpartisan estimates that the House Republican bill would cover 3 million uninsured people while the Democratic version would cover 36 million.

Read the entire article at … http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100209/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_overhaul

LMW COMMENT …

• Until two weeks ago, President Obama looked weak, unable to push his prime initiative, healthcare reform, through the Congress and into law.
• Republicans had been taking shots based on outright lies as to what was in the bills being considered, and there was not a clear perception among Americans as to the what was being proposed.
• Then the meeting President Obama had with Congressional Republicans on national TV, at which the President dissected Republican lies and clearly demonstrated the obstructionist policies of the party of NO.
• Now comes the meeting on February 25.
  • The Republicans will make fools of themselves if they do not attend.
  • And they will make fools of themselves if they do attend.
• President Obama has taken the reins of the healthcare debate, after a year of Democratic Congressional blithering and weakness has shaken the faith of Americans that our government in DC can get anything done at all.
• Now comes the showdown on February 25.
• After which I believe there will be a single healthcare bill introduced in both houses of Congress, passed in the House and filibustered in the Senate.
  • I welcome a Senate filibuster.
  • Let the Republicans be clearly identified as the party which
    • does not want to insure 30 million Americans without insurance,
    • does not want to provide insurance to those Americans with pre-existing conditions,
    • that does want to allow insurance companies to gouge huge price increases from Americans who are seriously ill.
  • Such a Republican filibuster on national TV (CSPAN) will make it clear who cares about all Americans and who only cares about the wealthy and well-connected.

Wouldn’t it be something if, at the end of the day,

President Obama achieves healthcare reform

that has eluded 7 presidents.

******

see Lew Weinstein’s CASE CLOSED blog at …

http://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/

for a vibrant discussion of the FBI’s failure to solve the 2001 anthrax murders

read Lew’s novel CASE CLOSED

for one fictional scenario as to why the FBI failed to solve the case

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

* look at the job numbers … we are clearly on the right path

Can it be any clearer than this that the stimulus package (supported by both Bush and Obama administrations) is working ???

Jobs lost by month has shown a sharp turnaround …

Now, can we have a similar chart that shows the deficit numbers,

from Clinton to Bush to Obama?

******

see Lew Weinstein’s CASE CLOSED blog at …

http://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/

for a vibrant discussion of the FBI’s failure to solve the 2001 anthrax murders, read Lew’s novel CASE CLOSED

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

******

* proposed Constitutional amendment … members of Congress cannot treat themselves with special privileges

U.S. Congress

Thanks to Bob Lurer for sending this to me …

A proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution is being circulated, prompted by the way Congress treats itself to special privileges, such as healthcare, and exempts itself from laws which govern the rest of us.

What do you think? If you agree, tell your mailing list and ask them to tell theirs.

Here’s the proposed amendment …

“Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Members of the United States Senate and to Members of the United States House of Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to Members of the United States Senate and Members of the United States House of Representatives that does not apply equally to all of the citizens of the United States”.

******

* simplistic Sarah vs a complex reality

simplistic Sarah

An old friend of mine said many times (probably quoting someone else) … a simple lie will often defeat the complex truth.

We’d better hope that Sarah Palin’s pronouncements on the deficit don’t fit that description. Even more so because I don’t think she’s lying; I just think she is ignorant and ill-informed, and willing to pander her ignorance to her frightened supporters.

Last night, in her Tea Party speech, Ms. Palin said (this is a paraphrase; I’ll substitute the actual text when it’s available) …

• dealing with the deficit is simple.
• Just like balancing your home budget.
• Tighten your belt.
• Don’t buy that extra pair of roller skates.

It is a measure of her almost total ignorance and related arrogance that Ms. Palin probably believes what she said is true.

It is frightening that other Americans apparently agree with her.

******

For a far more complex but infinitely more accurate view of the deficit problem, here are excerpts from this morning’s (2/7/10) New York Times editorial …

• The deficit numbers — a projected $1.3 trillion in fiscal 2011 alone — are breathtaking.
• What is even more breathtaking is the Republicans’ cynical refusal to acknowledge that the country would never have gotten into so deep a hole if President George W. Bush and the Republican-led Congress had not spent years slashing taxes — mainly on the wealthy — and spending with far too little restraint.
  • The Republican amnesia and posturing are playing well on the hustings, where Americans are deeply anxious about the economy and fearful of losing their jobs and homes.
  • Far too many Democratic lawmakers are losing their nerve.
• As the budget debate plays out, here are some basic facts about the deficit that Americans need to consider:
• HOW DID WE GET HERE?
  • When President Bush took office in 2001, the federal budget had been in the black for three years, and continued surpluses were projected for a decade to come.
  • By the time Mr. Bush left office in early 2009, the government had run big deficits for seven straight years, and the economy was on the brink of another Great Depression.
  • About half of today’s huge deficits can be chalked up to Bush-era profligacy: mainly cutting taxes deeply while borrowing to wage two wars and to enact the Medicare prescription drug benefit — all of which Republicans supported, virtually in lockstep.
  • The other half of recent deficits is due to the recession and the financial crisis.
• As for why the financial system and the economy imploded, President Bush and Congress deserve much of the blame for their devotion to debt-driven growth and blind deregulatory zeal — although on deregulation, President Clinton and his team (some of whom are back in the White House) were also complicit.
• WHAT CAN BE DONE NOW?
  • Here is an unpopular but undeniable fact of life: When private sector demand is weak, the federal government must serve as the spender of last resort. Otherwise, collapsing demand sets in motion a negative, self-reinforcing spiral in which lack of demand — for goods, services and new employees — leads to ever deepening economic weakness.
  • The stimulus package slowed job losses and helped spur activity — in the third quarter of 2009, the economy grew at an annual rate of 2.2 percent, and the initial fourth-quarter reading was 5.7 percent, a rebound few thought possible a year ago.
• SO DO WE JUST LIVE WITH THE DEFICIT?
  • The problem must be addressed. Persistently high deficits are harmful to the economy and the country’s long-run security.
  • The real problem, which also goes unmentioned, is that dangerous deficits will accumulate over time if continuing trends and policies — especially in health care — persist unchanged.
• SO HOW DO WE FIX IT?
  • To truly tame deficits will require serious health care reform, the sooner the better. Other aspects of the long-term fiscal problem — raising taxes and retooling Social Security — must take place in earnest as the economy recovers.
  • Unless health care costs are controlled, there is no way to solve the country’s long-term deficit and debt problems.
  • Broad tax reform is also essential to ensure that revenues keep pace with expenditures.
  • And then there is Social Security.
  • What is needed is a combination of benefit cuts and tax increases that preserve the program’s essential nature.
• There is no way to get deficits under control until our political leaders are willing to acknowledge difficult truths and make even more difficult political choices.
• We have heard and seen too little of that from the Democrats lately, and none at all from the Republicans. That is truly a recipe for disaster.

Read the entire NYT editorial at … http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/opinion/07sun1.html?ref=opinion

******

see Lew Weinstein’s CASE CLOSED blog at …

http://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/

for a vibrant discussion of the FBI’s failure to solve the 2001 anthrax murders, read Lew’s novel CASE CLOSED

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

******

* Krugman (NYT) … hypocritical Republican fear-mongering threatens our nation’s future

Republican leaders McConnell & Boehner

Paul Krugman writes in the NYT (2/5/10) …

• These days it’s hard to pick up a newspaper or turn on a news program without encountering stern warnings about the federal budget deficit.
  • The deficit threatens economic recovery, we’re told;
  • it puts American economic stability at risk;
  • it will undermine our influence in the world.
• These claims generally aren’t stated as opinions, as views held by some analysts but disputed by others. Instead, they’re reported as if they were facts, plain and simple.
• Yet they aren’t facts.
• The long-run budget outlook is problematic, but short-term deficits aren’t — and even the long-term outlook is much less frightening than the public is being led to believe.
• Why, then, all the hysteria? The answer is politics.
• The main difference between last summer, when we were mostly (and appropriately) taking deficits in stride, and the current sense of panic is that deficit fear-mongering has become a key part of Republican political strategy, doing double duty: it damages President Obama’s image even as it cripples his policy agenda.
• And if the hypocrisy is breathtaking — politicians who voted for budget-busting tax cuts posing as apostles of fiscal rectitude, politicians demonizing attempts to rein in Medicare costs one day (death panels!), then denouncing excessive government spending the next — well, what else is new?
• The trouble, however, is that it’s apparently hard for many people to tell the difference between cynical posturing and serious economic argument. And that is having tragic consequences.
• For the fact is that thanks to deficit hysteria, Washington now has its priorities all wrong: all the talk is about how to shave a few billion dollars off government spending, while there’s hardly any willingness to tackle mass unemployment. Policy is headed in the wrong direction — and millions of Americans will pay the price.

Read Krugman’s entire column at … http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/05/opinion/05krugman.html?ref=opinion

LMW COMMENT …

Democracy depends on an intelligent and informed electorate. The profusion of Republican hypocritical lies spread by the drumbeat of FOX News, is a serious threat to our country as we try to deal responsibly with serious problems, largely caused by the same hypocrites who voted for huge deficit causing tax breaks and two unfunded wars, and have now become the party voting NO to all proposed solutions to the problems they created. Some people rail against all politics, without differentiating between what makes sense and what doesn’t. There is much to be upset about with politicians, but it is they who hold the keys to our future; our job is to push them in the direction of responsible decision-making.

******

see Lew’s CASE CLOSED blog at …

http://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/

for a vibrant discussion of the FBI’s failure to solve the 2001 anthrax murders.

* Wanted: Congressional courage to address the important issues; Obama’s leadership to make it happen

Gail Collins writes in the NYT (2-4-10) …

• Cutting a federal program is next to impossible because there’s usually somebody who cares much more about keeping it than the White House does about making it go away.
  • Senator Bill Nelson of Florida is already making soft whimpering noises about the NASA budget cuts, which will, if necessary, eventually rise to guttural howls.
  • Before the budget document even went out, Senator Chuck Schumer of New York had issued a scathing press release attacking plans to eliminate $5 million in grants to manufacturers of worsted wool.
  • My own favorite target for extinction is a $9 million annual appropriation for museums and educational programs that highlight the “shared culture and tradition” of Alaskan Natives, Native Hawaiians and “children and families of Massachusetts.”In other words, whaling.
• It does seem as if the people who spend all their time carping about the deficit should step up to the plate, though. We are looking at you, Scott Brown. Give back that whale money.

Read the entire column at … http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/opinion/04collins.html?ref=opinion

LMW COMMENT …

• I like Gail Collins, but I think this column misses the mark.
  • Congressmen and women will always look for ways to bring Federal dollars to their districts. Their constituents demand it, and they will (with few exceptions) not get re-elected if they don’t.
  • The best we can do with these district-oriented appropriations is to focus attention on them, make it clear who is proposing what, and make the entire Congress vote on each of them.
  • That wouldn’t be so bad. Some of these “earmarks” are actually worthwhile projects. And in total they apparentlly amount to roughly 1% of the Federal budget.
• There other ways to get spending under control and reduce the deficit and it has nothing to do with earmarks, which are a diversion.
  • Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security account for a huge percentage of the budget and are increasing at unsustainable rates. These programs must be addressed and adjusted to levels of expenditure we can afford.
  • Tax policy must become more rational, especially with regard to the wealthy and for corporations. We need to provide incentives for investment in innovation, but we should be focusing on the best opportunities for our future economic health, not on providing unfair tax advantages for the wealthy and well-placed.
  • Our defense expenditures must also be carefully reviewed. We need to protect America; it is our highest priority. But that does not mean that every Defense Department expenditure has merit, and we should eliminate those which do not.
• If Congress has courage, it will address these issues which impact all Americans, not just the ones in their own districts. We have seen little evidence, from incumbent Republicans or Democrats, or those running against them, of any willingness to do so.
• It is President Obama’s biggest challenge to prod and lead Congress in the direction he so clearly articulates.

