Posts Tagged ‘reform’

Dismantling an Entitlement, and a Majority

Posted on: May 31st, 2011 by Kyle. | No Comments

A political scientist would tell you that the first lesson to learn for a politician is to know their constituents. It seems basic, but it is a fundamental part of constructing a winning electoral strategy. If you don’t get this right, you have no chance of holding on to power, let alone passing meaningful reforms once you attain it. The Democrats saw this firsthand in 2010 when they lost control of the House after failing to motivate their winning coalition from 2006 and 2008 to go to the polls. Republicans risk repeating the same mistake with a push for radical legislation that independent voters will find hard to stomach.

The Democratic and Republican Party are comprised of many, sometimes conflicting, constituencies. Labor unions, minorities, and blue-collar workers are just some of the Democratic Party’s base. Big business, evangelical Christians, and white-collar workers largely comprise the Republican Party. While this is a bit of a simplification, it largely holds true from one election to the next. The people who do not rigidly identify with one party or the other, independents, will decide who wins Congress and the White House in 2012. They largely sit out midterm elections, which are low turnout elections driven more by partisans.

The independent vote, by all accounts, is up for grabs in 2012. There is no doubt that they were dissatisfied with the slow pace of the economic recovery and perceived overspending by Washington. The Republican Party did a great job of characterizing, vilifying even, the Democratic healthcare plan as “socialized medicine”, despite the fact that it essentially left the structural system unchanged. Near universal healthcare? Yes, but far from the single-payer systems of Europe and Canada.

Whatever the case may be, Republicans have gone in the opposite direction and pursued a far more radical agenda than the Democrats could ever imagine. The Republican plan to end Medicare, replacing it with vouchers for seniors that would result in over $6,000 a year in out-of-pocket expenses, is just one example of their overreach. It has long been a wet dream of Republicans to dismantle Medicare and Social Security. George W. Bush attempted a similar approach in 2005 with his failed plan to privatize Social Security. Voters rejected that and they are going to reject this Republican Congress’s plan as well.

As far as building coalitions goes, though, the Republican Party is in a real bind. Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich displays this quite well when he called the Republican plan “right-wing social engineering”, only to backtrack the next day when he was met by outrage on the right. A Republican presidential or Congressional candidate will find it difficult to win a primary without supporting the Republican plan to end Medicare, but at the same time, this makes them virtually untenable in a general election. It’s a catch-22 that could very likely end the Republican majority in 2012.

The bottom line of this is that the Republicans in Congress, with the exception of only four in the House and five in the Senate, voted for a plan that is toxic to a majority of their constituents. Even Republican voters have reservations about dismantling a program that they have invested in throughout their entire lives. Elections are won with coalitions and the Republicans just gave the middle finger to the two largest and most reliable voting groups in the country: Baby Boomers and seniors. Unless Republicans can distract voters away from their vote to dismantle Medicare, they can kiss their majority goodbye.

The Sanctuary Movement Selling Strong on Amazon.com

Posted on: April 18th, 2011 by Kyle. | No Comments

The Sanctuary Movement: How Broken Immigration Policies Affect Cities is selling strong on Amazon.com. The latest sales figures on the site put it at #1 among books about immigration law and #2 among books about El Salvador history (the book is not about El Salvador, although it does reference a period of war where Salvadorans fled to the United States). The fact that it has generated this much interest is encouraging. I hoped when writing this book that it would help people better understand the immigration system in the United States and how badly it needs to be reformed.

That’s one of the reasons why I priced it so cheap. It’s only $2.99 for Kindle. You can find it at Amazon.com and Smashwords. Buy your copy today and help us keep the momentum going! Reviews have been positive. Christopher writes: “Great book! Having never heard of ‘sanctuary cities’ before I found it to be very informative. Can’t wait to read more by this author.” 5 out of 5 stars After you have read it, I encourage you to write a review of the book as well. Other customers always appreciate an honest review from fellow readers.

The Truth Behind Nancy Pelosi’s House Record

Posted on: January 14th, 2011 by Kyle. | No Comments

Last week Republicans took control of the House of Representatives for the first time since 2006. The reasons are more complicated than some would lead you to believe, but put simply, it was a mix of high unemployment, a huge money advantage for Republicans by corporate benefactors, dissatisfaction with Washington gridlock, and demographics in midterms that favor Republicans over Democrats. Older people tend to vote in all elections, while younger voters only tend to vote in presidential years. In fact, only about a quarter of young voters participated in the 2010 election vs. half of them during 2008. That’s a steep drop-off and largely benefited the Republicans.

No matter the outcome of the midterm election, it is indisputable that the last Congress was one of the most productive ever. For all of the Pelosi haters out there, Speaker Pelosi accomplished a great deal in the past four years, including many things that Republicans would have supported in the past (such as tax cuts). Her image as a “San Francisco liberal” did not make her many friends in the nation’s mid-section and President Obama rarely defended her, despite the fact that she was carrying his bucket in the House. Here are just a few of the many accomplishments that Pelosi managed when she was House Speaker:

*Extending unemployment benefits. The roughly 10-15% of people unemployed in this area (depending on which county you live in) would not have unemployment benefits if the GOP had their way.
*Expanding health care coverage to all Americans by 2014 (unless Republicans de-fund it, which is quite possible)
*Regulating the banks to make sure that future bailouts do not happen.
*Ending the bank bailouts from the Bush years.
*Increasing funding for financial aid to college, including Pell Grants and reducing the cost of student loans.
*Creating an estimated 3.7 million jobs with the Recovery Act

I would stand by that record any day of the week. The Republicans got us into the ditch and the Democrats got us out. It wasn’t easy and times are still tough, but we are on the path to recovery. Going down the Republican path of de-regulation and tax cuts for the rich will only ensure a future economic collapse.

Senate Passes Wall Street Reform Along Party Lines

Posted on: May 20th, 2010 by Kyle. | No Comments

Democrats won a major victory on Thursday as the Senate passed Wall Street reform by a 59-39 vote. The bill would increase oversight of Wall Street banks and ends bailouts of those institutions. Only four Republicans joined fifty-five Democrats in passing the bill: Senators Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, and both Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine.

Two Democrats voted against the bill, Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Maria Cantwell of Washington, saying that the bill did not go far enough in regulating Wall Street. Republicans opposed the legislation, saying that the government overstepped its reach. Sen. Robert Byrd, (D-WV) and Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) missed the vote.

“Those who wanted to protect Wall Street, it didn’t work. They can no longer gamble away other people’s money,” said Majority Leader Harry Reid. “When this bill becomes law, the joyride on Wall Street will come to an end,” he added. The bill now goes to the House of Representatives where it will be reconciled with a previously passed House version.

Republicans Vote to Kill Wall Street Reform

Posted on: May 20th, 2010 by Kyle. | No Comments

The Republican Party voted in unison against a financial reform bill that would regulate Wall Street. The attempt by Senate Democrats to end debate on the bill failed by a vote of 57-42, owing to the fact that 60 votes are required to get anything done in the Senate. Majority Leader Harry Reid blamed newly minted Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown for reneging on a promise to vote in favor of the bill. Even with Brown’s support, two Democrats voted against ending debate, arguing that it was not strong enough. Republican complaints have been that the bill goes too far.

Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin explained his vote against the bill by stating that he wants the bill to be stronger: “After thirty years of giving in to the wishes of Wall Street lobbyists, Congress needs to finally enact tough reforms to prevent Wall Street from driving our economy into the ditch again. We need to eliminate the risk posed to our economy by ‘too big to fail’ financial firms and to reinstate the protective firewalls between Main Street banks and Wall Street firms. Unfortunately, these key reforms are not included in the bill. The test for this legislation is a simple one – whether it will prevent another financial crisis. As the bill stands, it fails that test. Ending debate on the bill is finishing before the job is done.”

The truth is that the Party of No does not care about the country’s economic future – only their political standing and support for their donors. They voted against a stimulus act that had over $300 billion in tax cuts to middle class taxpayers. They voted against a health care bill that extends insurance to virtually everyone. They voted against extending unemployment benefits. And when they had a chance to stand up to Wall Street, they voted against Wall Street reform. Enough is enough. Send the GOP a message that obstruction is not how to run a country. Vote Democrat in the fall.

Democrats Take Lead in Ohio Senate Race

Posted on: April 2nd, 2010 by Kyle. | No Comments

While this election cycle is almost certain to return fewer Democratic members to the House and Senate, Ohio is shaping up to be a state where Democrats have a good chance of picking up a seat currently held by a Republican. George Voinovich, a former governor, is retiring from the Senate this year. Open seats are traditionally much more competitive than seats with an incumbent.

