Tag: Congress

Take It To The Streets–Again

Americans know the problems we are having with the government shutdown that has 800,000 people out of work and many many other losing their jobs maybe forever.

I wrote a piece the other day asking Americans ti take it to the streets and do some substantive protests…kinda like the “yellow vests” of France.

https://lobotero.com/2019/01/23/take-it-to-the-streets/
 
After I wrote that a similar post was put up on the website, CounterPunch.org, they are calling for massive protests in the streets of this country…..

Here are seven things you won’t hear much if anything about in the reigning corporate media regarding the ongoing record-setting partial shutdown of the United States federal government:

1: The Longstanding Neoliberal War on “Big Government”:  a proper understanding of the shutdown in relation to the longstanding capitalist project of what the leading corporate-neoliberal champion Grover Norquist called “starving the beast,” with “beast” taken to mean “big government.”  Norquist wanted, he said, “to cut government down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub.”

https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/01/23/time-for-the-u-s-yellow-vests/

I agree it is time for the people to take to the streets and demand a government of the people and not one of corruption, and for the rich only.

This situation illustrates perfectly how badly a strong labor movement is needed……and needed badly!  (redundancy used for effect…trying to head off the grammar police)…..

Bailout Offers Many Powers

If the plan is pushed through Congress, there will be some massive new powers for the boyz in control.

• Buying Power: This is the cornerstone of the proposal — allowing Treasury to buy up to $700 billion of privately held assets in the market. The original proposal called for buying power to be limited to “mortgage-related” assets, but a later draft expanded that to allow the government to purchase any “troubled assets.” There’s a staggering difference in authority between the two phrases, and it is a moving target as of press time. The banking industry generally favors the second version, but that potentially exposes taxpayers to much higher costs.

• Managing Power: Under the Bush administration’s plan, Treasury would hire private managers to handle the hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of assets it will soon own. But Treasury was silent on whether those managers would be able to actually negotiate directly with homeowners who hold the troubled mortgages. Democrats would go further and demand that bankruptcy judges be given the ability to renegotiate those failing mortgages on behalf of homeowners. This will be one of the more contentious sideshow fights of the negotiations.

• Global Power: Under one version of Treasury’s proposal, the government would have the power to buy assets from any institution in the world that it deemed worthy of a bailout.

• Pay Power: Democrats on Capitol Hill say they want the final plan to include restrictions on payouts to the executives of the financial institutions that take the taxpayer lifeline. Paulson says he doesn’t like this idea, but it may be tough for elected officials to oppose this populist carve-out in an election year.

• Equity Power: Democrats would like the government to get shares in the financial institutions that take federal help — effectively giving taxpayers ownership stakes in the nation’s largest banks and providing them with a huge windfall if those institutions prosper in future years.

• Oversight Power: Treasury’s initial proposal included very little room for congressional oversight of the new effort, calling for reports to be sent to the Hill just twice per year. That isn’t flying with Democrats or many Republicans on the Hill; if a bill makes it through Congress, it will almost certainly have much stronger oversight provisions.

CEO Exit Pay

Democrats on Tuesday criticized the multimillion-dollar pay packages awarded to the former chief executives of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac at a time when taxpayers could foot a massive bill for the companies’ bailout.

In a joint letter to Fannie and Freddie’s regulator, Senators Charles Schumer of New York and Jack Reed of Rhode Island said the combined pay and bonus packages of about $24 million should be revised.

“We find it way out of line,” they said in the letter, saying the severance pay for former Fannie Mae CEO Daniel Mudd and former Freddie Mac CEO Richard Syron should be questioned especially if any financial losses could have been caused by errors in management.

The U.S. government takeover came as worries heightened over shrinking capital at the congressionally chartered companies, which had combined losses of nearly $14 billion in the last four quarters.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has said the final price tag for taxpayers cannot be estimated until the extent of the declines in the mortgage market is fully known.

A Vote Or Not

Reversing course, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is planning energy legislation that may allow oil and gas drilling in new areas off the U. S. coast, according to a House Democratic leadership aide.

Pelosi, D-Calif., is open to considering energy exploration on the outer continental shelf as part of a broader package of measures to address rising energy costs, the aide said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Details haven’t been worked out, the aide said.

Pelosi rejected holding a vote on drilling before the House adjourned for its five-week recess on Aug. 1. In a CNN “Larry King Live” interview Monday night, she said “we can have a vote” on offshore drilling, “but it has to be part of something that says we want to bring immediate relief to the public and not just a hoax on them.”

Among other provisions, Pelosi said she would like a requirement that electricity be produced from renewable sources such as wind and solar energy and the release of some oil from the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve as an immediate brake on prices.

Democrats have been under increasing pressure to allow offshore drilling as gasoline prices have risen over $4 a gallon.

Americans are famous for a lack of concern on some issues.  Now that the price of gas is sliding downward, will the vote be necessary?  Or wanted at all?

No Vote On OffShore Oil

For weeks, pressure has been mounting in Congress to approve more domestic oil drilling, but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has held the line, using her power to block a vote on offshore drilling.

President Bush has made almost daily calls for Democratic leaders to take action. House GOP leaders, citing a new poll showing that a slim majority of Californians now favor offshore drilling, issued a release today saying “even (Pelosi’s) own California neighbors oppose her efforts to block new drilling far off American coasts.” GOP lawmakers are so disgruntled they’re urging Bush to deny Congress its August break by calling a special session on energy.

Even some Democrats are getting antsy, fearing the party’s stance could hurt in the fall elections. But Pelosi, who has opposed offshore drilling throughout her two decades in Congress, insists opening new areas to drilling won’t lower gas prices in the short-term. She believes a vote would only help the GOP blame Democrats for high gas prices.

While I agree with Pelosi on this matter, because there are already 68 million acres of leases already.  Let the companies start there and then see if it will make a difference in the price of gas.  I doubt very seriously if it will and the whole clap trap about it is just that a shovel full of manure.

No More Blank Checks For Iraq

Damn, this is the same thing that the Dems said after the 2006 election and seems that the President has had is way regardless of their feeling.

Sen. Jack Reed says America can’t afford the Republican strategy of continuing to write blank checks for the Iraq war.

“At a time when the war in Iraq costs $10 billion each month, Americans are paying $4 a gallon for gasoline, and our economy is struggling, we cannot continue down the path that President Bush and Senator McCain propose: writing blank check after blank check,” Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat, said Saturday in his party’s weekly radio address.

Reed said Democrats have outlined a better plan to carefully redeploy combat troops out of Iraq and give them missions such as counterterrorism and training Iraq’s military.

“Make no mistake: This is a plan that seizes on the progress and sacrifices our troops have made in Iraq, and it recognizes the desire of the Iraqi people to take control of their own destiny,” he said.

Please, stop promising things that you cannot deliver, at least right now.

Mortgage Help Passes

Mortgage help for homeowners nationwide and tax relief for some recipients sailed through the House on Wednesday after President Bush lifted his veto threat.

The tax relief in the giant housing rescue bill is expected to win Senate approval this week and be signed into law soon.

The bill includes $300 billion to provide more affordable mortgages to troubled homeowners, nearly $4 billion in grants to help communities fix up foreclosed properties and a $7,500 tax credit for first-time home buyers.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the president believes the bill is too important, given the housing crisis, to trigger a lengthy veto fight. The legislation is designed to help 400,000 homeowners facing foreclosure and prevent financially struggling mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from collapsing.

This is sorta good news for homeowners, but will it be enough?

The Electoral College Is Coming

A measure that would push the Electoral College to the fringes of American politics has been an unlikely beneficiary of this year’s protracted presidential primaries.

Buoyed by a long presidential primary season that focused attention on states that usually are overlooked in the calculus of winning a nomination, states as far-flung as Massachusetts and Hawaii have passed or are considering legislation that would guarantee that the candidate who got the most votes nationwide would win the White House.

If lessons from high school civics classes on how the Electoral College operates had dimmed, the 2000 election brought them back to life as Al Gore won the national popular vote but lost the presidency to George W. Bush in the Electoral College after the Supreme Court settled the dispute over Florida‘s vote count. That’s because almost every state casts its electoral votes based on the winner of the popular vote in that state.
The U.S. Constitution provides that states can choose how they allocate electors. Under the group’s plan, the new method of casting electoral votes would take effect when states with a combined 270 electoral votes—the number necessary to elect a president—join the national popular-vote compact
National Popular Vote was founded by Silicon Valley venture capitalist John Koza. The group says the measure should have bipartisan support, pointing to the near-miss of the 2004 election. Bush was re-elected when he won the popular vote by more than 3 million ballots. But a switch of only 60,000 votes in Ohio would have swung that battleground state to John Kerry, who would have won in the Electoral College.

And Republicans have supported it, including Illinois State Sen. Kirk Dillard (R-Hinsdale), a co-sponsor of the Illinois bill, which Gov. Rod Blagojevich signed in April.

Apart from partisan politics, the Electoral College has supporters. Walter Berns, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, notes that the current system helps small states keep some clout on the national scene.
Still, even some opponents of the Electoral College are skeptical. Burdett Loomis, a political science professor at the University of Kansas, favors amending the Constitution to abolish the Electoral College. Supporters of the National Popular Vote campaign say is that’s too difficult because an it requires approval by two-thirds of Congress and three-quarters of the states.

This is a shorten post from an original article published in the Chicago Tribune. Time for this archaic piece of crap to be eliminated.

The Oil Mirage

I was sent this post in an email from a friend in New York.

If gasoline were selling for $2 a gallon today, President Bush’s decision to lift the ban on oil drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts most likely would have caused an uproar. But with gasoline at more than $4 a gallon, and seemingly rising every day, the response to Mr. Bush’s directive has been muted at best. At worst, it is drawing support from various circles, including Congress, as lawmakers react to the growing public alarm over energy costs.

But this is a time for responsible leadership, and Congress must rise to the occasion. It’s one thing for Mr. Bush to seize an opportunity to open more acreage to the oil companies. He’s been pro-exploration from the moment he entered the Oval Office. But it’s quite another for responsible members of Congress to start wavering on the issue of offshore drilling out of fear of voter backlash at home. They need to stand firm.

Increasing the supply of domestic oil is, at best, a feeble solution to a global energy crisis. Under Mr. Bush’s plan, oil companies would be able to drill for an estimated 10 billion barrels of oil pinpointed in areas now off limits to drilling. But even if such a rich source materialized and were tapped, there is no guarantee the oil would flow to the U.S. market. Instead, it would become part of the global oil supply and subject to the price fluctuations of global demand. Assuming there is no let-up in demand by China and India, the impact on prices would be minimal at best. Meanwhile, the U.S. coastal landscape would be degraded.

If only some lawmakers would talk bluntly about this issue. If only some of them would dare to say that even though $4-a-gallon gasoline is a burden on most family budgets, it is, in its own way, a blessing as well. The higher cost of fuel has made Americans more conservation conscious. It has all but driven the gas-guzzling SUV into extinction. It has increased ridership on mass transit systems. It has made cities more attractive for workers to live in, and the suburbs, along with their daily commutes, less attractive. If that trend continues, suburban and ex-urban sprawl may at last be curbed.

Then there are the health benefits. If Americans drive less and burn less fuel, the air will be cleaner and there will be fewer respiratory ailments. And there are economic benefits. Fewer cars means less wear and tear on the infrastructure, and thus less cost for maintenance and repair.

Congress can make these points, and more, by refusing to go along with Mr. Bush and lift the drilling moratorium. That is to say, Congress must act responsibly even if Mr. Bush refuses to do so.

Kucinich To Investigate Surveillance

This was recently post on Raw Story:

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), who has figured prominently in recent political news for his attempts to begin impeachment hearings against President George W. Bush, today announced that the congressional subcommittee he chairs will look into reports of peace groups being surveilled by police and private investigators.

“[M]ost people would be upset to know that police were spying on lawful citizens and infiltrating peaceful organizations, rather than chasing down real criminals,” said Kucinich in a press release delivered to RAW STORY. “At a minimum, such police spying is clearly a waste of taxpayer dollars and a diversion from the mission of protecting and serving the people.

“I want the subcommittee to determine how widespread these activities are and who ordered them,” the Ohio Democrat and former presidential candidate said.

Kucinich chairs the House Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

The press release referred to reports that Maryland state police officers infiltrated peace and anti-death penalty groups and that private investigators working on behalf of “several large corporations” had surveilled environmental groups.

Such surveillance is apparently not limited to law enforcement and private investigators. In January 2007, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) released a report showing “widespread Pentagon surveillance of peace activists.”

At least somebody in Washington is trying to keep the fires of civil disobedience  alive.  One of the reason I would have voted for him for president.