Support NeoGAF

[Oblivion]

Well, of the 260 Billion left to spend ... almost half of it is tax cuts. The new simulus would be focused on construction/infrastructure projects that were axed off the initial stimulus plan. Which is why it is being deemed a "jobs bill" because it focuses more on employment projects (or "make work") than other methods of stimulating the economy.

Also, the House version incorporated 75 billion from TARP into the bill to pay for unemployment and health insurance extensions. Much needed in light of the (worse than expected) unemployment numbers.

Ah, okay thanks.

 

[Oblivion]

Surprised this hasn't been posted on Huffpost, or dailykos, but this is just too awesome.

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheYoungTurks#p/u/9/whF-dX-eQgA

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

So the excise tax has been unchanged. Great news.

BTW, Washington Times says Obama more successful cutting spending than Bush:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/14/obama-wins-more-cuts-in-spending-than-bush/

 

[loosus]

Would you get this mad if/when the the FDIC raises rates due to too many banks failing?

Okay, seriously, what the fuck are you on about? This has NOTHING to do with that. Taxing banks that had nothing to do with this is not the way to raise the money. How about -- gee, I don't know -- punishing those banks (and, especially, their executives) who put us here to begin with as opposed to pulling us all down? Your solutions are stupid.

 

[GhaleonEB]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/...deal--but-arent-sure-it-will-work.php?ref=fpb

Labor on board with the compromise. Not thrilled, but on board.

Work is being done to open the exchanges faster, to more people:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/01/did_the_unions_and_the_excise.html

White House official: 'The exchanges will open to more and more people'

On a conference call earlier today, the union representatives mentioned that the exchanges would open to collective bargaining units and Taft-Hartley plans in 2017. This is, potentially, a very big deal. But details are hard to come by. Does it mean that the exchanges open up to all employers in 2017? A later conference call with White House officials saw repeated questions on this front (including one from me), and a studied vagueness: "We're working very hard on the exchanges," they said. But there was a clue to the direction the bill is moving: "Over time, the exchanges will open to more and more people," said one of the officials on the call.

Union officials seem pretty sure that collective bargaining units of all sizes will be included in the exchanges in 2017. That's part of the excise tax deal, in their mind. If they can get a better deal in the exchanges, which have all sorts of plans and a much larger risk pool, then they should be able to go get that deal rather than sticking with pricier insurance that's vulnerable to the new tax.

They're right about that, and this is exactly the sort of movement toward a more competitive, price-conscious insurance market that the excise tax is designed to encourage. The question is whether this deal applies to all employers. Sources briefed on the conversations believes that it does. And if the combination of the excise tax and union concerns with the vulnerabilities of the employer-based market lead Congress to open the exchanges to everyone in 2017, then this has been a successful negotiating process indeed, and this bill is a lot better than it was a week ago.

And Obama fires up the House Dem caucus:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/01/barack_obama_on_repeal_of_heal.html

So, I know everybody in the media is all in a tizzy -- "Oh, what's this going to mean politically?" Well, let me tell you something. If Republicans want to campaign against what we've done by standing up for the status quo and for insurance companies over American families and businesses, that is a fight I want to have. (Applause.) If their best idea is to return to the bad policies and the bad ideas of yesterday, they are going to lose that argument. What are they going to say? "Well, you know, the old system really worked well; let's go back to the way it was"? That's not going to appeal to seniors who are now seeing the possibility of that doughnut hole finally closing and so they can finally get discounts on their prescriptions. (Applause.) That's not going to appeal to the small businesses who find out all the tax credits that they're going to get for doing right by their employees -- something that they have been wanting to do, but may not have been able to afford. It's not going to be very appealing to Americans who for the first time are going to find out that they can provide coverage to their children, their dependents, all the way up to the age of 26 or 27.

And that's why I'll be out there waging a great campaign from one end of the country to the other, telling Americans with insurance or without what they stand to gain -- (applause); about the arsenal of consumer protections; about the long-awaited stability that they're going to begin to experience. And I'm going to tell them that I am proud we are putting the future of America before the politics of the moment -- the next generation before the next election. And that, after all, is what we were sent up here to do: standing up for the American people against the special interests; solve problems that we've been talking about for decades; make their lives a little bit better; make tough choices sometimes when they're unpopular. And that's something that every one of you who support this bill can be proud to campaign on in November.

Now, I know that some of the fights we've been going through have been tough. I know that some of you have gotten beaten up at home. Some of the fights that we're going to go through this year are going to be tough as well. But just remember why each of us got into public service in the first place -- we found something that was worth fighting for. There was something we thought was important enough that we were willing to stand up in the public square, risk loss, risk embarrassment, because we knew in our hearts that something wasn't right, that we weren't in some measure living up to the American ideal, and that we thought that if we got involved and engaged in the democratic process, somehow we could make it a little bit better.

 

[ViperVisor]

Jesus, the Palin and Beck chat is fucking creepy.

Glenn has a cold giving him a Stacy Keach as the Phantasm in Batman vibe.

 

[PhoenixDark]

next week

Lieberman: I Will Filibuster National Exchange
White House to Reid: Drop National Exchange
Nelson: Preserve Anti-Trust Exemption or Else

 

[Diablos]

next week

Lieberman: I Will Filibuster National Exchange
White House to Reid: Drop National Exchange
Nelson: Preserve Anti-Trust Exemption or Else

:lol :lol :lol

It's funny because it's so very possibly true

 

[Gruco]

Bank fee by size of bank is a great idea. Big bank has to charge more = more people use smaller banks = lower systemic risk re: too big too fail.

 

[GhaleonEB]

next week

Lieberman: I Will Filibuster National Exchange
White House to Reid: Drop National Exchange
Nelson: Preserve Anti-Trust Exemption or Else

For the record, that's exactly what I predicted three months ago.

 

[Averon]

Suffolk poll has Brown up by 4.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31534.html

:lol if the Dems loses a Senate seat to a Rep in Mass of all places.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Suffolk poll has Brown up by 4.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31534.html

:lol if the Dems loses a Senate seat to a Rep in Mass off all places.

Same day another poll had Coakley up by 8. The polling is just NUTS in this race. :lol

A week ago, the fallback plan for healthcare reform was, should Coakley lose, the House could just pass the Senate bill and it would be enacted with no further action from the Senate.

I can't find the article, but there's apparently a new fallback plan: in Massachusetts, the Secretary of State can't certify the winner of the election until all ballots are counted. And counting is not ended until all eligible overseas ballots are counted. And the state allows 10 days after election day for ballots to be received and counted. And since the new Senator can't be sworn in to the Senate until he/she has the proper papers from the state Secretary of State (remember Burris' confrontation), that means they could delay the swearing in until the Thursday or Friday of the week after the election.

As it happens, Dems are now targeting Saturday for sending the bill to the CBO. They think it will take a week to ten days to score, after which it will take about three days to work its way through the Senate to the final vote. Meaning it would happen...Thursday or Friday of the week after the election.

So if Coakley loses, the timer starts.

 

[Aaron Strife]

God.

Dems losing Ted Kennedy's seat will be the most depressing thing in politics since Norm Coleman.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Can't wait for all the claims of fraud if this is close =/

Nate says it's a toss up. Brown has to have the advantage when you consider he's up with independents in all the polls. Wow...I honestly think dems will lose, giving us a pretty big overdose of irony
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/01/ok-its-toss-up.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

[Averon]

On second thought, wasn't Sulffolk one of the crappy pollsters? There was a website that had the ratings for all the pollsters during the 2008 primary and election.

 

[GhaleonEB]

It is kinda scary that we're talking about possibly losing Ted Kennedy's seat to a teabagging nutjob in freaking Massachusetts.

I still think Coakley wins by 4-8 points. But jeez. :lol

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

All that I know is if the Repubs pick up the seat in Mass and its because of this reason that the HCR doesn't pass, I just don't know. It really will have to be a perfect storm for all of that to occur but still. IF the storm arrives, it will be a very sad and depressing three years, not to mention a very entertaining yet nauseating one at least regarding the political discourse in this country.

 

[Averon]

It seems what will determine the race is whether independents will come out in force on Tuesday. If they do, Brown wins. If not, Coakley wins. Whatever happens on Tuesday, this is a bad sign for Dems in November when the GOP can make such a blue northeastern state like Mass a toss-up.

 

[GhaleonEB]

It seems what will determine the race is whether independents will come out in force on Tuesday. If they do, Brown wins. If not, Coakley wins. Whatever happens on Tuesday, this is a bad sign for Dems in November when the GOP can make such a blue northeastern state like Mass a toss-up.

Yeah. I was just looking at the registration stats in MA (from the 2008 election) and the Dems have a crazy huge advantage:

Democrat: 1,559,464
Republican: 490,259
Unenrolled: 2,141,878

Dems have a 3:1 registration advantage. If Coakley blows this, it will be one of the most epic campaign failures ever.

 

[cntr]

TPMDC Morning Roundup

Obama To Announce 'Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee'
President Obama will formally unveil today his proposed "Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee," a fee on 50 of the largest financial firms, in order to recoup taxpayers' money from the TARP bailout. The proposal is aimed at raising $90 billion over the next ten years, and will bring the total cost to the government of the bailout down to $117 billion, including both the fee and money that has been paid back..

