By LIZ SIDOTI, AP National Political Writer Liz Sidoti, Ap National Political Writer – 39 mins ago
WASHINGTON – For Republicans, an election win of any size Tuesday would be a blessing. But victories in Virginia, New Jersey or elsewhere won't erase enormous obstacles the party faces heading into a 2010 midterm election year when control of Congress and statehouses from coast to coast will be up for grabs.
It's been a tough few years for the GOP. The party lost control of Congress in 2006 and then lost the White House in 2008 with three traditional Republican states — Indiana, North Carolina and Virginia — abandoning the party.
So even if political winds start blowing harder behind them and even if they can capitalize on Democratic missteps, Republicans still will have a long way to go over the next year because of their party's own fundamental problems — divisions over the path forward, the lack of a national leader and a shrinking base in a changing nation.
The GOP would overcome none of those hurdles should Republican Bob McDonnell win the Virginia governor's race, Chris Christie emerge victorious in the New Jersey governor's contest, or conservative Doug Hoffman triumph in a hotly contested special congressional election in upstate New York.
In fact, 2009 seems to have underscored what may be the biggest impediment for Republicans — the war within their base.
Not that the GOP would casually brush off even a small stack of victories on Tuesday.
One or more wins would give the Republicans a jolt, and a reason to rally in the coming months. Victories certainly would help with grass-roots fundraising and candidate recruiting. And they might just be enough to reinvigorate a party that controlled the White House and Congress through much of this decade, only to lose power in back-to-back national elections.
Viewed from the other side, a GOP sweep would be a setback for Democrats. It could be seen as a negative measure of President Barack Obama's standing and could signal trouble ahead as he seeks to get moderate Democratic lawmakers behind his legislative agenda and protect Democratic majorities in Congress next fall.
Still, with Democrats in control, the onus is on the GOP to get its act together. George W. Bush, the president many Republicans came to see as an election-day albatross, is gone, but the party troubles born under him linger.
Republican leaders in Washington certainly are mindful of the challenges.
"It's going to be a difficult road to walk, to work with relatively new entrants into the political system and to work with them to show them that, by and large, we are the party who represents their interests," House Republican leader John Boehner told CNN on Sunday, arguing that there's "a political rebellion" taking place in the country.
Others are more blunt.
"Right now there's no central Republican leader to turn to, and there's no central Republican message," conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh told Fox News on Sunday. "The Republican message is sort of muddied. What do they stand for? Right now it's opposition to Obama."
A debate is waging over whether that's enough — or whether the party has to be for something, anything really, to be able to claw its way back to the top. Similar hand-wringing happened in the GOP ahead of the 1994 midterms. Just weeks before those elections, Republicans came up with the Contract with America — and ended up taking control of Congress.
Heading into the 2010 elections, the GOP also faces a very real split between conservatives who want to focus on social issues — which tend to work best during peaceful, prosperous times — and the rest of the party, which generally wants a broader vision, particularly given recession.
Proof of a divide is in New York's 23rd Congressional District. Potential 2012 presidential hopefuls trying to solidify their conservative credentials, Sarah Palin and Tim Pawlenty, endorsed Hoffman, a conservative third-party upstart, over the GOP-chosen candidate, moderate Dierdre Scozzafava. Badly trailing in polls, she ended up dropping out and — in a slap at the GOP — endorsing Democrat Bill Owens.
There are similar tensions in Senate primaries in Florida, California and elsewhere, where conservatives are challenging establishment-backed candidates.
Adding to the party's woes: No one — or rather everyone — is speaking for the GOP.
Fiery talk show hosts like Limbaugh and Glenn Beck have become the angry white face of the party, filling a vacuum created by Bush's departure as the its standard-bearer and the lack of one single person to emerge as its next generation leader.
The 2008 presidential nominee, John McCain, has all but disappeared from the Republican power structure. His running mate, Palin, refuses to disappear — much to the delight of tabloids and to the chagrin of elder party statesmen. And one of the most unpopular politicians in recent times, former Vice President Dick Cheney, keeps popping up to attack Obama — a reminder of the country's and the party's problems under Bush.
What's more, the GOP's ranks are thinning: Only 32 percent of respondents called themselves Republicans in a recent AP-GfK survey compared with 43 percent who called themselves Democrats.
Also, the party's power center is limited to the South, the only region McCain dominated last fall; Obama won everywhere else — including emerging powerhouse regions like the West.
And demographic, cultural and, perhaps, economic changes in America tilt in the Democrats' favor. Consider that Hispanics, a part of the Democratic base, are the nation's fastest growing minority group. Consider that more states than ever are permitting same-sex unions; Maine will vote Tuesday on whether to allow gay marriage. Consider that the emerging new industry — so-called "green jobs" — is focused on the environment, a core Democratic issue.
Still, Republicans sense opportunity — at least in the short term.
The bloom is off the Obama rose, and the public is giving the Democratic-controlled Congress low ratings.
Economists say the recession is over but jobs aren't reappearing and unemployment is still expected to hit 10 percent. The war in Afghanistan continues, and the public is deeply divided over it. Obama's expansion of government and budget-busting spending isn't sitting well with most Americans. And independents are tilting away from Democrats.
All that raises this question: Can the GOP take advantage of such conditions — or are the problems the party faces too great? Stay tuned to 2010 for the answer.
Showing posts with label POLITICS NEWS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label POLITICS NEWS. Show all posts
Monday, November 2, 2009
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Lieberman opposes Reid's health care plan
By ANDREW MIGA, Associated Press Writer Andrew Miga, Associated Press Writer – 43 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman says while he's "strongly inclined" to vote to move Sen. Harry Reid's health care plan to the Senate floor for debate, he would ultimately oppose the measure because it includes a public option.