******

see Lew’s CASE CLOSED blog at … http://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/ for a vibrant discussion of the FBI’s failure to solve the 2001 anthrax murders.

******

* exit poll data from MA Brown-Coakley election

Dan Payne writes in the Boston Globe (1-27-10) – Thanks to Harry Schroeder for sending me the link …

• There have been many interpretations of what Massachusetts voters felt they were doing last week when they elected Scott Brown over Martha Coakley.
• Washington observers quickly announced that President Obama and Democrats are in big trouble and Republicans are sitting pretty as the midterm elections approach. Perhaps.
• Rather than trying to divine meaning through tea leaves or turnout patterns or Sunday morning talking heads, why not go to the source? The polling firm Hart Research in Washington interviewed 810 Massachusetts voters on Election Day and agreed to give me its exit poll data and report.
• The finding that most defies conventional wisdom is that voters, by a two-to-one margin, (61-to-33 percent), said they voted for the person they believed would be the better senator and not to send a message to Washington or President Obama.
• Asked whom they trusted more to improve the economy, 47 percent of voters said Obama and Democrats in Congress. Only 33 percent said the Republicans.
• Voters were asked if Brown should stick to his conservative guns and try to block the president and Congressional Democrats, or work with them in a bipartisan manner. Cooperation won by more than three-to-one (76-to-21 percent ). Even among Brown voters, bipartisan cooperation was preferred to resistance by 61-to-36 percent.
• Among those who said health care was the top reason for their decision, Coakley won 50-to-46 percent. Those who said health care was not their main motivation, Brown won 55-to-38 percent.
• The economy, not health care, drove the vote. Among those who felt the economy was doing well, (Who are those people?) Coakley won 52-to-43 percent. For those who said the economy was not good or poor, Brown won 56-to-39 percent.

Dan Payne is a Boston-area media consultant who has worked for Democratic candidates around the country. He also does political analysis for WBUR radio.

Read the entire article at … http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/01/27/what_voters_were_saying_at_the_polls/

* it’s not too late for real healthcare reform … Gov. Rendell’s suggestion

Last night on the Rachel Maddow Show, Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell suggested a multi-step strategy for accomplishing healthcare reform.

1. Put together a bill that includes only (a) no pre-existing conditions, (b) no dropping when you get sick, (c) lower the Medicare age to 55.

2. Introduce the bill in the Senate and dare the Republicans to filibuster. They will look like fools if they do.

3. Adopt the same bill in the House and pass the bill into law.

4. Then immediately move to add  the other pieces, which the healthcare companies will need if they’re going to get the 30 million  additional customers they want.

5. Use the reconciliation process for these additional changes so that only 51 votes (including VP Biden) are needed.

Sounds good to me.

* it’s not too late for real reform of our financial system

Jim Kuhnhenn writes for AP (1/21/10) …

• President Barack Obama, eager to harness and redirect voter anger over bank bailouts, is ramping up his war on Wall Street.
• Building on his own proposals and the work of the House, the president wants new federal government powers to limit the size and complexity of large financial institutions and to limit their ability to engage in high-risk trades.

Read the entire article at … http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100121/ap_on_bi_ge/us_financial_overhaul

LMW COMMENT …

It is a disgrace that the original bailouts of the financial institutions by both the Bush and Obama administrations did not include conditions to the loans that would require lending, limit bonuses, and assure responsible risk-taking.

But maybe it’s not too late. If the Democrats in Congress have the guts to act. And if President Obama shows the strength to insist.