Obama's Day Ahead
President Obama and Vice President Biden will receive the presidential daily briefing at 10 a.m. ET. Obama will meet at 10:30 a.m. ET with senior advisers, and at 11:05 a.m. ET with Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki. At 11:50 a.m. ET, he will deliver remarks to announce the new financial crisis responsibility fee, to be levied on large financial institutions. He will have lunch at 12:05 p.m. ET with Vice President Biden. At 1:45 p.m. Et, he will deliver remarks at the opening session of the Forum on Modernizing Government. He will receive the economic daily briefing at 2:15 p.m. ET, and meet at 3 p.m. ET with Secretary of the Treasury Tim Geithner. At 5:05 p.m. ET, he will deliver remarks at the House Democratic Caucus retreat.

Biden's Day Ahead
Vice President Biden will attend President Obama's morning briefing at 10 a.m. ET. He will meet at 11:30 a.m. ET with Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, to discuss the stimulus program. He will have lunch at 12:05 p.m. ET with President Obama. At 1 p.m. ET, he will meet with Iraqi Vice President Adil Abd al-Mahdi. At 2:15 p.m. ET, he will meet with Earl Devaney, chairman of the Recovery Act Transparency and Accountability Board.

Clinton Cuts Asia Trip To Address Haiti Disaster
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton cut short her Asian tour to help address the earthquake in Haiti. "We have a full court press going on here at the president's direction," said Clinton. "This is a devastating catastrophe, just to figure out what steps to take so we don't make the situation worse ... This is incredibly complex work. We have some of the best people in the world from the United States down there and we're just going to do everything we can to be helpful."

Cornyn Spreading The Wealth From His Leadership PAC
Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, gave more than $100,000 from his personal leadership PAC in late 2009 to GOP candidates -- including some in contested primaries. Donations include $10,000 to Kelly Ayotte in the New Hampshire Senate race, $10,000 to Trey Grayson in the Kentucky Senate race, and $5,000 to incumbent GOP Sen. Robert Bennett in Utah.

Perry Takes Texas Out Of Federal Grant Program
Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) has announced that Texas will not participate in the federal "Race to the Top" program, which gives grant money to states in exchange for school reform efforts and encouraging charter schools, shutting Texas off from up to $700 million. "We would be foolish and irresponsible to place our children's future in the hands of unelected bureaucrats and special-interest groups thousands of miles away in Washington," said Perry.

Pelosi: Google 'An Example To Businesses And Governments' In China Dispute
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is praising Google in its current dispute with the Chinese government. "Google is to be commended for taking action in response to cyber attacks originating from China targeting Chinese human rights advocates, and the intellectual property and corporate data of Google and more than 30 other companies," said Pelosi, in a statement. "The announcement that Google will fully review its business operations in China and will no longer tolerate censorship of its search engine should serve as an example to businesses and governments."​

 

[cntr]

Americans not getting fatter

That's what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say, anyway. Obesity rates have held steady for five years among men and a solid 10 years among women, which is good news. So what's the cause here? Better eating habits? Exercise? Or can we just not get any fatter?

Dr. Ludwig said the plateau might just suggest that “we’ve reached a biological limit” to how obese people could get. When people eat more, he said, at first they gain weight; then a growing share of the calories go “into maintaining and moving around that excess tissue,” he continued, so that “a population doesn’t keep getting heavier and heavier indefinitely.”

Furthermore, Dr. Ludwig said, “it could be that most of the people who are genetically susceptible, or susceptible for psychological or behavioral reasons, have already become obese.”​

That leaves us with a third of American adults who are obese, and 17 percent of children. So it's good news in the sense of less bad news. It's a bit like unemployment, actually: Stopping the upward trend is good, but what we really need to do is bring those numbers down. And that would be real good news: The easiest way to control costs in the health-care system would be for people to need less health care. And the easiest way for that to happen would be for people to lower their risk of chronic diseases.

 

[cntr]

The magic powers of the word 'tax'

Ever wonder why politicians will do anything to avoid the word "tax"?

Via Julia Whitty, here's a new study from a trio of Columbia psychologists that tries to settle this question. Test subjects were broken up into two groups, and each group was allowed to pick between pricier and cheaper versions of various items like airline tickets. Group A was told that the more expensive items included the price of a "carbon tax," whose proceeds would go toward clean-energy development. Group B was told that the costlier items included the price of a "carbon offset," whose proceeds would go toward clean-energy development. Exact same policy, just different names for each.

You can guess what happened next. In the "offset" group, Democrats, Republicans, and independents all flocked toward the pricier item. They were perfectly happy to pay an extra surcharge to fund CO2 reduction — even Republicans gushed about the benefits of doing so. Not only that, but most of the group supported making the surcharge mandatory. In the "tax" group, however, Democrats were the only ones willing to pay for the costlier item. Republicans in this group were much more inclined to grumble about how much more expensive the tax made things. Labels really do matter.​

"Labels matter," concludes Brad Plumer. But we shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking they're overly malleable. In a polity where both parties wanted to do something to keep the Earth from cooking, Republicans and Democrats might agree on a policy of "carbon offsets" and then they'd both call the policy "The Carbon Offset Act" and then that policy would pass and the Earth wouldn't cook. In a polity where one party wants to use the other party's intention to keep the Earth from cooking as a way to corner them into advocating an energy tax that will lose them seats in the next election, an effort to change "carbon tax" into "carbon offsets" wouldn't stick for two minutes. Cap-and-trade, however, is different enough from a carbon tax, and advocates have been building its brand for so long, that Republican efforts to rename it haven't really worked. Yet.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Poll: Brown Takes The Lead In MA SEN

The latest poll in the Massachusetts Senate race shows Scott Brown (R) taking a slim lead over Martha Coakley (D) as the clock ticks down in the special election to replace Ted Kennedy in the Senate.

The poll, conducted by Suffolk University Jan. 11-13, shows Brown leading Coakley by four, 50-46. It's the latest in a string of polls showing the race is too close to call less than a week before voters go to the polls Jan. 19. The Suffolk poll has a 4% margin of error.

 

[besada]

Perry Takes Texas Out Of Federal Grant Program
Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) has announced that Texas will not participate in the federal "Race to the Top" program, which gives grant money to states in exchange for school reform efforts and encouraging charter schools, shutting Texas off from up to $700 million. "We would be foolish and irresponsible to place our children's future in the hands of unelected bureaucrats and special-interest groups thousands of miles away in Washington," said Perry.

Good. More ammo with which to beat on Perry during the election.

Oh, and a note that Perry was more than willing to let the bureaucrats in Washington dictate terms when it was Bush peddling No Child Left Behnd.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Poll: Brown Takes The Lead In MA SEN

12 posts up.

Should be interesting watching the results come in on Tuesday.

Suggested reading: Axelrod writes an op-ed eviscerating Rove for saying it's Obama that drove up the deficit.

And Obama wants the biologics exclusivity window shortened:

Biologic Drugs May Get Less Protection

President Obama is pushing for a last-minute change in the final health care bill that would shorten the time that expensive biotechnology drugs would be shielded from generic competition, pharmaceutical industry officials said Thursday.

Any White House intervention would be welcome news to generic pharmaceutical companies, as well as to some consumer groups, insurers and big employers, which have complained that the proposed House and Senate bills would not allow for robust competition.

But it could throw another wrench into negotiations. At a time when congressional leaders are trying to resolve differences in the House and Senate bills, the issue of biotech drugs is one aspect on which both bills agree.

Both the House and Senate bills would for the first time create rules by which so-called biologic drugs, which are made in living cells, would be subject to copycat competition, saving the health care system billions of dollars over ten years.

The drugs, which include big-sellers like the cancer drug Avastin and the arthritis drug Enbrel, can cost tens of thousands of dollars a year. Biologics are not governed by the Hatch-Waxman Act, which covers generic competition for more conventional drugs made from chemicals, such as Prozac or Lipitor. After the patent on a biologic drug expires, competitors may produce similar products, but they are treated by the health care system as if they were entirely new drugs, not substitutes like generics.

To retain incentives for innovation, both the House and Senate bills would provide a brand-name biologic drug with 12 years of protection from competition, even if the drug’s patents expire before that.

Until now it looked like matter was settled because the 12-year period got wide bipartisan support in both chambers. And with Congress having much more prominent issues to grapple with, there seemed little chance this issue would be reopened.

That has changed. Mr. Obama apparently met with Congressional leaders and specified a shorter exclusivity period as one of the changes he wanted in the legislation, according to James Greenwood, the president of the Biotechnology Industry Organization, the biotech trade group, which favors the 12-year period.

“We think it’s outrageous,’’ Mr. Greenwood said. “This is an issue that was overwhelmingly settled months ago in both the House and the Senate.’’ He said that with many differences in the bills still to be resolved, “one wouldn’t think the leadership would want to create discord where there hasn’t been discord.’’

But Kathleen Jaeger, president of the Generic Pharmaceutical Association, said a change would be welcome. “It sounds like he’s pushing Congress to do the right thing,’’ she said.

Mr. Obama in the past has said that seven years would be an appropriate exclusivity period. It could not be learned whether he is pushing for a specific period now. The proposed new interval is rumored to range from seven years to 10 years, similar to what is granted in Europe.

The 12-year window was one of the more repugnant elements of the bill; I'll be delighted if that gets rolled back a bit.

 

[cntr]

White House official: 'The exchanges will open to more and more people'

On a conference call earlier today, the union representatives mentioned that the exchanges would open to collective bargaining units and Taft-Hartley plans in 2017. This is, potentially, a very big deal. But details are hard to come by. Does it mean that the exchanges open up to all employers in 2017? A later conference call with White House officials saw repeated questions on this front (including one from me), and a studied vagueness: "We're working very hard on the exchanges," they said. But there was a clue to the direction the bill is moving: "Over time, the exchanges will open to more and more people," said one of the officials on the call.

Union officials seem pretty sure that collective bargaining units of all sizes will be included in the exchanges in 2017. That's part of the excise tax deal, in their mind. If they can get a better deal in the exchanges, which have all sorts of plans and a much larger risk pool, then they should be able to go get that deal rather than sticking with pricier insurance that's vulnerable to the new tax.

They're right about that, and this is exactly the sort of movement toward a more competitive, price-conscious insurance market that the excise tax is designed to encourage. The question is whether this deal applies to all employers. Sources briefed on the conversations believes that it does. And if the combination of the excise tax and union concerns with the vulnerabilities of the employer-based market lead Congress to open the exchanges to everyone in 2017, then this has been a successful negotiating process indeed, and this bill is a lot better than it was a week ago.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

With the race so close in MA, I'm sure the local media affiliates are giving the race much attention, meaning more people will go out and vote on election day.

 

[cntr]

The new bank tax, and beyond

The White House proposed its "fee" on the 50 or so largest banks today. As Felix Salmon summarizes, it's "a 0.15% tax on bank liabilities excluding deposits (which already come with an FDIC fee attached). It would be paid by roughly 50 firms, including GE Capital, and would raise something on the order of $90 billion over 10 years. That’s an average of $180 million per firm per year."

If what you're trying to do is recoup the TARP losses, this is a smartly designed tax. But we should be more ambitious than than that. The financial industry's share of the national dollar has grown even as the tax laws dictating their contribution to the American economy have weakened. Under George W. Bush, of course, tax rates on the richest Americans fell precipitously. And under Bill Clinton, the tax rate on capital gains fell from 28% to 20% (and then Bush brought it down to 15%). Meanwhile, Wall Street got richer and richer and richer...

The tax Obama is proposing will raise $90 billion over 10 years, and refund the direct losses taxpayers suffered in the bailout. But that wasn't the only cost of the financial crisis. The recession -- which has cost the federal budget far more -- was also triggered by Wall Street. We're not even here, not by a long shot.

But this isn't about getting even. It's about good policy. Restoring the 1996 tax rates on the rich, and on large capital gains, would improve the nation's finances without harming anything of value. It would raise far more than $90 billion and it wouldn't sunset after 10 years. The tax Obama is proposing is not ideal from the point of justice -- Wall Street owes us far more than that -- but it's also not ideal from the point of federal finances and tax equity.

 

[cntr]

Democrats Push Reluctant Obama To End Antitrust Exemption For Insurance Companies

With the public option now a distant memory, a group of House Democrats are now insisting that President Obama and Congressional leaders adopt separate measures to ensure competition in the health insurance market. Thirty four Democrats, lead by Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) have signed their names to a letter, obtained by TPMDC, demanding that health care legislation include a provision repealing the industries antitrust exemptions.

"Since we all agree that containing the rising cost of health care is one of the overriding goals of health reform, we insist that the House demand an alternative cost cutting tool," the letter reads. "One tool that stands out for attracting strong bipartisan support is removing the current antitrust exemptions enjoyed by the health insurance industry."

The House must insist on the House language that repeals the health and medical malpractice insurance industries' exemptions from all federal antitrust laws. Subjecting the health and medical malpractice insurance industries to the antitrust laws is a vital step toward reforming health care, lowering prices for consumers and doctors, and leveling the playing field for American businesses. The Consumer Federation of American has said that consumers would save over $40 billion in insurance premiums if the antiquated law was repealed for all lines of insurance. It is estimated that subjecting the health insurance industry to federal antitrust laws would lower premiums by 10%.​

President Obama says he supports the idea in principle. But unfortunately for House Democrats, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) wants to maintain the exemptions, and with his vote absolutely necessary to pass health care reform, ending them completely will be a tough sell. Health care negotiators are working on a watered down approach to the issue--one which is unlikely to satisfy the signatories to this letter, but which Obama seems inclined to accept.

"I'm entirely supportive of that," Obama told DeFazio during a Democratic caucus meeting tonight, according to a Democratic aide. "But I want 60 votes in the Senate. I'm trying to get it done, I'll leave it at that."

You can read the entire letter here.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

.....

 

[Particle Physicist]

Democrats Push Reluctant Obama To End Antitrust Exemption For Insurance Companies

next week

Lieberman: I Will Filibuster National Exchange
White House to Reid: Drop National Exchange
Nelson: Preserve Anti-Trust Exemption or Else

1 down, two to go.

 

[mckmas8808]

Okay, seriously, what the fuck are you on about? This has NOTHING to do with that. Taxing banks that had nothing to do with this is not the way to raise the money. How about -- gee, I don't know -- punishing those banks (and, especially, their executives) who put us here to begin with as opposed to pulling us all down? Your solutions are stupid.

If too many banks fail in a short period of time and the FDIC decide to raise the amount of money that all banks have to pay, shouldn't you be pissed off about that too?

 

[GhaleonEB]

1 down, two to go.

Word is, Nelson is also demanding a pony. A brown one with white spots. They found a black one with white spots, but he said he'd filibuster that one.

 

[mckmas8808]

12 posts up.

Should be interesting watching the results come in on Tuesday.

Suggested reading: Axelrod writes an op-ed eviscerating Rove for saying it's Obama that drove up the deficit.

And Obama wants the biologics exclusivity window shortened:


The 12-year window was one of the more repugnant elements of the bill; I'll be delighted if that gets rolled back a bit.

I love this change and hope it gets lowered to 7 years. But anything is better than the 12 years that's already in the bill.

But what is the law today?

 

[Dooraven]

Nelson should just change his party to republican and get it over with. That man is a travesty.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Nelson should just change his party to republican and get it over with. That man is a travesty.

He's actually voting for the bill though. While he's blocked some critical components, without him the bill would never, ever pass. I also tend to throw my hands in the air and gnash my teeth every time I read about the douchebag, but he's (sadly) a necessary douchebag.

 

[Dooraven]

Fair point.

 

[mckmas8808]

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Obama administration is considering a criminal trial in Washington for the Guantanamo Bay detainee suspected of masterminding the bombing of a Bali nightclub that killed 202 people, a plan that would bring one of the world's most notorious terrorism suspects just steps from the U.S. Capitol, The Associated Press has learned.

Riduan Isamuddin, better known as Hambali, was allegedly Osama bin Laden's point man in Indonesia and, until his capture in August 2003, was believed to be the main link between al Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiyah, the terror group blamed for the 2002 bombing on the island of Bali.

Other terrorism trials also may occur in Washington and New York City under a proposal being discussed within the Obama administration, according to U.S. officials briefed on the plan, who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss private planning meetings.

Authorities already have begun discussing the intense security measures needed to bring Hambali and others before a Washington federal judge, the officials said.

Conducting a trial in the nation's capital would be a symbolic repudiation of the policies of former President George W. Bush, who portrayed Hambali as a success story in the Bush administration's program of interrogating terror suspects in secret CIA prisons overseas.

Bush said such interrogations, which included the simulated drowning technique of waterboarding, helped crack alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and led authorities to Hambali. Under intense questioning at a CIA "black site," Hambali revealed a plan for another wave of suicide hijackings in the U.S., Bush said.

Obama already has decided that Mohammed will face trial in New York and has said he believes criminal courts can handle even the most dangerous terrorists. If Hambali's trial were held in Washington's federal courthouse, the country's most significant terrorism trials in generations will be conducted in the two cities targeted in the Sept. 11. 2001, attacks.

But as Obama tries to close the military-run detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, he has found that moving detainees into U.S. courts is more difficult than he spelled out during his presidential campaign. Hambali was among 14 of what the U.S. said were key al-Qaida operatives moved from CIA custody to Guantanamo Bay in 2006.

Some Guantanamo prisoners have been cleared for release for more than a year, but the U.S. can't find any country to take them. Other detainees are deemed too dangerous to release, but prosecutors don't have enough evidence to charge them in court. And prosecuting people like Mohammed and Hambali, both of whom spent time in secret CIA prisons, risks revealing more details about the classified interrogation program.

Attorney General Eric Holder is sorting through the files of the nearly 200 detainees, deciding who can be brought to court and who should remain in a military commission system, where rules of evidence are more lax and prisoners have fewer rights. Justice Department spokesman Matthew Miller said Hambali's fate remains undecided.

"The attorney general has made no decision on forum for this case, let alone on where such a case would be tried if it were sent to federal courts," Miller said.

The Washington courthouse has a courtroom shielded by bulletproof glass. Recently, U.S. marshals stepped up security for a terrorism trial involving Simon Trinidad, the Colombian rebel leader convicted of taking U.S. hostages.

After announcing that Mohammed would face trial in New York, Obama drew criticism from Republicans who said it would make New York even more of a terrorist target, an argument that is certain to be repeated if Hambali is brought to Washington.

Obama is one week away from his self-imposed deadline to close Guantanamo Bay, a deadline he acknowledges he will miss.

In 2007, Hambali appeared before a preliminary military tribunal and denied any connection with al Qaeda.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/15/ap-us-said-eye-dc-gitmo-trial/

ALL republicans will be pissed about this. I expect a yelling storm next week about this case.

 

[Macam]

Good. More ammo with which to beat on Perry during the election.

Oh, and a note that Perry was more than willing to let the bureaucrats in Washington dictate terms when it was Bush peddling No Child Left Behnd.

Just as Hutchinson was willing to vote for TARP when Bush asked for it, but not for the stimulus when the parties changed in Washington. I can't even tell the difference between Perry & Hutchinson sans the chromosome discrepancy. Medina, the libertarian nutjob in the "debate" last night, at least stood out for her insanity. Clearly, secession and taking guns into the local grocery store are pressing concerns.

The R-primary is March 2 and I'm still planning on voting in it.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Dems need to wrap up Healthcare ASAP and get back to the fucking economy. Or it will be November 2010 soon.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Dems need to wrap up Healthcare ASAP and get back to the fucking economy. Or it will be November 2010 soon.

Healthcare bill is probably one of the most potent stimulus bills they could pass. But don't tell anyone that.

 

[cntr]

TMPDC Morning Roundup

Obama Pledges Campaign For Health Care Bill And Democrats
Speaking to the House Democratic caucus yesterday, President Obama pledged to mount a nationwide campaign for them in this year's elections, promoting the health care bill: "I'll be out there waging a great campaign from one end of the country to the other, telling Americans with insurance or without what they stand to gain."

Obama's Day Ahead
President Obama will receive the presidential daily briefing at 9:30 a.m. ET, and meet at 10 a.m. ET with senior advisers. He will receive the economic daily briefing at 1:45 p.m. ET, and he will meet at 3:45 p.m. ET with Secretary of Treasury Tim Geithner.

Biden's Day Ahead
Vice President will be in Louisiana today. At 1 p.m. ET, he will announce in New Orleans the steps that the administration is taking to assist in recovery and rebuilding efforts in the Gulf Coast Region after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. He will be joined by Sen. Mary Landrieu, Gov. Bobby Jindal, Rep. Joseph Cao, and Mayor Ray Nagin. He will then travel to Grand Lake, Louisiana, and deliver remarks at 4:30 p.m. ET on rebuilding efforts. In the evening, Biden and his wife Dr. Jill Biden will travel to South Florida.

Powell: I'm 'Very Impressed' With Obama's Performance On Haiti Quake
Former Secretary of State Colin Powell has praised President Obama's response to the Haiti earthquake, telling CNN that he is "very impressed" with the administration's handling of the situation. "I think the Commander-in-chief, he seems to have everything under control," Powell said.

Cantor: GOP Will Win House; Ten Months Not Enough Time For Dems To Recover
House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) is predicting that the Republicans Party will win the House this fall -- and says it's too late for Democrats to change the public's mind about the condition of the country. "It is in the mind-set of the public right now: Washington's out of control," Cantor said. "They do not have the economic security in their life yet. The 10 months' time [until the election] is not enough for people to regain their sense of security, no matter where this unemployment rate goes."

Reid: Senate Has Time For Climate Bill
Speaking to a geothermal energy group in New York yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said that the Senate has time for climate change, in addition to all the other issues it's dealing with. "We have a lot on our plate," said Reid, according to the prepared remarks. "We have to finish reforming health insurance and Wall Street, and also must help bring Americans out of unemployment. But we are not so busy that we can't find the time to address comprehensive energy and climate legislation."

Axelrod Hits Back At Karl Rove On The Deficit
White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod has written a guest column in the Washington Post, firing back at former Bush White House Political Director Karl Rove's criticism of the Obama administration on the deficit. Axelrod points to the Bush administration's own spending: "To put the breathtaking scope of this irresponsibility in perspective, the Bush administration's swing from surpluses to deficits added more debt in its eight years than all the previous administrations in the history of our republic combined. And its spending spree is the unwelcome gift that keeps on giving: Going forward, these unpaid-for policies will continue to add trillions to our deficit."
​

 

[Diablos]

This health bill is such a nightmare. I just want it to pass already. Regardless of what happens, Democrats will be playing defense on this for years.

I'm not so disturbed by the point at which it is now, as I fully expect asshats like Nelson to have their way with the bill, but the steps they took to get there. They could have planned this thing so much better. Public support for the bill is plummeting after months and months of indecision and then finally a delayed vote that only resulted in another delayed vote.

The new Brown poll makes me want to go on media blackout until the election is over. If he wins, Democrats are going to have a harder time in the midterms than anyone imagined.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Healthcare bill is probably one of the most potent stimulus bills they could pass. But don't tell anyone that.

When, in 2019?

 

[Diablos]

When, in 2019?

I see what you did there

 

[GhaleonEB]

When, in 2019?

Nah, in 2014.