Much of this cycle the Democrats have trailed Republican Rob Portman, a former Bush administration official, by a few points. That appears to have ended with a slight lead for both Democratic candidates for Senate. The reversal of fortune comes just weeks after the health care reform bill became law. President Obama’s approval rating has also edged up in the state, as has Governor Strickland’s, a Democrat.

“In the Senate race, Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher leads Republican Rob Portman 41 – 37 percent, reversing a 40 – 37 percent Portman lead February 24. Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner edges Portman 38 – 37 percent, reversing a 40 – 35 percent Republican lead,” Quinnipiac University found. While a 4 point lead and 1 point lead for the Democratic candidates is not comfortable, it is a pretty big swing in the matter of a short period of time (7 points towards Lee Fisher and 6 points towards Jennifer Brunner).

House Passes Student Loan Reform, Increases Pell Grants

Posted on: March 21st, 2010 by Kyle. | No Comments

The United States House of Representatives today voted to increase Pell Grants to college students in need of financial assistance and voted to reform how student loans were awarded. As part of the health care reconciliation bill, these reforms will take away federal money that previously went directly to banks to provide loans to students. Instead, the federal government will now directly lend to students, saving $60 billion of taxpayer money over the course of 10 years.

Basically, these loans were giant subsidies to private banks. The banks received low interest loans from the government and when they signed loans with students, the risk was passed on to the government, which was responsible for defaults. This bill gets rid of the middle man. “What we have is a miraculous opportunity,” said Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. “Simply by stopping the subsidy to banks, we can plow those savings into our students.”

By voting against the reconciliation package in the House, every Republican member has voted against saving $60 billion in unnecessary spending to banks. The Republicans also voted against removing deals in the original health care proposal, such as the so-called “Cornhusker Kickback”, where money was directed to Nebraska and not any other state. I thought that they were against government waste? They’ve proven, yet again, that they will say one thing and do another.

Health Care Reform Becomes Law as House Passes Bill

Posted on: March 21st, 2010 by Kyle. | 1 Comment

Democrats scored a major victory on Sunday night as the health care bill, which has been debated for over a year, has finally passed both chambers of Congress and is expected to be signed into law by President Barack Obama shortly. The vote was 219 to 212 with zero Republicans voting in favor. It is an achievement that eluded Presidents Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.

The bill extends insurance to 32 million Americans that previously did not have health insurance, reduces the deficit by over $1 trillion over the next two decades, bans the insurance industry practice of denying coverage due to pre-existing conditions, and bans insurance companies from dropping coverage due to health. While Republicans have complained about a lack of bipartisanship, the bill includes over 200 Republican amendments.

Passing Health Care Gets Tricky for House Democrats

Posted on: February 28th, 2010 by Kyle. | No Comments

Almost all of the attention as of late has been on the Senate, but the House of Representatives could prove decisive in the battle to reform America’s ailing health care system. Both chambers have already passed separate versions of the bill with the Senate voting 60-40 and the House 220-215. The House passed their version of the bill in November with the Senate voting on Christmas Eve. The President’s health care summit does not appear to have changed the math.

Percentage wise, the vote was a lot closer in the House than it was in the Senate. The reason that the Senate got all of our attention was because of the Republican’s obstruction tactics, namely the filibuster, which requires 3/5 for passage instead of a majority vote. The President and Democratic leaders in the Senate appear to be ready to break the Republican’s filibuster attempts by passing a “fixed” version of the bill using a procedural device known as reconciliation.

It’s worth noting that Republicans attacking Democrats for using procedural shortcuts are themselves using procedural roadblocks. The filibuster is not in the Constitution and it is not even a law. It is simply a rule within the Senate which can be revised at the start of each Congress. Reconciliation, however, is in fact a law that was passed in the 1970s to reconcile budget issues. This is exactly what Democrats are likely to use it for as they will make changes to their original bill such as how to pay for it.

Going back to the House, though, it is unlikely that Speaker Pelosi currently has the votes to pass the Senate bill. There are two major hurdles that Democrats will need to face before President Obama can finally sign the bill. The first is that Democrats have literally lost three of their members from resignations and a death. Representative Jack Murtha recently passed away, Rep. Neil Abercrombie resigned to focus on his bid for governor of Hawaii and Robert Wexler resigned to head the Center for Middle East Peace and Economic Cooperation. In other words, with these vacancies, the Democrats stand at 217-215, not enough to pass the bill. A majority of the chamber is 218. The sole Republican to vote with Democrats, Joseph Cao, has stated that he will likely vote against it the second time. That puts Democrats two votes short of a majority.

Is it possible for Nancy Pelosi to strong-arm Democrats that voted against the bill to vote for this revised bill? Certainly it is possible, she could threaten everything from fundraising to committee spots, but most of the Democrats that voted no are conservatives from mostly rural and/or Southern districts. She could make the argument that even Democrats that voted against the health care bill are in big trouble – perhaps because they are undercutting their base. In New Mexico, Harry Teague is trailing former Congressman Pearce by two points, even though he voted against the original bill. Would he be in a stronger position if he had voted to extend insurance benefits to the 45 million that currently live without it? Probably, especially in a relatively poor state like New Mexico.

The second problem for Democrats in the House is the issue of abortion. Bart Stupak of Michigan was successful in passing an amendment that would ban any insurance policies from covering an elective abortion in the bill’s insurance exchange, which would include policy choices from both private and public insurance plans. Democrats in the Senate sought to continue the ban on any public funds going towards abortion, but did not want to restrict private insurance plans in the exchange from offering it. It’s questionable whether pro-life Democrats will vote for the House bill if the Stupak amendment is not present and it’s equally questionable whether pro-choice Democrats will vote for a bill that includes it.

*Edit*

According to CNN, due to the vacancies, the majority in the House is now 217.

We Want Our Money Back

Posted on: January 14th, 2010 by Kyle. | No Comments

In the fall of 2008, the financial system collapsed in a way that forced the federal government to bailout major banks on Wall Street. The program, started under the Bush administration, was known as TARP. Congress authorized the Treasury Department to spend $700 billion of taxpayer money to stabilize the system in the hope that banks would continue to lend to businesses and consumers in need of credit.

The banks instead used the money to buy their competitors. Bank of America, which received bailout funds, purchased Merrill Lynch for $50 billion. They also provided extravagant bonuses to their CEOs and other executives at a time when their companies were on the verge of collapse. As the New York Times reports, “Citigroup’s overall 2009 bonus pool is expected to be about $5.3 billion, about the same as it was for 2008, although the bank has far fewer employees.”

Wall Street simply does not get it. The American people saved the financial system from ruin. Our return is tightened credit policies, high unemployment and bank fees that promise to continue to rise. Without the American taxpayer, many of these institutions would no longer exist. Perhaps that would have been for the better as they are resisting attempts by the Obama administration to prevent a repeat of the 2008 meltdown.

Thankfully, President Obama does get it. He is proposing to Congress a 0.15 percent tax on the liabilities of large financial institutions. “It would apply only to those companies with assets of more than $50 billion — a group estimated at about 50…. The administration expects that 60 percent of the revenue would come from the 10 largest firms. As proposed, the fee would go into effect June 30, 2010, and last at least 10 years,” the AP reports. It is estimated that this tax could result in $100-$150 billion to the Treasury. The rest of the TARP money has already been paid back.

“We are already hearing a hue and cry from Wall Street, suggesting that this proposed fee is not only unwelcome but unfair, that by some twisted logic, it is more appropriate for the American people to bear the cost of the bailout rather than the industry that benefited from it, even though these executives are out there giving themselves huge bonuses,” President Obama said. “What I’d say to these executives is this: Instead of setting a phalanx of lobbyists to fight this proposal or employing an army of lawyers and accountants to help evade the fee, I’d suggest you might want to consider simply meeting your responsibility.”

This is great news. It means that, if Congress passes it, the taxpayer will recover all of the money that we spent to bailout these reckless companies. It also sends a signal to Wall Street that the Obama administration will play hardball with firms that somehow expect to profit off of the generosity of the American people. Passing this proposed tax will recover all of the money that was lent to the banks at the height of the meltdown. This act should only be a first step, though. We still badly need financial reform to ensure that this never happens again.

*Update*

President Obama brought up the new proposed tax on the banks in his Weekly Address. Watch below: