Posts Tagged ‘deregulation’

Robert Reich – The Secret Big-Money Takeover of America

Evans Liberal Politics
October 8, 2010

 

Robert Reich – The Secret
Big-Money Takeover of America


The Secret Big-Money Takeover of America, Robert Reich.org, October 7, 2010, by Robert Reich, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

Not only is income and wealth in America more concentrated in fewer hands than it’s been in 80 years, but those hands are buying our democracy as never before – and they’re doing it behind closed doors.

CompUSA Best Sellers

Hundreds of millions of secret dollars are pouring into congressional and state races in this election cycle. The Koch brothers (whose personal fortunes grew by $5 billion last year) appear to be behind some of it, Karl Rove has rounded up other multi-millionaires to fund right-wing candidates, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is funneling corporate dollars from around the world into congressional races, and Rupert Murdoch is evidently spending heavily.

No one knows for sure where this flood of money is coming from because it’s all secret.

But you can safely assume its purpose is not to help America’s stranded middle class, working class, and poor. It’s to pad the nests of the rich, stop all reform, and deregulate big corporations and Wall Street – already more powerful than since the late 19th century when the lackeys of robber barons literally deposited sacks of cash on the desks of friendly legislators.

Credit the Supreme Court’s grotesque decision in Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Commission, which opened the floodgates. (Even though 8 of 9 members of the Court also held disclosure laws constitutional, the decision invited the creation of shadowy “nonprofits” that don’t have to reveal anything.)

According to FEC data, only 32 percent of groups paying for election ads are disclosing the names of their donors. By comparison, in the 2006 midterm, 97 percent disclosed; in 2008, almost half disclosed.

Last week, when the Senate considered a bill to force such disclosure, every single Republican voted against it – thereby revealing the GOP’s true colors, and presumed benefactors. (To understand how far the GOP has come, nearly ten years ago campaign disclosure was supported by 48 of 54 Republican senators.)

Maybe the Disclose Bill can get passed in lame-duck session. Maybe the IRS will make sure Karl Rove’s and other supposed nonprofits aren’t sham political units. Maybe pigs will learn to fly.

In the meantime we face an election that marks an even sharper turn toward plutocratic capitalism than before – a government by and for the rich and big corporations — and away from democratic capitalism.

As income and wealth has moved to the top, so has political power. That’s why, for example, it’s been impossible to close the absurd tax loophole that allows hedge-fund and private-equity managers to treat much of their income as capital gains, subject to a 15 percent tax (even though they’re earning tens or hundreds of millions a year, and the top 15 hedge-fund managers earned an average of $1 billion last year). Why it proved impossible to fund expanded health care by limiting the tax deductions of the very rich. Why it’s so difficult even to extend George Bush’s tax cuts for the bottom 98 percent of Americans without also extending them for the top 2 percent – even though the top won’t spend the money and create jobs, but will blow a $36 billion hole in the federal budget next year.

The good news is average Americans are beginning to understand that when the rich secretly flood our democracy with money, the rest of us drown. Wall Street executives and top CEOs get bailed out while under-water homeowners and jobless workers sink.

A Quinnipiac poll earlier this year found overwhelming support for a millionaire tax.

But what the public wants means nothing if our democracy is secretly corrupted by big money.

Right now we’re headed for a perfect storm: An unprecedented concentration of income and wealth at the top, a record amount of secret money flooding our democracy, and a public in the aftershock of the Great Recession becoming increasingly angry and cynical about government. The three are obviously related.

We must act. We need a movement to take back our democracy. (If tea partiers were true to their principles, they’d join it.) As Martin Luther King once said, the greatest tragedy is “not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.”

What can you do?

1. Read Justice Steven’s dissent in the Citizens United case, so you’re fully informed about the majority’s pernicious illogic.

2. Use every opportunity to speak out against this decision, and embarrass and condemn the right-wing Justices who supported it.

3. In this and subsequent elections, back candidates for congress and president who vow to put Justices on the Court who will reverse it.

4. Demand that the IRS enforce the law and pull the plug on Karl Rove and other sham nonprofits.

5. If you have a Republican senator, insist that he or she support the Disclose Act. If they won’t, campaign against them.

6. Support public financing of elections.

7. Join an organization like Common Cause, that’s committed to doing all this and getting big money out of politics. (Personal note: I’m so outraged at what’s happening that I just became chairman of Common Cause.)

8. Send this post to your friends (including any tea partiers you may know).

Check out our Famous Guide to Liberal News & Politics on the Web, the best guide to where to find "The Truth" in the news around the web.


Check out Paul’s Playlist of 231 Rock and Pop Hits, and have fun with all the artists you love while you surf the web.


NEW! For our readers: Check out our 40 song "Only Classic Rock Playlist", now on its own page!


Follow Evans Liberal Politics and Paul Evans on
Twitter logo link for Evans Liberal Politics on Twitter

Follow Paul Evans on
Facebook logo link to follow Paul Evans on Facebook

We’re Counting on YOU! Please share Evans Liberal Politics with friends! While we enjoy a certain level of popularity on the web, in order for us to keep bringing you the latest in liberal news and politics, we really need you to SHARE Evans Liberal Politics with your friends and contacts. Can you help us today? If you value liberal and progressive ideas and politics, please simply share Evans Liberal Politics with friends and contacts to keep free, independent and liberal journalism alive. Thanks in advance.

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

31 Percent Unemployment is What I Think Of When I Hear the Expression ‘Compassionate Convervatism’

Evans Liberal Politics
September 5, 2010

 

31 Percent Unemployment is What I Think Of
When I Hear the Expression ‘Compassionate Convervatism’

 

Investment in American Workers and American Jobs:
Chances Are It’s Not Going to Happen

 

Evans Liberal Politics, September 6, 2010, Commentary by Evans Liberal Politics owner Paul Evans:

What the CEO’s and big business are doing now is really shameful.

Skyscraper - Pharmacy Checker Approved and CIPA certified Online Pharmacy
small photo of Evans Liberal Politics owner wearing his favorite Obama hat, from February, 2009

Companies are sitting on a record amount of money (capital from profits at their disposal in record amounts), which they could reinvest in workers and jobs and new equipment, but the business leaders have all decided that would not make them as much money as downsizing until America starts buying again. It’s more profitable now to invest in Chinese and Indian plants and workers and ship the items overseas, where we American’s buy all the plastic crap from Wal*Mart, than it is to have American workers make products.

The main reason we are stuck in the Great Recession for the indefinite future is that America — and here I mean the middle class, or what used to pass for it — CANNOT start buying again until the economic climate improves and workers again can get hired and find better jobs. A quarter of our homes are "under water" and many of the rest of them have debt attached to them, and we have no sources left to tap into for cash to even think about buying luxuries any more. Most of us are barely getting by, if that. The unemployment rate a few months ago for Americans making less than $20,000 a year stood at 31 percent, and it isn’t getting any better anytime soon, folks. Of COURSE we aren’t buying goods! No buying power until the economy improves.

So it’s a vicious cycle, but it’s the business community’s greed that is the problem. (Business profits are actually up, as are CEO salaries, big time.) If the American business community would just use its huge amounts of ready cash and INVEST in American workers and American jobs, EVERYONE would do better, including American businesses. But they will not do this although it is an easy option for them. What investment IS taking place is happening overseas, where Ford and GM, for example, are investing heavily in Chinese plants. American workers want to have a decent life, have expectations of a decent lifestyle, and cost more than Chinese workers, even when you factor in the shipping costs.

The Republican business community speaks of the need to deregulate business and industry so it can again be profitable. If you want to be sick to your stomach, just look at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s page on what they want for so-called "regulatory reform". If you want to see what deregulation and corruption about it did under Bush and Cheney in the oil and gas industry (leading directly to the BP oil spill disaster), read Cheney’s Culture of Deregulation and Corruption, AP on the Center for American Progress, June 9, 2010. The claim is that only once the business community stands deregulated and free to act as irresponsibly as they wish, can the economic climate improve.

This is a huge LIE. Business is very profitable now, Wall Street is doing fine, and profits were up in 2009. (This is actually a big part of the problem. The bailout worked fine for Wall Street and big business, but why should Wall Street or Exxon care if we American workers suffer while profits are good?) Americans have this silly thing called the American dream and workers make three, four and five times what Chinese and Indian workers make. It seems obvious that only if government steps in and makes the tax and economic climate favorable for investment IN AMERICA, for American workers and American jobs, can a true economic recovery take place. The only ways to do this involve government intervention and changes to the tax code. In other words, REGULATING business and forcing it to invest in America. The chances for that now seem to be slim to none.

31 percent unemployment for the poor and greed like this is what I think of when someone speaks of "compassionate conservatism." Let’s face it folk, the business community is pretty thoroughly Republican, and it is their greed and failure to care at ALL what happens to Americans and how much we suffer, which is at fault for all this. ~ Paul Evans

See Surfing in Style through the Great Recession, Campaign for America’s Future on Evans Liberal Politics, September 6, 2010, by Sam Pizzigati: Business Executives Slash Jobs to Win Higher Pay, Promotions.

See Yves Smith’s Op-Ed On Myopic Corporate Greed In Today’s NYT, Daily Kos on Evans Liberal Politics, July 6, 2010, by Bob Swern.

See 1938 in 2010, The New York Times, September 5, 2010, by Paul Krugman, excerpt quoted verbatim:

Even under F.D.R., there was never the political will to do what was needed to end the Great Depression; its eventual resolution came essentially by accident.

I had hoped that we would do better this time. But it turns out that politicians and economists alike have spent decades unlearning the lessons of the 1930s, and are determined to repeat all the old mistakes. And it’s slightly sickening to realize that the big winners in the midterm elections are likely to be the very people who first got us into this mess, then did everything in their power to block action to get us out. Emphasis added

But always remember: this slump can be cured. All it will take is a little bit of intellectual clarity, and a lot of political will. Here’s hoping we find those virtues in the not too distant future.

small thumbnail photo of Paul Krugman serves as a link for his 2007 talk, Income Inequality and the Middle Class "Income Inequality and the Middle Class:" Paul Krugman explains to us that income equality is made or unmade by the political climate, not circumstances. – 7:15

Check out Paul’s Playlist of 183 Rock and Pop Hits, and have fun with all the artists you love while you surf the web.

Truthout Articles Celebrating Labor Day:


See The Face of Labor in the Streets (Photo Essay), Truthout, September 6, 2010, by David Bacon.

See Trumka: Most Crucial Election in 75 Years, Truthout, September 6, 2010, by Dick Meister.

See Poor Labor Day Gets No Respect. It’s the Rodney Dangerfield of Holidays., Buzzflash Blog, September 5, 2010, by Will Durst.

Also See Social Security and Medicare Don’t Make Hard Times, Military Spending and Tax Cuts for the Rich Do, Buzzflash Blog, September 6, 2010, by BuzzFlash.

Follow Evans Liberal Politics and Paul Evans on
Twitter logo link for Evans Liberal Politics on Twitter

Follow Paul Evans on
Facebook logo link to follow Paul Evans on Facebook

We’re Counting on YOU! Please share Evans Liberal Politics with friends! While we enjoy a certain level of popularity on the web, in order for us to keep bringing you the latest in liberal news and politics, we really need you to SHARE Evans Liberal Politics with your friends and contacts. Please help us out — we bring you the latest in liberal and progressive news and politics just to share the truth and promote liberalism. Can you help us today?

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

Robert Reich: Why Boehner’s Blaming Bureaucrats

Evans Liberal Politics
August 27, 2010

 

Robert Reich: Why Boehner’s Blaming Bureaucrats

 

Why Boehner’s Blaming Bureaucrats, Robert Reich.org, August 26, 2010, by Robert Reich, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

CompUSA Best Sellers

We’re moving ever closer to a double-dip. Of course, as I’ve said before, most Americans never got out of the first one.

In previous postings I’ve suggested ways to reverse course, including a “people’s tax cut” exempting the first $20K of income from payroll taxes and making up the revenue loss with a payroll tax on incomes over $250,000.

Yet Democrats seem frozen in the headlights of conservative supply-siders, blue-dog deficit hawks, and pollsters who say the public doesn’t trust anything government does.

As to Republicans, now comes John Boehner, capitalizing on this distrust by blaming the bad economy on government bureaucrats.

In an address billed as a major speech on economic policy, the House GOP leader (on) Tuesday attributed our economic woes to the fact that “taxpayers are subsidizing the fattened salaries and pensions of federal bureaucrats who are out there right now making it harder to create private sector jobs.”

What?

It’s true workers at all levels of government now earn more than their private-sector counterparts. But that’s mainly because private-sector benefits have dropped precipitously over the last few years. Companies have replaced defined-benefit pensions with do-it-yourself 401(k)s, and have ratcheted up premiums, co-payments, and deductibles on employee health-care. Government workers’ benefits haven’t yet been sliced the diced these ways, but the cuts are coming.

The pay gap is also due to the fact that the typical public-sector job requires more education. According to the Center for State and Local Government Excellence, 48 percent of state and local employees have a college degree while only 23 percent of private-sector employees do.

Blaming government workers for this bad economy is absurd, regardless. The Great Recession continues because consumers can’t and won’t spend. They’re overwhelmed with credit-card debt, their mortgages are under water, their nest eggs have become chick peas, and they can’t afford health insurance.

Rather than help alleviate all this, Boehner and his Republican colleagues have been busily voting against extending unemployment insurance, against reorganizing mortgages under bankruptcy, against forcing credit card companies to stop charging exorbitant interest, and against giving Americans affordable health insurance.

As far as I can tell, all Republican want to do is to privatize Social Security, extend the Bush tax cuts to the richest 3 percent of Americans, and deregulate. But none of this seems particularly relevant to the task at hand.

Privatizing Social Security would put retirees entirely at the mercy of the Wall Street casino.

Extending the Bush tax cuts to the richest 3 percent wouldn’t stimulate demand because the very rich save rather than spend most of their extra cash.

And if anything we need more rather than less regulation. Just consider BP’s oil spill, Massey’s mine cave-in, DeCoster’s rotten eggs, Goldman Sach’s predations, and Wellpoint’s double-digit insurance premium increases.

Boehner delivered his speech at the City Club of Cleveland, a safe distance from those government employees he says are on the make. But of course Boehner is a federal employee. He gets $193,400 a year along with generous retirement benefits. In fact, he has among the fattest salaries and pensions in Washington.

InformIT (Pearson Education)

Follow Evans Liberal Politics and Paul Evans on
Twitter logo link for Evans Liberal Politics on Twitter

Follow Paul Evans on
Facebook logo link to follow Paul Evans on Facebook

We’re Counting on YOU! Please share Evans Liberal Politics with friends! While we enjoy a certain level of popularity on the web, in order for us to keep bringing you the latest in liberal news and politics, we really need you to SHARE Evans Liberal Politics with your friends and contacts. Please help us out — we bring you the latest in liberal and progressive news and politics just to share the truth and promote liberalism. Can you help us today?
Please consider making a $5 or $10 donation to Evans Liberal Politics. We bring you the news and all things liberal for free out of love of people and liberalism, but a fellow has to eat! See Help a Christian Family in Need. The button to donate via PayPal is located at the top right of every page (or use this handy link), and your kind help is greatly appreciated.

*****

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

We’re Counting on You!
Tell Your Friends About Evans Liberal Politics!

Listen to 180 Rock and Pop Hits!


Paul's Playlist of the best streaming rock, pop and electronic music

Our Playlist is #1 Rated by Google

America Still Needs Elizabeth Warren, And The Bank Lobby Is Still Lying About Her

Evans Liberal Politics
August 9, 2010

 

America Still Needs Elizabeth Warren
And The Bank Lobby Is Still Lying About Her

 

America Still Needs Elizabeth Warren, And The Bank Lobby Is Still Lying About Her, Campaign for America’s Future, August 7, 2010, by Zach Carter, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

Of all the accomplishments Elizabeth Warren has amassed during her lifetime, one of the most impressive is also one of the least well-known to the general public. Warren was a co-founder of Credit Slips, a very technical, influential blog on banking and bankruptcy. She hasn’t blogged there since taking up her post as Chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, but a review of her posts reveals a set of truths that Warren’s opponents in the bank lobby do not want to acknowledge. While Wall Street bankers like to smear Warren as an ideologically driven crusader, Warren’s blogging reveals her to be the exact opposite: a serious student of economic evidence, eager to embrace good ideas from any source.

Click the Magic Dollar Sign
to Visit Our Electronic
Rock Playlist! – 164 Songs
#1 Rated by Google

A magic dollar sign serves as a link to Paul's Playlist – Listen to hours of streaming rock, pop and electronic music

Take a look at this post from September 2008, in which she praised economists Greg Mankiw and Ken Rogoff. Both of these economists are, let’s say, unpopular among liberals. Mankiw was chair of President George W. Bush’s council of economic advisors, and Rogoff is an alum of the International Monetary Fund, where he pushed draconian cuts in social programs in developing nations in the name of balanced budgets.

But it turns out that both Mankiw and Rogoff had something interesting to say at a forum back in September 2008. And what did Elizabeth Warren have to say about it? She calls them “interesting,” “terrific,” “calm,” and “funny.” She doesn’t blast them for their backgrounds with institutions that are generally reviled by progressives, she just emphasizes that they’re serious thinkers who are making good points about the role the bank bailout played in the economy:

Greg’s work with the current administration and Ken’s background with the IMF and on the Board of the Federal Reserve add a certain credibility to their assessments of conditions on Wall Street. If they are right, the $700 bailout is saving some investment bankers’ jobs in the short term, but overall it is just making the financial system worse.

Aside from seeking out common ground with aggressive conservatives, Warren also displays a deep-rooted intellectual curiosity throughout her blog postings. One of the most obnoxious bank-lobby smears against Warren is that she doesn’t fully appreciate the benefits of financial innovation, and that she’ll cut off useful credit to poor people by pushing overzealous consumer protection. Even some otherwise respectable bloggers have taken up the chant, without really bothering to investigate whether there’s any shred of truth to it. Even a casual browsing of Warren’s blog work reveals this to be a silly charge.

In a post from May 2008, she details a Wells Fargo customer who was quite clearly ripped off by her bank. Warren provides a very cautious analysis of the situation. While Wells Fargo’s actions were an obvious disgrace to the bank itself and the regulatory regime, the appropriate response is not obvious. Maybe the kind of product Wells Fargo was selling should be banned outright. Maybe it should only be provided with more rigorous disclosures. Maybe consumers should have to ask for the product before bankers are allowed to discuss it. The point is, Warren isn’t eager to claim that an obviously abusive product should simply be banned—she wants to make sure that policymakers don’t unnecessarily cut off credit to well-informed adults who want it.

Again and again, Warren reveals herself to be a devout student of data in her blog work. It isn’t sexy, it sure as hell doesn’t traffic in the broader blogosphere, but it’s the mark of someone who truly cares about getting it right, rather than merely developing a set of popular talking points. Warren clearly loves reading economic papers on the effects of various credit policies, and determining their effects on both individuals and society at large. That’s exactly what we need from a bank regulator, especially at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

You can find all of Warren’s Credit Slips blogs here. I’ll be highlighting more of her blogging in future pieces, but it’s clear from these posts alone that she is not an ideological crusader. This fact, in truth, is why the bank lobby so fervently opposes putting her in a position of regulatory authority. For decades, all of our bank regulators have been driven by ideological agendas. They’ve aggressively pursued any policy that creates short-term profits for Wall Street, under the view that anything that generates money for Wall Street is expanding credit in society and furthering productive economic growth. President George W. Bush even appointed a bank lobbyist to the top regulatory post in the nation. The results of this plan were disastrous, as everyone living through the current recession can attest.

Of course, there is an alternative to appointing regulators who will always put bankers and brokers first. We need a rigorous scholar who cares about finding the right policies to elevate the middle class and further healthy economic growth. We need Elizabeth Warren.

Zach Carter lives in Washington, D.C. He is a Fellow a Campaign for America’s Future and Economics Editor for AlterNet. His work has appeared in The Nation, Mother Jones, The American Prospect and Salon.

Follow Evans Liberal Politics and Paul Evans on
Twitter logo link for Evans Liberal Politics on Twitter

Follow Paul Evans on
Facebook logo link to follow Paul Evans on Facebook

We’re Counting on YOU! Please share Evans Liberal Politics with friends! While we enjoy a certain level of popularity on the web, in order for us to keep bringing you the latest in liberal news and politics, we really need you to SHARE Evans Liberal Politics with your friends and contacts. Please help us out — we bring you the latest in liberal and progressive news and politics just to share the truth and promote liberalism. Can you help us today?

Please consider making a $5 or $10 donation to Evans Liberal Politics. We bring you the news and all things liberal for free out of love of people and liberalism, but a fellow has to eat! See Help a Christian Family in Need. The button to donate via PayPal is located at the top right of every page (or use this handy link), and your kind help is greatly appreciated.

*****

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

We’re Counting on You!
Tell Your Friends About Evans Liberal Politics!

Listen to 164 Rock and Pop Hits!


Paul's Playlist of the best streaming rock, pop and electronic music

#1 Rated by Google

Congress Begins the Final Push on Financial Regulation

FragranceNet.com

Evans Liberal Politics
June 1, 2010

 

Congress Begins the Final Push on Financial Regulation

 

Congress Begins the Final Push on Financial Regulation, Truthout, May 31, 2010, by David Lightman and Kevin G. Hall of McClatchy Newspapers, excerpt quoted verbatim:

Washington – The fate of the biggest overhaul of the nation’s financial regulatory system in generations now rests with a small group of Capitol Hill lawmakers who are known for their ability to compromise.

In early June, negotiators from the Senate and the House of Representatives are expected to begin work on merging two competing but similar visions for revamping the way the government regulates banks and financial markets.

Sen. Sanders: Deregulation Lead to
Financial Crisis and BP Oil Disaster


The Senate passed its version of the legislation on May 20; the House approved its bill last December.

“This is one of the rare occasions when the two bills are really very close to each other. There’s not a great deal of difference,” said Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.

Even if they’re in the ballpark on the big issues, the two bills have some significant differences.

For example, while both chambers favor the creation of an equivalent of the Consumer Product Safety Commission for consumer credit products such as mortgages, student loans and credit cards, they’d go about it differently.

The House would create a new, standalone agency called the Consumer Financial Protection Agency; the Senate envisions a Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection within the Federal Reserve.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce hopes to weaken the bill during the negotiations, arguing that the new consumer panel’s leader would have powers beyond those of other government agency heads.

“I don’t know that I’m going to persuade people that my approach to consumer protection is the right way, but we should have a debate about having this much power concentrated in one individual,” said David Hirschmann, senior vice president at the Chamber.

Assistant Treasury Secretary Michael Barr, an intellectual author of the consumer panel, countered that there are numerous checks built into the creation of the new independent agency. It’ll have public rulemaking, must conduct cost-benefit analyses on measures it proposes, and the agency head would serve at the pleasure of the president and require Senate confirmation.

“We’re in fundamental disagreement with the Chamber on this point,” Barr said.

Also contentious is whether auto dealers should be subjected to the consumer panel’s rules. Consumer advocates argue that some auto dealers make more money from lending than they do from selling cars.

“The whole point of this agency is to make sure that lenders have to play by better rules and be fairer,” said Travis Plunkett, legislative director for the Consumer Federation of America.

Pointing to support from the Pentagon, which thinks that auto lenders have preyed on servicemen and servicewomen, Plunkett added that resolving the dealer exemption “is going to be all about raw political power.”

House and Senate lawmakers agree with the auto dealers, who argue that they didn’t cause the financial crisis and aren’t financial institutions. The House bill exempted car dealers; the Senate bill didn’t, but a majority of senators have voiced support for the exemption.

Another battle will be over complex financial instruments called derivatives, which helped cause the near meltdown of financial markets in 2008. The Senate bill would force banks to spin off their derivatives businesses, but the Obama administration and House lawmakers think that goes too far and could prove disruptive.

The Senate language came out of the Agriculture Committee, where Arkansas Democrat Blanche Lincoln, the chairman, faced a primary challenge and wanted to show voters she was tough on Wall Street. Lincoln now faces a June 8 runoff, a day after the Senate returns from its Memorial Day recess — freeing her, and Democrats, from having to keep up the appeal to Arkansas liberals.

Congressional leaders, with the help of the White House, have chosen a bipartisan team of negotiators, called conferees, who’re likely to find common ground on these issues quickly.

…SNIP…

Among the reasons for the unusually conciliatory mood surrounding the talks:

_ Politics: “If I were a Republican, I’d be hard pressed to vote against financial regulation,” said Burdett Loomis, professor of political science at the University of Kansas, especially less than six months before congressional elections. Politicians must show they can get tough with Wall Street, erasing voters’ memories of the unpopular 2008 bailouts of troubled financial firms.

_ Bipartisanship: Dodd and Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, the top committee Republican, made sure during this month’s debate that the two parties alternated offering amendments. As a result, some major GOP changes were accepted, such as Florida Sen. George LeMieux’s plan to instruct government agencies to stop relying solely on credit ratings when measuring creditworthiness.

_ The Players: Dodd and Frank will lead the committee, and both have a long history of working with Republicans on major legislation. Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., will participate, even though it’s unusual for a junior member of the Senate to be included in such talks. Corker was involved earlier this year in compromise efforts, complaining later that his views were largely ignored.

Check out our new page of specially selected liberal movies, available for instant download from Amazon.com, with reviews.

*****

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top.

We know, if you come here repeatedly,
you like Evans Liberal Politics. So, all we ask is that you
Tell Your Friends About Evans Liberal Politics!

98 Smokin’ Electronic Rock and Pop Tracks
(Listen to hours of music while you surf the web!)


Paul's Playlist of the best streaming electronic rock and pop

#1 Rated by Google


Have You Listened to Us Lately?

Robert Reich: What You Can Do to Bring Wall Street Under Control

Evans Liberal Politics
May 27, 2010

 

Robert Reich: What You Can Do
To Bring Wall Street Under Control

 

What You Can Do to Bring Wall Street Under Control, Robert Reich.org, May 28, 2010, by Robert Reich, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

The most important remaining battle to rein in Wall Street is over Senator Blanche Lincoln’s measure to stop the big banks from being subsidized by taxpayers for their risky derivative trades. Miraculously, it’s still in the bill but it’s on life support. The bill has now gone to the conference committee where differences between the House and Senate bills are to be ironed out.

But official Washington (read: dependent on Wall Street for money) is dead set against it. Even Barney Frank — who Massachusetts voters used to consider a reliable progressive until he became chair of the House Financial Services Committee — has vowed to kill Lincoln’s provision. And the White House says the measure is “not core,” which in Washington-lingo means “you’re free to dump it.”

Big, big money is at stake.  Wall Street’s five largest banks have a corner on the trade, raking in about in about $30 billion in over-the-counter derivatives last year. It’s the single largest reason they’re too big to fail. So they’re spending like mad on Washington lobbyists and campaign donations in order to keep the subsidy in place. (Lincoln’s provision doesn’t force them to give up derivative trading, by the way; it only forces them to do it in a separate entity that doesn’t get subsidized by deposit insurance or the Fed’s discount window).

All the guns are aimed at this measure. But it’s still possible that the people can prevail, if we’re organized and active. Here’s a list of all the Dems on the Senate Banking and House Finance Committee, as well as Republican conferees. All conferees are indicated by ->.

Organize and mobilize your friends and acquaintances, especially those who live in these states or districts, to call their members and make their voices heard. Tell them you want Lincoln’s measure (Section 716 of the Senate bill) to remain in the final bill. Say you’ll hold them responsible if it goes.


Alabama -> Senator Richard C. Shelby (202) 224-5744

Arkansas -> Senator Blanche Lincoln (202) 224-4843

California -> Rep. Maxine Waters (202) 225-2201 (California-11)
    Rep. Brad Sherman, CA (202) 225-5911
    Rep. Jackie Speier, CA (202) 225-3531
    Rep. Joe Baca, CA (202)225-6161

Colorado -> Senator Michael Bennet (D-CO) (202) 224-5852
    Rep. Ed Perlmutter, CO 202.225.2645

Connecticut -> Chairman Christopher J. Dodd (D-CT) (202) 224-2823
    Rep. Jim Himes, CT (202) 225-5541

Florida -> Rep. Ron Klein, FL (202) 225.3026
    Rep. Suzanne Kosmas, FL (202) 225-2706
    Rep. Alan Grayson, FL (202) 225-2176

Georgia -> Senator Saxby Chambliss 202-224-3521
    Rep. David Scott, GA (202) 225-2939

Hawaii -> Senator Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI) (202) 224-6361

Idaho -> Senator Mike Crapo (202) 224-6142
Rep. Walt Minnick, ID (202) 225-6611

Illinois -> Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez (202) 225-8203 (Illinois-4)
    Rep. Melissa L. Bean, IL (202) 225-3711
    Rep. Bill Foster, IL (202) 225-2976

Iowa -> Senator Tom Harkin (202) 224-3254

Indiana -> Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) (202) 224-5623
    Rep. Joe Donnelly, IN (202) 225-3915
    Rep. Andre Carson, IN 202-225-4011

Kansas -> Rep. Dennis Moore (202) 225-2865 (Kansas-3)

Massachusetts -> Chairman Barney Frank (202) 225-5931 (Massachusetts-4)
    Rep. Michael E. Capuano, MA (202) 225-5111
    Rep. Stephen F. Lynch, MA (202) 225-8273

Minnesota -> Rep. Keith Ellison, MN (202) 225-4755

Mississippi -> Rep. Travis Childers, MS (202) 225-4306

Missouri -> Rep. Gary Peters, MI (202) 225-5802

Montana -> Senator Jon Tester (D-MT) (202) 224-2644
    Rep. William Lacy Clay, MO (202) 225-2406
    Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, MO 202.225.4535

New Jersey -> Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) (202) 224-4744
    Rep. John Adler, NJ (202) 225-4765
    Rep. Scott Garrett (NJ) (R) (202) 225-4465

New Hampshire -> Senator Judd Gregg (202) 224-3324
    Rep. Paul W. Hodes, NH (202) 225-5206

New York -> Senator Charles E. Schumer (202) 224-6542
    Rep. Gregory W. Meeks 202/225-3461 (New York-6)
    Rep. Nydia M. Velázquez, NY (202) 225-2361
    Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, NY (202) 225-5516
    Rep. Dan Maffei, NY (202) 225-3701

North Carolina -> Rep. Melvin L. Watt (202) 225-1510 (North Carolina-12)
    Rep. Brad Miller, NC (202) 225-3032

Ohio -> Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) (202) 224-2315
    Rep. Charles Wilson, OH (202) 225-5705
    Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy, OH (202) 225-2015
    Rep. Steve Driehaus, OH (513) 684-2723

Oregon -> Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR) (202) 224-3753

Pennsylvania -> Rep. Paul E. Kanjorski (202) 225-6511 (Pennsylvania-11)

South Dakota -> Senator Tim Johnson (202) 224-5842

Tennessee -> Senator Bob Corker (202) 224-3344

Texas -> Rep. Rubén Hinojosa, TX (202) 225-2531
    Rep. Al Green, TX (202) 225-7508
    Rep. Jeb Hensarling (TX) (R) (202) 225-3484

Wisconsin -> Senator Herb Kohl (D-WI) (202) 224-5653
    Rep. Gwen Moore, WI 202-225-4572

Vermont -> Senator Patrick J. Leahy (202) 224-4242

Virginia -> Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) (202) 224-2023

Comment by Evans Liberal Politics owner Paul Evans: It’s easy – and it’s a huge cop out, to say to yourself, I’m just one person, I don’t really matter in this whole thing. And it’s dead wrong.

Evans Liberal Politics had a post on May 2, 2010 called Inspirational Thoughts for a Sunday. This being a Sunday, there’s no time like the present to give you just a few relevant quotes for inspiration. Call your friends and get everybody together and make some phone calls. You probably want to wait until tomorrow (Monday) as the Congressional offices are basically closed for the weekend. (Use the email this post feature by loading the individual article from the small title at the top of the article. Or you might print this out, because these are the “swing” Congressmen whose vote is crucial to passing liberal and progressive legislation; you might want to refer to these phone numbers in the future.):

Check out Evans Liberal Politics new page of feature length famous liberal movies, with reviews, available for immediate download from Amazon.com.

“The best time to plant a tree was always 20 years ago. The second best time is always today.” ~ old Chinese saying

“Destiny is not a matter of chance, It’s a matter of choice; It’s not a thing to be waited for, It’s a thing to be achieved.” ~ William Jennings Bryan

“Someone once asked me why do you always insist on taking the hard road? and I replied why do you assume I see two roads?” ~ unknown

“The thing always happens that you really believe in; and the belief in a thing makes it happen.” ~ Frank Lloyd Wright

“I’m a great believer in luck, and I find the harder I work the more I have of it.” ~ Thomas Jefferson

“I have the audacity to believe that peoples everywhere can have: three meals a day for their bodies, – education and culture for their minds – and dignity, equality and freedom for their spirits.” — Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. — And that’s why I am a liberal. ~ Paul Evans

On political activisim: “If you think you’re too small to be effective, you’ve never been in the dark with a mosquito.” — source unknown.

Given to us by GreenSooner over at DailyKos: “Policies that were wrong under George W. Bush are no less wrong because Barack Obama is in the White House.” – Bob Herbert

“To be what we are, and to become what we are capable of becoming, is the only end of life.” ~ Robert Louis Stevenson

Attention Readers!

About Comments on Evans Liberal Politics: Sorry to bring this up but a few bad apples spoil it for everyone. In the first place, I have some kick ass anti-spam operating on the comments, and if your comment has a link to a website, 98 percent of them get kicked into my spam comment folder. In other words, those comments only post if I individually approve them and move them from the spam folder. So you people from the same websites that sell stuff and keep posting comments like “Great post, keep up the good work”…. Do you really think I don’t remember the website the individual commenter has come from? I’ve been nice about it, but here’s the rule. If you’re pushing a commercial site and post some comment that consists of nothing but some generic praise, you’re going to get one such comment and then I’m not going to move any more such comments from you out of the spam folder. Would you? What I’d really like to see are some comments which actually discuss the topic of the article…. Let’s get real, people!

Study Finds Supplements Contain Contaminants

Evans Liberal Politics
May 8, 2010

 

 

 

Study Finds Supplements Contain Contaminants

 

Study Finds Supplements Contain Contaminants, © The New York Times, May 25, 2010, by Gardiner Harris, excerpt quoted verbatim:

Nearly all of the herbal dietary supplements tested in a Congressional investigation contained trace amounts of lead and other contaminants, and some supplement sellers made illegal claims that their products can cure cancer and other diseases, investigators found.

an overturned pill bottle and some pills atop a layer of twenty dollar bills highlights this article on pharmaceuticals

The levels of heavy metals — including mercury, cadmium and arsenic — did not exceed thresholds considered dangerous, the investigators found. However, 16 of the 40 supplements tested contained pesticide residues that appeared to exceed legal limits, the investigators found. In some cases, the government has not set allowable levels of these pesticides because of a paucity of scientific research.

Investigators found at least nine products that made apparently illegal health claims, including a product containing ginkgo biloba that was labeled as a treatment for Alzheimer’s disease and a product containing ginseng labeled as a treatment to prevent diabetes and cancer. They also described a salesperson at a supplement specialty store who claimed that a garlic supplement could be taken instead of blood pressure medication.

Any product that claims to treat, cure, prevent or mitigate a disease is considered a drug and must go through strict regulatory reviews.

The report, which was prepared by the Government Accountability Office, was provided to The New York Times and will be made public at a Senate hearing on Wednesday. Its release comes two weeks before the Senate is scheduled to begin debate on a landmark food safety bill that is expected to substantially increase the federal government’s authority over food manufacturers.

Click the pretty lady
to Visit Paul’s Playlist for
Great Rock & Pop Sounds!

a pretty brunette draped only in an American flag serves as a link to Paul's Playlist of great streaming electronic rock and pop music

But it is uncertain how tough the bill will be on supplement manufacturers, and it has been the subject of fierce lobbying. Capitol Hill staff members familiar with the process said the bill was unlikely to include provisions opposed by supplement manufacturers.

Dr. Joshua M. Sharfstein, principal deputy commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, said in an interview that he was not concerned about the safety of the supplements tested by the G.A.O. investigators. But Dr. Sharfstein noted that the agency had recently announced a recall of Vita Breath, a dietary supplement that it said might contain hazardous levels of lead.

Steve Mister, president of the Council for Responsible Nutrition, a trade association representing the dietary supplement industry, said it was not surprising that herbal supplements contained trace amounts of heavy metals, because these are routinely found in soil and plants. “I don’t think this should be of concern to consumers,” Mr. Mister said.

Senator Herb Kohl, a Wisconsin Democrat who will preside over Wednesday’s hearing of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, said that while improvements had been made in recent years in the oversight of supplements, “the F.D.A. needs the authority and tools to ensure that dietary supplements are as safe and effective as is widely perceived by the Americans who take them.” ….

Read the full article, here.

Commentary by Evans Liberal Politics owner Paul Evans  This is a $25 billion a year industry, and I imagine the lobbying over regulation of it is pretty fast and furious. However, you need to consider that while the FDA does need to investigate and in some cases regulate the claims made by dietary supplements, these are in most cases naturally derived items which come from herbs and minerals, in other words they come from the earth. This explains why for example there are heavy metals in them, as you would expect from something grown out of the ground.

We do need regulation of the industry, but we need to be careful, too. I myself take a number of supplements. For example, Saw Palmetto is an excellent treatment and prophylaxis for urinary tract health for men, yet regulating it has made the herb marketed in such a weak strength that you really need to take it in over strength for it to be effective. The Seminole Indians chewed Saw Palmetto as their men became older and there is no real downside to taking more than is suggested, at least a little, so far as I can see. Did you know that at least in origin, aspirin comes from the bark of willow trees?

Dietary supplements are something like the internet in the nineties, or the Wild Wild west. Right now it’s “let the buyer beware”. So yes, let’s have the FDA regulate these supplements, but let’s not have them be too strict and disallow people the freedom to put into their bodies what is their own choice. Many people, for example, believe garlic supplement is very beneficial, just as described above. One needs to remember that what medicines operate in certain ways on some people will not do so on everyone, either. I know that I certainly think of my dietary supplements as medicine and am just as careful with them as I would be with a prescription. I also know, on the other hand, that claims regarding the benefits of sexual enhancement drugs are legendary. Likewise, even birth control pills are controversial.

Watch Women’s Sexual Health: Sex Drive & The Birth Control Pill, Does The Pill Ruin Sex for Girls?, Evans Liberal Politics, YouTube video, May 13, 2010 – 7:00. We do need the right to put into our bodies what we choose to…. and to deal with the worst offenders in the field of dietary supplements. ~ Paul

Read an article by the Food and Drug Administration about dietary supplements and thier regulation.

Read Will New Food Safety Bills Really Outlaw Backyard Gardening and End Farmers’ Markets?, AlterNet, April 6, 2010, by Ari LeVaux, excerpt quoted verbatim:

My inbox has been pummeled in recent weeks by a barrage of emails warning me of the evils of HR 875, a bill currently working its way through Congress. Sponsored by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn), the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009 was one of several bills introduced in the wake of the peanut butter-borne salmonella outbreak. Each of these bills ostensibly seeks to improve food safety with increased regulation.

Critics, paranoid and level-headed alike, point to the disproportionate burden that increased regulation places on small farmers, and many wonder if the banner of food safety is being used as a Trojan horse to create a more favorable business climate for corporate agriculture.

“If [HR 875] passes, say goodbye to organic produce, your Local Farmer’s market and very possibly, the GARDEN IN YOUR OWN BACKYARD!!!!!” announced one email.”

Another warned that HR 875 would result in “…criminalization of seed banking, prison terms and confiscatory fines for farmers.”

And of course, no serious foodie conspiracy theory would be complete without Monsanto as the architect: “DeLauro’s husband Stanley Greenburg works for Monsanto!” claim nearly all of these emails.

Read The Newest Diet Trend: What Would Jesus Eat, AlterNet, February 6, 2010, by Anneli Rufus.

Read The Need for Regulation of Dietary Supplements—Lessons From Ephedra, Journal of the American Medical Association, March 10, 2003, by Phil B. Fontanarosa, MD; Drummond Rennie, MD; Catherine D. DeAngelis, MD, MPH.

Rand Paul’s Crazy BP Oil Spill Comments

Evans Liberal Politics
May 23, 2010

 

 

 

Rand Paul’s Crazy BP Oil Spill Comments

 

Rand Paul (Libertarian leader Ron Paul’s son) recently polled ahead of Sarah Palin for President and must be reckoned with as something of a force in right wing politics now. However he can’t stop putting his foot in his mouth… and the main reason is that his ultra-libertarian, pure right wing views are outside of the mainstream of American society. Recent comments to just totally trust BP and not have regulatory agencies regulate are just more of the same. So actually he’s not putting his foot in his mouth, he just believes all those crazy things that get him in trouble. The amazing thing is that perhaps 20 percent of Americans agree with him. A dangerous man… (with a very annoying voice, too).

See Liberated from Libertarianism: Rand Paul Runs and Hides from … Rand Paul, OpEdNews, May 22, 2010, by David Michael Gree.

Also see Oil Spill Might Be Message From God – Ted Turner, which actually doesn’t sound so terribly crazy to me. Isn’t it time to get off our dependence on hydrocarbon fuels (oil, gas and coal)? Shouldn’t we be pushing solar and wind power? On the other hand, probably BP’s money-grubbing safety failures had something to do with it right? Now who wants to trust BP with the cleanup?

I think all of us, as Americans, need to follow exactly what happens about the cost of the cleanup for the Gulf Oil spill. Just how badly will BP try to get off the hook for the cost? They can’t just go along and pretend that their stocks shouldn’t take a bit hit and that they shouldn’t show a loss for a couple of quarters…. I mean they are trying to MAKE money by using their sweetheart deal Corexit dispersant for cleanup, when several other less toxic, more effective dispersants are readily available: IF profit weren’t all they cared about. And Rand Paul comes along and screams about the EPA clamping down about this…. Ridiculous. If (and when) BP tries to get out of paying the full costs for ALL entities involved in cleaning this up, then it’s time for America to boycott BP gasoline. It’s not like there aren’t other gas stations out there, right? If BP wants to play hardball about this, then let America raise it’s voice and just say NO to BP.