The stuff that kicks in early will, I think, have a pretty material affect.

More on the "livable communities" stuff from yesterday:

New Transit-Funding Rules Make Streetcars More Desirable

The Obama administration said it was revamping rules on federal transit funding to funnel more of the money to streetcars, bus routes and other projects that promote "livability."

The new policy announced Wednesday, part of a broader effort by the Obama administration to use transportation and housing programs to reduce driving, contain sprawl and create transit-related jobs, could lift the fortunes of makers of light-rail and other transit equipment sold to states and cities.

Among more than 80 cities that could now qualify for funding are Seattle; Cincinnati; Boise, Idaho; and Fort Lauderdale, Fla., said Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D., Ore.), who led the push for a federal program designed to promote transit projects. Transit-industry officials said many projects had been stymied by a Bush administration policy requiring the government to evaluate projects based largely on reducing commuting times at the lowest possible expense.

HNTB Corp., an infrastructure firm that serves federal, state, and other clients, is working on a commuter-rail project in Indianapolis that could benefit from the change, said Liz Rao, the firm's national public-transit services chairwoman.

The company is also working with clients on high-speed rail lines in California that will be "major hubs" for communities, said Ms. Rao, who expects to see steel and rail-car makers and companies in the solar-power industry benefit from the change.

Chandra Brown, president of streetcar maker United Streetcar LLC in Clackamas, Ore., said the company has been working for years to get the funding formula reworked. The old "method was 'how do you move the most people the greatest distance in the quickest time,' but that's not necessarily indicative of the benefits," she said, adding that the change "makes sure projects get credit for being green."

United Streetcar, which typically sells streetcars for between $3 million and $4 million each, currently has about $50 million in streetcar orders, including six under contract with Portland, Ore., and seven with Tucson, Ariz., she said.

Of the 80 or so cities considering streetcar development, about a dozen are "very close" to actually implementing a system, she said. "This will trickle down to us, so we'll be hiring more welders and fitters and machinists and electricians that are going to be putting these cars together."

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, who announced the policy change at a conference in Washington, said the shift would determine how the Federal Transit Administration awards some $2 billion a year in transit-construction funds. This money, awarded under a program known as "New Starts and Small Starts," is intended to help state and regional agencies build commuter rail, light rail, heavy rail and bus rapid-transit projects.

Mr. LaHood said the administration would immediately rescind the "budget restrictions" enacted by the Bush administration and focus on evaluating projects based on the environmental, community and economic-development benefits, as well as on congestion relief.

Jeff Rosen, a general counsel for the Department of Transportation during the Bush administration and now a partner in Washington law firm Kirkland & Ellis, said one danger of using noneconomic criteria was that it risked politicizing the process. "When jurisdictions are pushing to get their projects approved, if there are not clear economic criteria, there's more risk" that influential members of Congress will win favor, Mr. Rosen said. He also said that using criteria geared toward multiple "soft" objectives raised the risks of "achieving none of them."

Mr. Blumenauer said many cities are in varying stages of streetcar planning, but "nobody was applying [for the program] because they couldn't figure out how to make it work."

Portland, which managed to receive $75 million of funding under the program last year to expand its existing downtown streetcar, has generated significant new development alongside the streetcar, including retail space, housing and offices, said Mr. Blumenauer.

President Barack Obama has pushed agency heads to work together to encourage cities and suburbs to promote walking, biking and public transportation as alternatives to driving. Mr. Obama has called for the DOT and the Department of Housing and Urban Development, for example, to coordinate plans for transit and housing projects so people can find jobs and housing closer to transportation hubs.

Under the new policy, some dollars that might have gone to projects that emphasized longer commutes, such as a rail line between major cities, could now be shifted to smaller local projects that serve more-compact areas.

Federal Transit Administration Chief Peter Rogoff cited the planned expansion of light-rail service in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area as an example of a project that could benefit. The FTA wants the plans for light-rail service between the Twin Cities to be altered so that lower-income, mostly minority communities between the cities have greater access to the line.

 

[Diablos]

I wonder what our boy charlequin thinks about the latest polling developments.

 

[GhaleonEB]

I wonder what our boy charlequin thinks about the latest polling developments.

I wonder if he saw contradictory polls on the same day - just like the last round of polls - and concluded it's a close race that will come down to turnout.

A poll from a respected pollster has the Dem up eight, and one from a sub-average pollster has the Rep up four. I'm guessing you're only talking about the latter, for some reason.

 

[ToxicAdam]

I think the race will be a good test on Rasmussen on their polling techniques. Although a late surge in "get out the vote" efforts by the Dems could dramatically effect the final results.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Nah, in 2014.

The stuff that kicks in early will, I think, have a pretty material affect.

More on the "livable communities" stuff from yesterday: