The Stakeholder
Posted by Brandon English
Apr 02, 2004
Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer’s statement on today’s job report:
“The Labor Department’s report today is long-overdue welcome news for job seekers, but one month does not a successful economic policy make. Even if the economy added this number of jobs every month for the rest of the year, George W. Bush would barely break even on job creation for his entire four-year term and have the worst record of job creation since the Great Depression.
“While the Bush Administration will undoubtedly pop open the champagne bottles today, the plight of the over 8 million unemployed Americans demands some perspective.
“First, the unemployment rate in March actually increased to 5.7 percent and the number of unemployed Americans rose to 8.4 million because 200,000 job seekers re-entered the job market.
“And second, a simple comparison with the Clinton Administration demonstrates the current Administration’s continued abysmal economic performance. Over its eight years, the Clinton Administration presided over an economy that created 22 million jobs in eight years, an average job gain of 229,000 every single month. During the last three and one-half years, the economy has lost more than 2 million jobs.
“While I hope that we will see continued job gains in the coming months, the Bush Administration should not celebrate too loudly in the face of an increased unemployment rate.”
Posted by Brandon English
Apr 02, 2004
The first quarter of 2004 finished up yesterday, and we are happy to report that you are keeping us more than competitive with the GOP!!!! We raised $11.5 million this quarter which is HUGE.
Mostly, it means that we will be able to fight very hard in those swing districts. Additionally, we are the closest to our Republican counterparts when it comes to cash-on-hand:
The Republican National Committee had $54 million on hand Thursday and no debt. The GOP’s Senate fund-raising committee had roughly twice as much in the bank as its Democratic rival. The Democratic House committee was closest to its Republican counterpart in cash on hand, $12.3 million compared to $16 million. (emphasis mine)
- Sharon Theimer, Associated Press
Cash on hand is key, because it means that we keep our spending low - so more of every dollar we raise ends up in actual races. Our money goes where it is needed the most, and we can make a big impact in important races.
Thanks. You rule!
There is still a lot of work to be done, however, and we are more than a fundraising Committee. Click here to volunteer...
Posted by Brandon English
Apr 01, 2004
AIR AMERICA LAUNCHES WITH AL FRANKEN, CHUCK D, JANEANE GAROFALO AND MORE!
Like most great ideas it started with a simple concept: Create a place for progressive voices to meet on America’s airwaves.
Yet, years of right-wing domination of Talk Radio have ignited a firestorm of controversy over the launch of Air America, the fledgling network that dishes up political events with a “smart voice” and a powerful sense of humor.
Conservatives crow that liberal ideas are “too complicated” to be successful on radio. (Dealing with “Ditto Heads” and their like must be infinitely easier than having to worry about that pesky thought process). Media critics point to first-day programming glitches. (Care to show us the columns you wrote on your first day on the job?)
But no one denies the basic premise that we believe will make this venture a success: Talk radio has become a haven for the Far Right, whose beliefs DO NOT represent the views of at least half of the American public.
See who attended the glittering pre-launch party
Posted by Brandon English
Apr 01, 2004
Boy, oh boy, these Republicans are playing with fire. The emerging question of this year, with 10 open investigations into GOP Leadership, is whether those lower down will distance themselves from the bosses they’ve served so loyally, or stick with them and absord the stench of their corruption. The House Republicans on the Ways and Means Committee took a big step towards the latter this afternoon:
Republicans rejected Democratic efforts Thursday to force a White House adviser and the former Medicare chief to testify about their roles in keeping estimates of the cost of Medicare legislation from lawmakers.
Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee had sought to question the officials to learn whether the Bush administration intentionally withheld higher estimates of the bill’s cost, fearing that the larger figure would sink the Medicare overhaul.
In party-line votes, the committee defeated proposals to subpoena Doug Badger, an economic adviser to President Bush, and Thomas Scully, who until December headed the federal agency that runs the Medicare program.
The White House, citing executive privilege, declined the committee’s invitation to have Badger testify at a hearing Thursday. Scully, who now works for a law firm and an investment firm, told the committee in a letter that he was unavailable to testify.
“The White House is clearly trying to stonewall and now senior House Republicans are complicit in that cover-up,” said Rep. Charles Rangel of New York, the committee’s top Democrat.
This is far from over.
Posted by Brandon English
Apr 01, 2004
From The Hill:
Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee may seek to subpoena a top White House aide if he fails to testify today on the Medicare cost-scoring controversy.
Administration officials have said that Doug Badger, President Bush’s top healthcare adviser at the White House, will not testify on what Democrats have dubbed “Medigate.” The White House has cited concerns about the separation of powers in their decision not to let Badger testify.
A House Democratic aide said that the other two Bush administration officials asked to testify —Medicare policymakers Jeffrey Flick and Leslie Norwalk — will answer questions about the suppression of cost projections to Congress.
It is unclear if former Medicare chief Tom Scully will testify tomorrow.
“At this point, Scully is a wild card,” the aide said.
If Scully and Badger do not show, Democrats might make a motion to subpoena them. A majority of the committee must approve the motion for it to clear. The possible move could put Republicans in a difficult position, and it is unclear how they would vote on such a maneuver.
Republicans have declined to defend the administration’s decision to keep the cost estimates under wraps.
You know, there is indeed a question of precedent here, but not the one the administration is harping on. Perhaps Badger is an “advisor,” but this has nothing to do with any advice he gave the President, it has to do with an order he gave to Scully, who in turn passed it on to Foster (the actuary). The precedent that will be set, if the administration has its way, is that the executive branch is fully permitted to swindle Congress on the costs of any given bill in regards to any information that is produced within the very broad range of departments that are technically part of the executive. And furthermore, such dealings - which could very well be criminal (see op-ed in post below) - would be essentially above the law just so long as you had the person doing it call themselves an “advisor.” Oh, but this is not for the narrow reasons of this administration, the President really just cherishes the executive privacies for all administrations, Democrat or Republican, blah blah blah…
These folks don’t seem to be buying it.
Posted by Brandon English
Apr 01, 2004
From...(drumbeat por favor)...NRO Contributing Editor Deroy Murdoch!
His closing remarks:
Instead, Republicans should develop a modest plan for poor seniors who lack coverage, rather than any American over 65, including multimillionaires and those who already have drug insurance.
The Medicare drug benefit has metastasized from bad policy to bad politics and now to scandal and possible criminality. This law begs to be euthanized. The GOP should pulls its plug. As for the perpetrators of this colossal public fraud, the Justice Department should fit them for orange jumpsuits. [ok, our emphasis]
Ha Ha Ha! Testify!
Posted by Brandon English
Apr 01, 2004
Democratic House Leader Nancy Pelosi went on the offensive yesterday, attacking the GOP for using government employees and resources for political smears - this is bad enough by itself, but when REAL priorities like analysis of job creation strategies and disrupting terrorist networks get shelved to attack political opponents of Bush and DeLay that is WAAAAAAYYYYYYY over the top.
Pardon the excessive direct quoting, but I think her comments at a press conference with Rep. Rangel (D-NY15) yesterday sum it up pretty well...
“Yesterday, we learned that while the Bush Administration chose to give tax cuts to millionaires, it did not choose to fund an IRS request to disrupt terrorists’ financial networks. Even after the loss of a record 2.8 million jobs, the Secretary of the Treasury still spent the day defending the outsourcing of good-paying U.S. jobs. And the Treasury Department, at the request of the Majority Leader in the House, prepared a tax analysis for blatantly political purposes.
“According to today’s Wall Street Journal: ‘The Treasury tapped civil servants to calculate the cost of Senator John Kerry’s tax plan and then posted the analysis on the Treasury Web site. A federal law bars career government officials from working on political campaigns.’
“This of course was transmitted to House Majority Leader DeLay and to the Republican National Committee. The Bush economic team is quick to do a political tax analysis for Tom DeLay to give to the Republican National Committee, but slow to create even one single job.
“Democrats are calling for the Treasury Department to finally do the complete analysis of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts that it never did.”
via Atrios, Kautilyan has the skinny on this one.
Posted by Brandon English
Apr 01, 2004
It’s Knight Ridder again on Medigate:
Citing executive privilege, the White House refused to allow President Bush’s chief health-policy adviser, Douglas Badger, to testify Thursday before the House Ways and Means Committee about early administration estimates that the new Medicare prescription-drug benefit would be far more costly than many lawmakers believed when they voted for it.
I’ll save you the google. From the Washington Post (March, 19):
Foster said that he did not have concrete proof of a White House role, but that his inference was based on the nature of several conversations he had with Scully over data that Congress had asked for and that Foster wanted to release. “I just remember Tom being upset, saying he was caught in the middle. It was like he was getting dumped on,” Foster said.
Foster added that he believed, but did not know for certain, that Scully had been referring to Doug Badger, the senior health policy analyst. He said that he concluded that Badger probably was involved because he was the White House official most steeped in the administration’s negotiations with Congress over Medicare legislation enacted late last year and because Badger was intimately familiar with the analyses his office produced.
Oh yeah, this strategy worked great last time.
Posted by Brandon English
Mar 31, 2004
Fresh from Reuters (subscription required):
WASHINGTON (Reuters Health) Mar 31 - Claims from Democrats in the U.S. House and Senate that the Bush administration acted inappropriately during last year’s consideration of the new Medicare law are without foundation, a top Health and Human Services official said Wednesday.
“This is smoke. There’s nothing there,” said HHS senior spokesman Bill Pierce in an interview. Pierce is handing out a thick sheaf of documentation to reporters refuting Democratic claims that the administration withheld its higher cost estimates of the bill to ensure its passage among wavering Republicans concerned about the 10-year, $400 billion price tag. The administration in January announced its actuaries estimate the law could cost $534 billion over the next decade.
Among Pierce’s handouts are news stories and hearing transcripts from last summer quoting administration officials as noting that Medicare actuaries thought key portions of the bill would cost more than Congressional estimators thought. “We were giving clear signals to everybody who reads that we felt there were going to be significant differences between how we viewed this legislation and how Congress viewed this,” Pierce said.
Well our own Rep. Rahm Emanuel (IL-5) did a little work on this question himself, and this is what he found:
“This is a good bill that will help every Medicare beneficiary. We are spending $400 billion. There is modest, but real, cost containment to flag potential future cost explosions. There are modest, but real, competitive reforms. In fact, the final bill is almost precisely what President Bush requested from Congress.”
-Tom Scully, Administrator, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Letter to the Editor, The New York Times, November 20, 2003
“There’s no question, $400 billion over 10-year, $40 billion a year.”
--HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson on Fox News “Special Report with Brit Hume” November 24, 2003
For plenty more examples, see the extended entry.
Dear GOP: You are liars.
Posted by Brandon English
Mar 31, 2004
This story has been brewing for a while, you can get caught up here, but Pelosi took a firm stand today, and you are likely to hear more on it soon. Here is Pelosi’s statement in full:
Pelosi: ‘White House Has Responsibility to Enforce Non-Discrimination Policies’
Washington, D.C.—House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on the Bush Administration’s removal of long standing references on the Office of Special Counsel Web site regarding federal policies barring discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation:
“I have long fought for equal rights for lesbians and gays in all sectors of employment—federal, state, local, and the private sector.
“The actions of Special Counsel Scott Bloch are not only needlessly divisive, they are simply wrong as a matter of law. It is the responsibility of government to defend and protect the civil rights of all Americans and to enforce non-discrimination policies.
“Mr. Bloch’s willingness to tolerate discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is contrary to federal law, which has long been held by the Office of Special Counsel during Administrations of both political parties to prohibit discrimination in the federal workplace on the basis of sexual orientation.
“I call on President Bush to denounce this blatant act of discrimination, and to immediately restore workplace protections as required by law.
“It is unacceptable to use an ideological or political agenda to subvert years of settled interpretation of federal personnel policies and statutes. Once again, this Administration has sought to divide the American people for political purposes. The American people deserve better.”
Posted by Brandon English
Mar 31, 2004
In case you would like a more graphic representation of Jesse’s post on the Budget Deficit below, try this:
More info is available at the Democratic Whip’s Budget Clearinghouse.
Posted by Brandon English
Mar 31, 2004
The Hill has a little insider skinny on the Medicare intimidation scandal. It details how Republicans on the Hill are distancing themselves from the administration, something we’ve noted here before, but then goes on to quote the ever-present anonymous GOP aide:
The GOP aide said that as long as the Bush administration doesn’t attempt to lie, the controversy will fade. After all the talk, the aide said, there is a “so what” reaction to the Foster allegations. The staffer said that the administration opted to keep information from the Hill and that there is no law mandating the release of the data.
Nothing there, huh? Well there is still the question of whether GOP House Leadership knew about the other numbers, which is also discussed in the article.
In the meantime, Rep. Nancy Johnson (R-Conn.) was quoted in The New York Times March 17 as saying she “absolutely” had been aware of Foster’s Medicare numbers last year. GOP aides winced when they read her quote, and the next day, Johnson issued a press release that said, “No specific estimate was provided to me by [Foster] on the House bill.”
But besides that, unless Scully was really acting on his own, and I have not seen anybody actually contend that, then the White House not only withheld vital information from Congress while they were voting on a massive sham of a bill that we now know will bankrupt Medicare in 15 years, they actively continued to lie to Congress throughout, repeating the $400 billion number over and over and over again.
And deep down the Republican reaction is “so what”? Have they really dragged our government down that far?
Of course they have.
Posted by Brandon English
Mar 30, 2004
From Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer’s Budget Clearinghouse:
Then:
“I don’t like deficits, I don’t want deficits, and I won’t pretend deficits don’t matter.”
-Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle, CongressDaily, 3/12/03
“[Former New York Congressman] Jack Kemp worships at the altar of tax cuts. Jack has always said that deficits don’t matter. We think that deficits do matter.”
-Majority Leader Tom DeLay, New York Times, 1997
“The Republican lockbox legislation locks away the entire Social Security surplus . . .Today, we are restoring Americans’ faith and confidence in the Social Security system. It’s a promise to current and future generations of retirees: Rest assured, your hard-earned money will be saved for you so that you can enjoy your well-deserved retirement.”
-Majority Leader Tom DeLay, Congressional Record, 5/23/99
“This Congress will protect 100 percent of the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds. Period. No speculation. No supposition. No projections.”
-Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle, Press Release, 7/2/01
Now (the revolt):
“Republicans are in denial… they have been spending money like there is no tomorrow.”
-Bruce Bartlett, former deputy assistant secretary for economic policy under President Ronald Reagan, Chicago Tribune, 03/09/04
“Enough deficit spending, my friends. Enough. We are mortgaging our children’s futures. When does it stop? When does the Republican Party find its soul?”
-Sen. John McCain, Congressional Record, 02/12/04
Soul be gone.
Posted by Brandon English
Mar 30, 2004
Very few have probably been following the House and Senate budget debates all that closely, but it has been interesting. The Senate gave the administration a big punch in the face by including ”Pay-Go” provisions that demand that any new tax cuts must be accompanied by equal cuts in spending- essentially forcing the administration to name exactly which programs it will cut in order to shower more money on the top 1%. House Dems voted in unison to include this in the budget, but the GOP narrowly managed to shoot it down. Today the Dems forced another independent vote on the measure- this is Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer’s statement on it:
“Last year, House Republicans repudiated their own budget a mere 96 hours after they adopted it, approving a Democratic Motion to reinstate cuts to education, veterans and health care that were called for in the Republican budget. And they almost did the same thing this year.
“Today, after holding a five-minute vote open for 28 minutes, Republicans ‘defeated’ a Democratic Motion to Instruct conferees on the budget to adopt the Senate’s bipartisan pay-as-you-go rules, requiring both spending increases and tax cuts to be offset elsewhere in the budget. Republican leaders in the House have demanded that such rules apply to spending only.
“A unanimous Democratic Caucus was joined by 11 Republicans in voting for this Democratic Motion. Four other Republican Members cast ‘yes’ votes before Republican leaders, trying to stave off an embarrassing defeat, twisted their arms and convinced them to change their votes.
“With this vote today, Republicans confirmed that they have neither the will nor the courage to make tough budget choices, as they shamelessly pretend that tax cuts have no impact on the exploding budget deficit that their failed policies have created. Clearly, the Republican Party - which in three short years has turned record budget surpluses into a record deficit of half a trillion dollars this year and deficits as far as the eye can see - needs a remedial lesson in mathematics.
“Pay-as-you-go rules do not preclude tax cuts; they simply require us to pay for them. But House Republicans refused. Instead, they adopted a budget for Fiscal 2005 that would increase our budget deficits, mortgaging our future and forcing our children and grandchildren to pay this generation’s bills. That is not only irresponsible, it is immoral.”
Posted by Brandon English
Mar 30, 2004
The next time your friendly neighborhood Republican accuses Democrats of being soft on defense and not supporting our troops, please remind them of the Budget vote in the House last week.
Not a single Democrat voted for the GOP Budget resolution which was pretty close to Bush’s request. A big part of the reason why we stood against it is that the GOP budget funds Veteran’s Affairs by $1.3 billion LESS than what the House Veteran’s Affairs Committee requested and $2 billion less than what groups like the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Disabled American Veterans and the American Legion have pressed for.
In fact, you can point them to the following letters that outline the harm that these GOP cuts would cause.
Letter #1 - Steve Robertson, Director
National Legislative Commission, American Legion
Letter #2 - Rick Jones , National Legislative Director, AMVETS
Joseph A. Violante, National Legislative Director, Disabled American Veterans
Richard B. Fuller, National Legislative Director, Paralyzed Veterans of America
Dennis Cullinan, National Legislative Director, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States
You can learn more at www.independentbudget.org - a budget by veterans FOR veterans.
Page 388 of 395 pages « First < 386 387 388 389 390 > Last »
0 comments | Permalink