Lieberman said Tuesday in a telephone interview with The Associated Press that he's worried a public option would be costly to taxpayers and drive up insurance premiums.
An independent who caucuses with Democrats, Lieberman is among a group of about a dozen moderate senators whose support Reid will need as Senate critical health care votes near.
Lieberman said he's open to the possibility of supporting a plan set up and run by the states. Lieberman said he is "open to discussing that."
WASHINGTON – Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman says while he's "strongly inclined" to vote to move Sen. Harry Reid's health care plan to the Senate floor for debate, he would ultimately oppose the measure because it includes a public option.
Lieberman said Tuesday in a telephone interview with The Associated Press that he's worried a public option would be costly to taxpayers and drive up insurance premiums.
An independent who caucuses with Democrats, Lieberman is among a group of about a dozen moderate senators whose support Reid will need as Senate critical health care votes near.
Lieberman said he's open to the possibility of supporting a plan set up and run by the states. Lieberman said he is "open to discussing that."
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Social Security makes it official: No COLA in 2010
AP
By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press Writer Stephen Ohlemacher, Associated Press Writer – 31 mins ago
WASHINGTON – There will be no cost-of-living increase for more than 50 million Social Security recipients next year, the first year without a raise since automatic adjustments were adopted in 1975.
Blame falling consumer prices. By law, cost-of-living adjustments are pegged to inflation, which is negative this year because of lower energy costs. Social Security payments, however, do not go down even when prices drop.
The Obama administration, meanwhile, is pursuing a different way to boost recipients' income. On Wednesday, President Barack Obama called for a second round of $250 stimulus payments for seniors, veterans, retired railroad workers and people with disabilities.
The payments would match the ones issued to seniors earlier this year as part of the government's economic recovery package. The payments would be equal to about a 2 percent increase for the average Social Security recipient.
The White House put the cost of the payments at $13 billion. Obama didn't say how the payments should be financed, leaving that up to Congress. The president is open to borrowing the money, which would increase the federal budget deficit, just like Congress did with the first round of stimulus payments.
Social Security payments increased by 5.8 percent in January, the largest bump up since 1982. The big increase was largely because of a spike in energy costs in 2008.
"Social Security is doing its job helping Americans maintain their standard of living," said Social Security Commissioner Michael J. Astrue.
But, he added, "In light of the human need, we need to support President Obama's call for us to make another $250 recovery payment for 57 million Americans."
The Labor Department reported Thursday that consumer prices had declined 2.1 percent since the third quarter of 2008. The cost-of-living adjustment for Social Security, or COLA, is based on the change in consumer prices from the third quarter of one year to the next.
Social Security recipients shouldn't get a raise next year because their purchasing power has already increased with falling prices, said the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal-leaning think tank.
"Since the purpose of COLAs is to preserve beneficiaries' purchasing power, the decline in overall prices means that beneficiaries do not need a COLA in January 2010," Kathy Ruffing, a senior policy analyst at the center, wrote in a report this week.
Over the past 12 months, gasoline prices have fallen 29.7 percent and overall energy costs have decreased 21.6 percent, the Labor Department said Thursday.
Ruffing noted that government forecasters don't expect consumer prices to return to 2008 levels until 2011.
Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H, called the $250 payments "inappropriate."
"The reason we set up this process was to have the Social Security reimbursement reflect the cost of living," Gregg said.
Some advocates for seniors, however, argue that older Americans spend a disproportionate amount of their incomes on health care costs, which rise faster than other prices.
The lack of a cost-of-living increase triggers several provisions in the law. Among them, the amount of wages subject to Social Security payroll taxes will remain unchanged. The first $106,800 of a worker's earned income is currently subject to the tax.
Also, Medicare Part B premiums for the vast majority of Social Security recipients will remain frozen at 2009 levels. However, premiums for the Medicare prescription drug program, known as Part D, will increase.
Obama's proposal has picked up support from key members of Congress, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
Republican leaders said they, too, favor the proposal, but without increasing the deficit.
Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, said he wanted to use unspent funds from last year's stimulus legislation to offset the cost.
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said he expected members of his rank and file would also want to offset the estimated $13 billion cost.
Several groups that advocate for seniors have also endorsed the $250 payments, including the AARP and the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. One group, The Senior Citizens League, said recipients would be better off with a 3 percent increase in their monthly payments, which would compound throughout their retirement.
The average monthly Social Security payment for all recipients is $1,094.
WASHINGTON – There will be no cost-of-living increase for more than 50 million Social Security recipients next year, the first year without a raise since automatic adjustments were adopted in 1975.
Blame falling consumer prices. By law, cost-of-living adjustments are pegged to inflation, which is negative this year because of lower energy costs. Social Security payments, however, do not go down even when prices drop.
The Obama administration, meanwhile, is pursuing a different way to boost recipients' income. On Wednesday, President Barack Obama called for a second round of $250 stimulus payments for seniors, veterans, retired railroad workers and people with disabilities.
The payments would match the ones issued to seniors earlier this year as part of the government's economic recovery package. The payments would be equal to about a 2 percent increase for the average Social Security recipient.
The White House put the cost of the payments at $13 billion. Obama didn't say how the payments should be financed, leaving that up to Congress. The president is open to borrowing the money, which would increase the federal budget deficit, just like Congress did with the first round of stimulus payments.
Social Security payments increased by 5.8 percent in January, the largest bump up since 1982. The big increase was largely because of a spike in energy costs in 2008.
"Social Security is doing its job helping Americans maintain their standard of living," said Social Security Commissioner Michael J. Astrue.
But, he added, "In light of the human need, we need to support President Obama's call for us to make another $250 recovery payment for 57 million Americans."
The Labor Department reported Thursday that consumer prices had declined 2.1 percent since the third quarter of 2008. The cost-of-living adjustment for Social Security, or COLA, is based on the change in consumer prices from the third quarter of one year to the next.
Social Security recipients shouldn't get a raise next year because their purchasing power has already increased with falling prices, said the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal-leaning think tank.
"Since the purpose of COLAs is to preserve beneficiaries' purchasing power, the decline in overall prices means that beneficiaries do not need a COLA in January 2010," Kathy Ruffing, a senior policy analyst at the center, wrote in a report this week.
Over the past 12 months, gasoline prices have fallen 29.7 percent and overall energy costs have decreased 21.6 percent, the Labor Department said Thursday.
Ruffing noted that government forecasters don't expect consumer prices to return to 2008 levels until 2011.
Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H, called the $250 payments "inappropriate."
"The reason we set up this process was to have the Social Security reimbursement reflect the cost of living," Gregg said.
Some advocates for seniors, however, argue that older Americans spend a disproportionate amount of their incomes on health care costs, which rise faster than other prices.
The lack of a cost-of-living increase triggers several provisions in the law. Among them, the amount of wages subject to Social Security payroll taxes will remain unchanged. The first $106,800 of a worker's earned income is currently subject to the tax.
Also, Medicare Part B premiums for the vast majority of Social Security recipients will remain frozen at 2009 levels. However, premiums for the Medicare prescription drug program, known as Part D, will increase.
Obama's proposal has picked up support from key members of Congress, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
Republican leaders said they, too, favor the proposal, but without increasing the deficit.
Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, said he wanted to use unspent funds from last year's stimulus legislation to offset the cost.
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said he expected members of his rank and file would also want to offset the estimated $13 billion cost.
Several groups that advocate for seniors have also endorsed the $250 payments, including the AARP and the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. One group, The Senior Citizens League, said recipients would be better off with a 3 percent increase in their monthly payments, which would compound throughout their retirement.
The average monthly Social Security payment for all recipients is $1,094.
Obama: New Orleans will be better than ever
2 mins ago
NEW ORLEANS – President Barack Obama promised New Orleans residents Thursday that his administration would never forget the city that was devastated by a hurricane and floods four years ago.
During a town hall at the University of New Orleans, Obama noted that sewers and roads damaged by Hurricane Katrina still need to be repaired. Houses and hospitals are still vacant, he said. And schools and neighborhoods are waiting to thrive again.
"I promise you this," Obama said during his first visit to the city as president, "together we will rebuild this region and we will build it stronger than before."
He announced a new working group to coordinate restoration projects across the Gulf Coast.
Obama has accused the Bush administration of standing by "while a major American city drowns." He said Katrina was not just a natural disaster, but also a failure of government.
The president touted the progress made in the city since he became president: Reconstruction projects have moved forward that had stalled due to disagreements over whether the state or federal government would foot the bill. And his administration has sent more than $1.4 billion in additional federal aid toward repairing and rebuilding Louisiana.
Obama answered questions about rebuilding the city after visiting a school that he said was doing much better than four years ago.
NEW ORLEANS – President Barack Obama promised New Orleans residents Thursday that his administration would never forget the city that was devastated by a hurricane and floods four years ago.
During a town hall at the University of New Orleans, Obama noted that sewers and roads damaged by Hurricane Katrina still need to be repaired. Houses and hospitals are still vacant, he said. And schools and neighborhoods are waiting to thrive again.
"I promise you this," Obama said during his first visit to the city as president, "together we will rebuild this region and we will build it stronger than before."
He announced a new working group to coordinate restoration projects across the Gulf Coast.
Obama has accused the Bush administration of standing by "while a major American city drowns." He said Katrina was not just a natural disaster, but also a failure of government.
The president touted the progress made in the city since he became president: Reconstruction projects have moved forward that had stalled due to disagreements over whether the state or federal government would foot the bill. And his administration has sent more than $1.4 billion in additional federal aid toward repairing and rebuilding Louisiana.
Obama answered questions about rebuilding the city after visiting a school that he said was doing much better than four years ago.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Another GOP senator open to health care overhaul
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer Ricardo Alonso-zaldivar, Associated Press Writer – 4 mins ago.
WASHINGTON – A second Republican senator signaled Wednesday she's open to voting for sweeping health care legislation this year, putting President Barack Obama closer to a historic achievement that has eluded generations of Democratic leaders.
But Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, told The Associated Press that the bill approved Tuesday by the Finance Committee needs substantial improvements to make coverage more affordable, contain costs, and protect Medicare. Nevertheless, she joined her Maine GOP colleague Sen. Olympia Snowe in endorsing the goal of far-reaching changes.
"My hope is we that can fix the flaws in the bill and come together with a truly bipartisan bill that could garner widespread support," Collins said in an interview. "I think this bill is far superior to the ones passed by the Senate (health) committee and the three House committees, but it needs substantial additional work."
The ten-year, $829 billion Finance bill was approved by the committee Tuesday on a 14-9 vote, after Snowe broke ranks with her Republican colleagues to support Chairman Max Baucus' middle-of-the-road plan.
Wednesday, Snowe tackled the most divisive issue still on the table: creation of a government insurance plan that would compete with private ones.
While emphasizing that she still opposes the so-called public option, Snowe said in a nationally broadcast interview that she could foresee a government-run plan that would "kick in" if private insurers failed to live up to expectations that they keep premiums in check.
"I think the government would have a disproportionate advantage" in the event of a government-run option, Snowe acknowledged. At the same time, she added, "I want to make sure the insurance industry performs, and that's why we eliminate many egregious practices."
If the industry didn't follow through on congressionally-mandated changes aimed at making health care more affordable, she said, "then you could have the public option kick in immediately."
Snowe previously had proposed using the public option as an incentive, or a threat, to private insurers. This "trigger" option, or some version of it, has survived the bitter debate and scrutiny to remain a viable option for compromise.
Such a statement from a Republican can be very influential in an environment in which GOP lawmakers almost universally have opposed any kind of government-run health care option to compete with private insurers. It represents a break in party solidarity, even if finite. Health care proposals advanced in the House include such a government option.
Snowe broached her standby notion again as talks among lawmakers on health care were going back behind closed doors; Senate leaders are trying to merge two very different bills into a new version that can get the 60 votes needed to guarantee passage.
Collins, however, said she could not support Snowe's idea because she thinks it would make it too easy for a Democratic administration to impose a government plan nationwide. "It would simply delay the public plan for a couple of years," she told AP.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has said he wants move quickly to merge the Finance bill with a version passed earlier by the Senate health committee. His goal is to get health care overhaul legislation onto the floor the week after next.
Both bills were written by Democrats, but that's not going to make it easier for Reid. They share a common goal, which is to provide all Americans with access to affordable health insurance, but they differ on how to accomplish it.
The Finance Committee bill that was approved Tuesday has no government-sponsored insurance plan and no requirement on employers that they must offer coverage. It relies instead on a requirement that all Americans obtain insurance.
The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee bill, passed earlier by a panel in which liberals predominate, calls for both a government plan to compete with private insurers and a mandate that employers help cover their workers. Those are only two of dozens of differences.
Aides say Reid has a keen sense of what the Senate will pass and he is focused on finding a solution that can get the 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster.
In general, bills moving toward floor votes in both houses would require most Americans to purchase insurance, provide federal subsidies to help those of lower incomes afford coverage and give small businesses help in defraying the cost of coverage for their workers.
The measures would bar insurance companies from denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions and for the first time limit their ability to charge higher premiums on the basis of age or family size. Expanded coverage would be paid for by cutting hundreds of billions of dollars from future Medicare payments to health care providers. Each house also envisions higher taxes — an income tax surcharge on million-dollar wage-earners in the case of the House, and a new excise levy on insurance companies selling high-cost policies in the Senate Finance Committee bill.
Apart from Snowe, Finance Committee Republicans cited higher taxes, a greater federal role in the insurance industry and other concerns as they lined up to oppose the bill.
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said the legislation would place the nation on a "slippery slope to more and more government control of health care."
Snowe said there were problems with the bill but the risks of doing nothing were too great.
Across the Capitol, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her lieutenants have been at work for weeks trying to blend legislation approved by three House committees. The eventual result is certain to include a government option, but the details of the plan have split the rank and file and leaders have spent days struggling with the issue.
___
Associated Press writers David Espo and Erica Werner contributed to this report.
Health care legislation back behind closed doors
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer Ricardo Alonso-zaldivar, Associated Press Writer – 36 mins ago:
WASHINGTON – Health care talks slip back behind closed doors Wednesday as Senate leaders start trying to merge two very different bills into a new version that can get the 60 votes needed to guarantee its passage.
All eyes are on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who has said he wants to complete the wedding quickly and get historic health care overhaul legislation onto the floor the week after next.
Both bills were written by Democrats, but that's not going to make it easier for Reid. They share a common goal, which is to provide all Americans with access to affordable health insurance, but they differ on how to accomplish it.
The Finance Committee bill that was approved Tuesday has no government-sponsored insurance plan and no requirement on employers that they must offer coverage. It relies instead on a requirement that all Americans obtain insurance.
Sen. Olympia Snowe, the only committee Republican who supported advancing the Finance panel bill, suggested Wednesday a scenario in which a government-run plan could eventually come into play.
Snowe told CBS's "The Early Show" that she believes a public option would give the government "a disproportionate advantage" over private insurers, and said she still opposes the concept.
But at the same time, Snowe said that she wants "to make sure the insurance industry performs." In a separate interview on ABC's "Good Morning America," she said that if the industry did not live up to congressional expectations for more widely affordable and accessible insurance, "you could have the public option kick in immediately."
The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee bill, passed earlier by a panel in which liberals predominate, calls for both a government plan to compete with private insurers and a mandate that employers help cover their workers. Those are only two of dozens of differences.
President Barack Obama acknowledges it's not going to be easy. Speaking Tuesday in the Rose Garden, Obama called the 14-9 Finance Committee vote "a critical milestone" toward getting a health care overhaul this year. The legislation won its first Republican support when Snowe broke ranks with her party, saying she was answering the call of history.
Obama wasn't ready to bask in the bipartisan glow.
"Now is not the time to pat ourselves on the back," he said. "Now is the time to dig in and work even harder."
There was no victory lap either for Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus of Montana. "The bottom line here is we need a final bill, a merged bill, that gets 60 votes," he said. "Our goal is to pass health care reform, not just talk about it."
Aides say Reid has a keen sense of what the Senate will pass and he is focused on finding a solution that can get the 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster.
In general, bills moving toward floor votes in both houses would require most Americans to purchase insurance, provide federal subsidies to help those of lower incomes afford coverage and give small businesses help in defraying the cost of coverage for their workers.
The measures would bar insurance companies from denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions and for the first time limit their ability to charge higher premiums on the basis of age or family size. Expanded coverage would be paid for by cutting hundreds of billions of dollars from future Medicare payments to health care providers. Each house also envisions higher taxes — an income tax surcharge on million-dollar wage-earners in the case of the House, and a new excise levy on insurance companies selling high-cost policies in the Senate Finance Committee bill.
Apart from Snowe, Finance Committee Republicans cited higher taxes, a greater federal role in the insurance industry and other concerns as they lined up to oppose the bill.
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said the legislation would place the nation on a "slippery slope to more and more government control of health care."
Snowe said there were problems with the bill but the risks of doing nothing were too great.
Across the Capitol, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her lieutenants have been at work for weeks trying to blend legislation approved by three House committees. The eventual result is certain to include a government option, but the details of the plan have split the rank and file and leaders have spent days struggling with the issue.
___
Associated Press writers David Espo and Erica Werner contributed to this report.
Health care legislation back behind closed doors
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer Ricardo Alonso-zaldivar, Associated Press Writer – 36 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Health care talks slip back behind closed doors Wednesday as Senate leaders start trying to merge two very different bills into a new version that can get the 60 votes needed to guarantee its passage.
All eyes are on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who has said he wants to complete the wedding quickly and get historic health care overhaul legislation onto the floor the week after next.
Both bills were written by Democrats, but that's not going to make it easier for Reid. They share a common goal, which is to provide all Americans with access to affordable health insurance, but they differ on how to accomplish it.
The Finance Committee bill that was approved Tuesday has no government-sponsored insurance plan and no requirement on employers that they must offer coverage. It relies instead on a requirement that all Americans obtain insurance.
Sen. Olympia Snowe, the only committee Republican who supported advancing the Finance panel bill, suggested Wednesday a scenario in which a government-run plan could eventually come into play.
Snowe told CBS's "The Early Show" that she believes a public option would give the government "a disproportionate advantage" over private insurers, and said she still opposes the concept.
But at the same time, Snowe said that she wants "to make sure the insurance industry performs." In a separate interview on ABC's "Good Morning America," she said that if the industry did not live up to congressional expectations for more widely affordable and accessible insurance, "you could have the public option kick in immediately."
The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee bill, passed earlier by a panel in which liberals predominate, calls for both a government plan to compete with private insurers and a mandate that employers help cover their workers. Those are only two of dozens of differences.
President Barack Obama acknowledges it's not going to be easy. Speaking Tuesday in the Rose Garden, Obama called the 14-9 Finance Committee vote "a critical milestone" toward getting a health care overhaul this year. The legislation won its first Republican support when Snowe broke ranks with her party, saying she was answering the call of history.
Obama wasn't ready to bask in the bipartisan glow.
"Now is not the time to pat ourselves on the back," he said. "Now is the time to dig in and work even harder."
There was no victory lap either for Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus of Montana. "The bottom line here is we need a final bill, a merged bill, that gets 60 votes," he said. "Our goal is to pass health care reform, not just talk about it."
Aides say Reid has a keen sense of what the Senate will pass and he is focused on finding a solution that can get the 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster.
In general, bills moving toward floor votes in both houses would require most Americans to purchase insurance, provide federal subsidies to help those of lower incomes afford coverage and give small businesses help in defraying the cost of coverage for their workers.
The measures would bar insurance companies from denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions and for the first time limit their ability to charge higher premiums on the basis of age or family size. Expanded coverage would be paid for by cutting hundreds of billions of dollars from future Medicare payments to health care providers. Each house also envisions higher taxes — an income tax surcharge on million-dollar wage-earners in the case of the House, and a new excise levy on insurance companies selling high-cost policies in the Senate Finance Committee bill.
Apart from Snowe, Finance Committee Republicans cited higher taxes, a greater federal role in the insurance industry and other concerns as they lined up to oppose the bill.
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said the legislation would place the nation on a "slippery slope to more and more government control of health care."
Snowe said there were problems with the bill but the risks of doing nothing were too great.
Across the Capitol, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her lieutenants have been at work for weeks trying to blend legislation approved by three House committees. The eventual result is certain to include a government option, but the details of the plan have split the rank and file and leaders have spent days struggling with the issue.
___
Associated Press writers David Espo and Erica Werner contributed to this report.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Supreme Court will hear appeal of Enron's Skilling
2 mins ago
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court will consider throwing out the convictions of former Enron Chief Executive Officer Jeff Skilling for his role in the collapse of the one-time energy giant.
The court said Tuesday it will hear Skilling's appeal of lower court rulings that upheld all 19 of his 2006 convictions of conspiracy, securities fraud, insider trading and lying to auditors involving the 2001 collapse of Enron.
Skilling, serving a 24-year prison term, is asking the court to consider whether the federal "honest services" fraud statute was applied correctly. The justices already have two other cases on their schedule dealing with the honest services law, a favorite tool of federal prosecutors in white-collar crime and public corruption cases.
The law has been criticized as vague and unfair because the government need not prove, in some instances, that a defendant personally benefited from the alleged fraud.
Skilling also questions whether he received a fair trial in Houston following Enron's collapse.
A ruling in his favor probably would result in a new trial.
In January, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans upheld the convictions, but ordered Skilling's prison term reduced.
Skilling is the highest-ranking executive to be punished for the accounting tricks and shady business deals that led to the loss of thousands of jobs, more than $60 billion in Enron stock value and more than $2 billion in employee pension plans after the company imploded in 2001.
Company founder Kenneth Lay also was convicted of conspiracy, fraud and other charges, but his convictions were vacated after he died less than two months later of heart disease.
The case, to be argued next year, is Skilling v. U.S., 08-1394.
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court will consider throwing out the convictions of former Enron Chief Executive Officer Jeff Skilling for his role in the collapse of the one-time energy giant.
The court said Tuesday it will hear Skilling's appeal of lower court rulings that upheld all 19 of his 2006 convictions of conspiracy, securities fraud, insider trading and lying to auditors involving the 2001 collapse of Enron.
Skilling, serving a 24-year prison term, is asking the court to consider whether the federal "honest services" fraud statute was applied correctly. The justices already have two other cases on their schedule dealing with the honest services law, a favorite tool of federal prosecutors in white-collar crime and public corruption cases.
The law has been criticized as vague and unfair because the government need not prove, in some instances, that a defendant personally benefited from the alleged fraud.
Skilling also questions whether he received a fair trial in Houston following Enron's collapse.
A ruling in his favor probably would result in a new trial.
In January, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans upheld the convictions, but ordered Skilling's prison term reduced.
Skilling is the highest-ranking executive to be punished for the accounting tricks and shady business deals that led to the loss of thousands of jobs, more than $60 billion in Enron stock value and more than $2 billion in employee pension plans after the company imploded in 2001.
Company founder Kenneth Lay also was convicted of conspiracy, fraud and other charges, but his convictions were vacated after he died less than two months later of heart disease.
The case, to be argued next year, is Skilling v. U.S., 08-1394.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Job losses mar recovery, create woes for Dems
By TOM RAUM, Associated Press Writer Tom Raum, Associated Press Writer – 26 mins ago
WASHINGTON – A distressed economy is widely blamed for President George H.W. Bush's re-election defeat in 1992, and a decade earlier, for the loss of 26 House seats in midterm elections by Ronald Reagan's Republicans. Yet in both instances recession had already ended or was winding down.
It's a point not lost on President Barack Obama's White House or Democrats headed into next year's midterm elections. The stock market may be up, U.S. service industries may be recovering, banks may be lending again and housing prices holding. But one major piece of the recovery puzzle is still missing: a brighter employment picture.
And that's bad news for the party in power, whether the recession is officially over or not.
Job losses are expected to continue at least into the middle of next year, likely driving the unemployment rate above 10 percent from 9.8 percent last month. It could take three or four more years for it to fall to normal levels.
The longest and deepest downturn since the Great Depression has claimed 7.2 million jobs since it began in December 2007. Analysts figure 750,000 more jobs could disappear over the next six months.
If you add in people who have stopped looking for work, or who are working part time when they want a full-time job, the unemployment rate is a whopping 17 percent, according to the Labor Department.
"If you've got an effective unemployment rate of 17 percent and if this goes on for any length of time, a year or more, then everyone's cushion will run out," said Republican consultant Rich Galen. "There are going to be serious implications, culturally and politically."
Galen said it's understandable that Republicans would use the state of the economy to pound Obama and Democrats who control Congress. Still, "it's not something we should either make fun of, be amused by or play politics with," he said.
Republicans already see a "jobless recovery." In a letter to Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House GOP leaders asked, "Where are the jobs?"
Firing back, White House chief economic adviser Lawrence Summers defended the administration's efforts on the jobs front and wrote to the Republican leaders that Obama was "committed to not repeating the fiscal mistakes of the last eight years." House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Monday said stimulus spending and other Democratic initiatives "are the wrong approach."
Another sign of continuing distress: Applications for Social Security retirement benefits are up 23 percent from last year, a much larger jump than in other recessions.
The surge is due to a rush of baby boomers filing for early retirement. Signing up for Social Security benefits as early as age 62 can be an immediate source of income for laid-off older workers, but it's also a troubling sign of the scarcity of jobs.
Despite some signs of recovery, the economy remains fragile. Consumer spending — which powers two-thirds of economic output — remains weak. Yet the widespread view among economists is that the recession has ended and that the economy grew in the just-ended third quarter.
So how can it be over if things are still so bad?
A recession is most simply defined as a period when the gross domestic product falls for at least two quarters. It had been doing that since the July-September quarter of 2008, although most economists believe the GDP has now reversed course and rose in the past few months.
The Business Cycle Dating Committee of the National Bureau of Economic Research is generally seen as the authoritative arbiter for dating U.S. recessions. It takes other things into account besides GDP, including employment levels, real personal income, industrial production, and wholesale and retail sales.
It dated the beginning of the current recession as December 2007 — and hasn't yet called an end.
Economists agree that unemployment is a lagging indicator and can remain high long after a recession is pronounced over, continuing to inflict pain on those still out of work or worried about their jobs. That why it's hard for such workers to understand how the recession can be deemed over.
It's an important political dynamic as 2010 midterm elections approach.
At some point, continued job losses could easily push the economy back into negative territory, for a "double-dip" recession.
Hedge fund manager Doug Kass, founder and president of Seabreeze Partners Management, questions the ability of the economy to mount a self-sustaining recovery under continued elevated joblessness and wage deflation. "The consumer remains the Achilles' heel of the economy," he wrote recently.
Republicans claim continuing job losses signal a failure of the $787 billion Obama-driven stimulus legislation. "That is not what the American people were promised," said House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio.
White House aides concede they missed the mark with their January estimate that the stimulus package would keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent. But they insist things would be far worse had the stimulus not passed.
White House Budget Director Peter Orszag suggested the stimulus package added 2 to 3 percentage points, on an annualized basis, to U.S. economic activity from April through September. "If the economy remains fragile, additional options will be considered," he said in a recent interview with The Associated Press.
Among measures being studied by the White House and congressional Democrats: extending and expanding a $8,000 tax credit for first-time home buyers due to expire at the end of next month; and tax breaks for companies that add jobs.
Rob Shapiro, an economist who was a top official in President Bill Clinton's Commerce Department, sees "substantial, continued job losses" for some time if the government doesn't take more aggressive steps to foster job growth.
In the meantime, the Obama administration should "prepare the American people to wait a while for real results," said Shapiro, now with a Democratic think tank called NDN.
Obama song video prompts protests at NJ school
By GEOFF MULVIHILL, Associated Press Writer Geoff Mulvihill, Associated Press Writer – 29 mins ago
BURLINGTON TOWNSHIP, N.J. – Protesters brought some different songs Monday to an elementary school where students sang in praise of President Barack Obama, bringing criticism from conservative commentators who said children were being indoctrinated.
About 70 protesters stood on a sidewalk across the street from the B. Bernice Young School waving flags and homemade placards, singing "God Bless America" and "The Battle Hymn of the Republic," and chanting slogans such as "No indoctrination" and "Free children, free minds."
A smaller group of counter-protesters watched and occasionally heckled them.
The school is in a diverse suburb 15 miles northeast of Philadelphia and landed in an uncomfortable national spotlight last month when the video, shot last school year during an author's visit, surfaced. In it, second-graders sang a medley that began, "Mmm, mmm, mmm, Barack Hussein Obama/He said that all must lend a hand/To make this country strong again."
Some critics of the president say the song was overtly political and follows a pattern of Obama being viewed as an idol rather than a politician.
Monday's 90-minute protest, held while the school was in session and attended largely by members of anti-tax organizations from around the state, was an outgrowth of that sentiment.
"We should continue protests like this to prevent this from happening again," said Robert Gordan, 66, a retiree from Middletown.
Karen Flowers, a 43-year-old state government social worker, was there to protest the protesters.
"I don't have any problem with the first African-American president, the children singing about it," Flowers said. "They're making a lot out of nothing."
Jim and Gina Pronchick, who were among the few protesters who have children in the school, said they were upset that their son was in the video without their permission — and that school officials hadn't fully explained the context of the song.
The song was performed in February during an assembly that celebrated a number of occasions, from Black History Month to Dental Health Month, the township Board of Education said in a statement Monday. The lyrics were sent home to parents in advance, the board said.
The video was made a month later when Charisse Carney-Nunes, who wrote the children's book "I Am Barack Obama," visited the school and children sang the song again, school officials said.
"There was no intention to make any political statement or promote a political agenda at all," Superintendent Christopher Manno said in the statement.
The teacher who oversaw the class has retired.
BURLINGTON TOWNSHIP, N.J. – Protesters brought some different songs Monday to an elementary school where students sang in praise of President Barack Obama, bringing criticism from conservative commentators who said children were being indoctrinated.
About 70 protesters stood on a sidewalk across the street from the B. Bernice Young School waving flags and homemade placards, singing "God Bless America" and "The Battle Hymn of the Republic," and chanting slogans such as "No indoctrination" and "Free children, free minds."
A smaller group of counter-protesters watched and occasionally heckled them.
The school is in a diverse suburb 15 miles northeast of Philadelphia and landed in an uncomfortable national spotlight last month when the video, shot last school year during an author's visit, surfaced. In it, second-graders sang a medley that began, "Mmm, mmm, mmm, Barack Hussein Obama/He said that all must lend a hand/To make this country strong again."
Some critics of the president say the song was overtly political and follows a pattern of Obama being viewed as an idol rather than a politician.
Monday's 90-minute protest, held while the school was in session and attended largely by members of anti-tax organizations from around the state, was an outgrowth of that sentiment.
"We should continue protests like this to prevent this from happening again," said Robert Gordan, 66, a retiree from Middletown.
Karen Flowers, a 43-year-old state government social worker, was there to protest the protesters.
"I don't have any problem with the first African-American president, the children singing about it," Flowers said. "They're making a lot out of nothing."
Jim and Gina Pronchick, who were among the few protesters who have children in the school, said they were upset that their son was in the video without their permission — and that school officials hadn't fully explained the context of the song.
The song was performed in February during an assembly that celebrated a number of occasions, from Black History Month to Dental Health Month, the township Board of Education said in a statement Monday. The lyrics were sent home to parents in advance, the board said.
The video was made a month later when Charisse Carney-Nunes, who wrote the children's book "I Am Barack Obama," visited the school and children sang the song again, school officials said.
"There was no intention to make any political statement or promote a political agenda at all," Superintendent Christopher Manno said in the statement.
The teacher who oversaw the class has retired.
Job data to show stimulus aided teachers, laborers
By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer Matt Apuzzo, Associated Press Writer – 42 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Public school teachers are expected to be the big winners when states around the U.S. reveal for the first time how many jobs were created or saved during the first months of President Barack Obama's $787 billion stimulus plan.
State officials worked into the weekend as part of the most ambitious effort ever to calculate, in real time, the effect of a government spending program. From 11 jobs repaving a road in Caldwell, Texas, to one job helping run Utah food banks, to two forensic scientist positions in North Dakota, states were required to say exactly what became of billions in government aid.
The national data won't be available until later this month. But based on preliminary information obtained by The Associated Press from a handful of states, teachers appear to have benefited most from early spending. That's because the stimulus sent billions of dollars to help stabilize state budgets, sparing what officials said were tens of thousands of teacher layoffs.
In California, the stimulus was credited with saving or creating 62,000 jobs in public schools and state universities. Utah reported saving about 2,600 teaching jobs. In both states, education jobs represented about two-thirds of the total job number. Missouri reported more than 8,500 school jobs, Minnesota more than 5,900.
"They're going to be the biggest driver of jobs from the state side," said Chris Whatley, who tracks stimulus programs for the Council of State Governments.
Construction companies also are expected to report strong job numbers thanks to billions of dollars in highway money, but those figures will vary because some states have spent that money faster than others. Unlike construction jobs, which require bidding and contracting, teaching jobs were relatively quick to save once billions of dollars in aid arrived from Washington.
Job estimates have become political chips in the debate whether the stimulus was worth its hefty price tag. Since the president signed the bill, millions of jobs have been lost and unemployment has climbed higher than White House aides predicted.
The Obama administration, bolstered by some economists and anecdotal evidence, has said things would have been far worse without the stimulus. The White House says more than 1 million jobs have been saved or created so far, a figure that is so murky it can never be verified. That's because the White House estimate is based on economic models that try to calculate the effect of tax cuts and the ripple effect of government spending.
The numbers being collected by contractors and states are expected to provide a much more accurate count of workers employed by stimulus money. The job count will not tally jobs created by Obama's $288 billion tax cuts or attempt to quantify the ripple effect of stimulus spending.
Many states had little information to make public. In some states, that's because government agencies and contractors reported their data separately and governors were still getting a handle on what the job picture looked like. In other states, officials were still reviewing the data for errors.
"I don't want to give you data and have it change as it gets corrected," said Tom Evslin, whom Gov. Jim Douglas appointed as Vermont's top recovery officer. Evslin said before the public could see the data, state lawmakers would receive a briefing Thursday.
Other states that refused to make information public feared getting ahead of the release in Washington.
"We are still awaiting word from the federal government to see if this is data we ought to be releasing," said Tasya Peterson, spokeswoman for Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer's recovery office.
States were told to keep their counting simple: A job means a full-time, full-year job. So a 40-hour-a-week summer job will be counted as one-fourth of a job. A part-time researcher who works all year is half a job. And the full-time construction engineer who works all year is one job.
The Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, the independent body set up by Congress to monitor recovery act spending, will release jobs data in two batches. On Thursday, the board will release data on direct spending from federal agencies. That will include jobs such as repairing military bases and improving national parks.
Later this month, the board will release grant data, which will include jobs such as construction workers hired to repair local highways using federal money.
Officials have said the unprecedented accounting could become standard for government programs in the future, and this week's data release will offer the first indication of how it's working.
___
Associated Press writers David Gram in Montpelier, Vt.; Brock Vergakis in Salt Lake City; David Lieb in Jefferson City, Mo.; Jacques Billeaud in Phoenix; and Juliet Williams in Sacramento, Calif.; and April Castro in Austin, Texas, contributed to this report.
WASHINGTON – Public school teachers are expected to be the big winners when states around the U.S. reveal for the first time how many jobs were created or saved during the first months of President Barack Obama's $787 billion stimulus plan.
State officials worked into the weekend as part of the most ambitious effort ever to calculate, in real time, the effect of a government spending program. From 11 jobs repaving a road in Caldwell, Texas, to one job helping run Utah food banks, to two forensic scientist positions in North Dakota, states were required to say exactly what became of billions in government aid.
The national data won't be available until later this month. But based on preliminary information obtained by The Associated Press from a handful of states, teachers appear to have benefited most from early spending. That's because the stimulus sent billions of dollars to help stabilize state budgets, sparing what officials said were tens of thousands of teacher layoffs.
In California, the stimulus was credited with saving or creating 62,000 jobs in public schools and state universities. Utah reported saving about 2,600 teaching jobs. In both states, education jobs represented about two-thirds of the total job number. Missouri reported more than 8,500 school jobs, Minnesota more than 5,900.
"They're going to be the biggest driver of jobs from the state side," said Chris Whatley, who tracks stimulus programs for the Council of State Governments.
Construction companies also are expected to report strong job numbers thanks to billions of dollars in highway money, but those figures will vary because some states have spent that money faster than others. Unlike construction jobs, which require bidding and contracting, teaching jobs were relatively quick to save once billions of dollars in aid arrived from Washington.
Job estimates have become political chips in the debate whether the stimulus was worth its hefty price tag. Since the president signed the bill, millions of jobs have been lost and unemployment has climbed higher than White House aides predicted.
The Obama administration, bolstered by some economists and anecdotal evidence, has said things would have been far worse without the stimulus. The White House says more than 1 million jobs have been saved or created so far, a figure that is so murky it can never be verified. That's because the White House estimate is based on economic models that try to calculate the effect of tax cuts and the ripple effect of government spending.
The numbers being collected by contractors and states are expected to provide a much more accurate count of workers employed by stimulus money. The job count will not tally jobs created by Obama's $288 billion tax cuts or attempt to quantify the ripple effect of stimulus spending.
Many states had little information to make public. In some states, that's because government agencies and contractors reported their data separately and governors were still getting a handle on what the job picture looked like. In other states, officials were still reviewing the data for errors.
"I don't want to give you data and have it change as it gets corrected," said Tom Evslin, whom Gov. Jim Douglas appointed as Vermont's top recovery officer. Evslin said before the public could see the data, state lawmakers would receive a briefing Thursday.
Other states that refused to make information public feared getting ahead of the release in Washington.
"We are still awaiting word from the federal government to see if this is data we ought to be releasing," said Tasya Peterson, spokeswoman for Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer's recovery office.
States were told to keep their counting simple: A job means a full-time, full-year job. So a 40-hour-a-week summer job will be counted as one-fourth of a job. A part-time researcher who works all year is half a job. And the full-time construction engineer who works all year is one job.
The Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, the independent body set up by Congress to monitor recovery act spending, will release jobs data in two batches. On Thursday, the board will release data on direct spending from federal agencies. That will include jobs such as repairing military bases and improving national parks.
Later this month, the board will release grant data, which will include jobs such as construction workers hired to repair local highways using federal money.
Officials have said the unprecedented accounting could become standard for government programs in the future, and this week's data release will offer the first indication of how it's working.
___
Associated Press writers David Gram in Montpelier, Vt.; Brock Vergakis in Salt Lake City; David Lieb in Jefferson City, Mo.; Jacques Billeaud in Phoenix; and Juliet Williams in Sacramento, Calif.; and April Castro in Austin, Texas, contributed to this report.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
