Tag Archives: Newt Gingrich

Pop Quiz:
What would America look like under Rep. Ryan’s (R-Wis.) radical, Tea Party-inspired
budget?

A. A typical 65-year-old would spend $6,359 more
per year out of pocket for health care by 2022 because Medicare’s promise would
be replaced with underfunded vouchers.

B. At least 15 million people
would lose Medicaid health care.

C. $4.2 trillion in new
tax cuts would be handed out mostly to corporations and the rich.

D. All
of the above.

If you
answered D, all of the above, you’re right. The House Republican budget would do
all of those things.

All but four House Republicans voted for
this radical proposal. The
Senate will consider it this week.

How many Senate Republicans
will vote to give even more tax cuts to Wall Street and the wealthy and pay for
them by cutting deeply into services for seniors, children and low- and
middle-income working families?

Let’s make sure every
U.S. senator knows this “right-wing social engineering” bill—which is what
former GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich recently called Rep. Ryan’s
budget—is not used as a starting point for a debate over America’s
future.

Here’s how you can help stop this
radical, Tea Party-inspired budget:

Forward this message to five friends—ask them to oppose the Ryan budget and make
sure it gets voted down in the Senate.

In
Solidarity,

Manny Herrmann
Online Mobilization Coordinator,
AFL-CIO

P.S. Want to read more about the Ryan budget? Read and share the full post on the AFL-CIO Now
Blog.

Sources:
http://blog.aflcio.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/medicare_costs_by_state.pdf
http://blog.aflcio.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/medicaid_losses_by_state.pdf
http://www.aflcio.org/issues/jobseconomy/jobs/upload/house_budget2012.pdf

~ politics petitions pollution and pop culture

“I Now Hope This Deal Fails”: Conservatives Divide

12/12/2010 Nativegrl77

“I Now Hope This Deal Fails”: Conservatives Divided on Tax Compromise

http://mediamatters.org/research/201012120006

In the wake of last week’s announcement of a compromise between the Obama administration and congressional Republicans on the extension of the Bush tax cuts, the leaders of the right-wing media has fractured into a camp that supports the deal and a camp that fervently opposes it.

Gingrich, Kristol, Wall Street Journal Line Up In Favor Of Deal That Is “Good For The Economy”

Newt Gingrich: Tax Deal Is “A Great Victory For American People And GOP Leadership.” From former Speaker Newt Gingrich’s Twitter feed on December 7:

Bill Kristol: “This Is A Very Good Deal From A Conservative Point Of View.”

CHRIS WALLACE: Is this deal good for the economy? And what about the question of adding basically another trillion dollars to our debt?

KRISTOL: Yes it’s good for the economy. Keeping– Some of us have been arguing for a year that keeping current tax rates where they are is much better than allowing them to rise. A cut in the payroll tax cut– the payroll tax has been something conservatives have always thought was one of the best taxes you could cut on labor, especially– It’s a tax cut on labor in a time of high unemployment. The estate tax is what Jon Kyl, a leading Senate conservative, has been for, that tax cut, the estate tax compromise is what he’s been arguing for for years. So, there are a few things in the deal that most of the conservatives won’t like, but this is a very good deal from a conservative point of view. Jim DeMint, who’s against the deal because he’s against sort of any deal, I think honestly, Jim DeMint said that Senator McConnell had gotten “the best deal we could get,” he said. I agree with that. [Fox News Sunday, 12/12/10]

Wall Street Journal: “This Deal Is Superior To Anything We Could Have Imagined Six Months Ago.” From an editorial in the December 8 edition of the Wall Street Journal:

Should Republicans have held out for more, since they would return in January with a stronger position? We wish they had won a longer extension, kicking the next possible tax hike further into the future. As it is, Mr. Obama made clear on Monday that he’ll try again to raise taxes in 2013, figuring he’ll be politically stronger if the economy improves. The growth policy victories here are partial and temporary.

Yet this deal is superior to anything we could have imagined six months ago. Much credit goes to Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans for holding together against the class war attacks of Chuck Schumer and other Democrats. By holding firm, they divided the opposition. This proves again that Republicans win the economic debate when they make the case for lower taxes for everyone in the name of faster growth and job creation. [Wall Street Journal, 12/8/10]

Limbaugh, Palin And Others Say “Tax Compromise Must Now Die”

Erickson: “The Tax Compromise Must Now Die.” In a December 10 post on RedState.com, blogger and CNN contributor Erick Erickson said that the tax deal reached by President Obama and the Republican Party was “loaded up with budget busing pork of ridiculously absurd levels” and urged readers to call their senators and tell them to oppose it. He wrote:

But the deal must now die. It must now be opposed by Republicans. Released now in print, the legislation is loaded up with budget busting pork of ridiculously absurd levels. The attachments to the compromise represent everything wrong with Washington. Many of them mirror the same porkulus spending in TARP.

The GOP must now say no. GO TO THE REDSTATE ACTION CENTER RIGHT NOW and call your Senator.

The legislation contains a huge amount of pork, some in the form of tax extenders that only the most coin-operated of conservatives can really defend. It even has ethanol subsidies. Put it to you this way — with the logic of those vocally calling for support of these earmarks, if the Democrats gave a tax credit for abortion, you’d have these same conservative groups defending them. No, that is not an exaggeration.

The tax compromise already busted the budget with the unemployment extension. Ultimately, all the Republicans were getting anyway was keeping current income tax rates.

They now need to walk away from the table. Call now. [Redstate.com, 12/10/10]

Limbaugh: “I Now Hope This Deal Fails.” From the December 10 edition of Premiere Radio Networks’ The Rush Limbaugh Show:

It’s hard to break old habits, folks. Especially in Washington. Even the Republican leaders have been part of this system for decades. False deadlines, foolish deals: they’ve become the rule, and it need not be. I now hope this deal fails. I say it, directly and officially.

If the deal fails, the Democrats are in control, so it is they who will be raising taxes. Let the tax rates go up on January 1. Let ’em go up. Wait for our cavalry to show up and deal with this the right way. They had two years to deal with this. They’ve had the two years of Obama’s presidency to deal with this. And they haven’t. On purpose. They want the tax rates to go up. And we’re buying– They’re selling, really, in any great shakes, we agree to two years of the tax rates not changing? How about permanently, the tax rates not changing? Then we’ll talk to you.

Two years? And we’ve got thirteen more months of unemployment? But that– The only way you can describe that thirteen months is, look at all the spending that is. That’s new spending. Three years. Now, of unemployment compensation benefits. In exchange for a 35% death tax, a 2% cut in the payroll tax, and two years of tax rates on income not changing.

They had two years to deal with this. The new Congress coming in will fix it. If the GOP leadership will allow it. [Premiere Radio Networks, The Rush Limbaugh Show, 12/10/10]

Krauthammer: Tax Cut Deal Is “The Swindle Of The Year.” In a December 10 Washington Post column, Krauthammer wrote “Barack Obama won the great tax-cut showdown of 2010.” He went on to write:

If Obama had asked for a second stimulus directly, he would have been laughed out of town. Stimulus I was so reviled that the Democrats banished the word from their lexicon throughout the 2010 campaign. And yet, despite a very weak post-election hand, Obama got the Republicans to offer to increase spending and cut taxes by $990 billion over two years. Two-thirds of that is above and beyond extension of the Bush tax cuts but includes such urgent national necessities as windmill subsidies.

No mean achievement. After all, these are the same Republicans who spent 2010 running on limited government and reducing debt. And this budget busting occurs less than a week after the president’s deficit commission had supposedly signaled a new national consensus of austerity and frugality.

Some Republicans are crowing that Stimulus II is the Republican way – mostly tax cuts – rather than the Democrats’ spending orgy of Stimulus I. That’s consolation? This just means that Republicans are two years too late. Stimulus II will still blow another near-$1 trillion hole in the budget.

At great cost that will have to be paid after this newest free lunch, the package will add as much as 1 percent to GDP and lower the unemployment rate by about 1.5 percentage points. That could easily be the difference between victory and defeat in 2012.

Obama is no fool. While getting Republicans to boost his own reelection chances, he gets them to make a mockery of their newfound, second-chance, post-Bush, Tea-Party, this-time-we’re-serious persona of debt-averse fiscal responsibility.

And he gets all this in return for what? For a mere two-year postponement of a mere 4.6-point increase in marginal tax rates for upper incomes. And an estate tax rate of 35 percent – it jumps insanely from zero to 55 percent on Jan. 1 – that is somewhat lower than what the Democrats wanted. [Washington Post, 12/10/10]

The Hill: Palin “Came Out Against The Tax-Cut Deal President Obama Brokered With Republicans.” From a December 8 blog post on TheHill.com:

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) on Wednesday came out against the tax-cut deal President Obama brokered with Republicans.

The potential 2012 presidential candidate endorsed a Twitter post that applauded Sen. Jim DeMint’s (R-S.C.) criticism of the deal.

“Thank you, @JimDeMint – DeMint comes out against tax deal, says GOP must do ‘better than this,'” reads the message from conservative commentator Jedediah Bila. [TheHill.com, 12/08/10]

From Sarah Palin’s Twitter feed, December 8:

Contact

~ politics petitions pollution and pop culture

Temper tantrum -repost-

10/18/2010 Nativegrl77

Last month, Republican Senate candidate Joe Miller said that Republicans must have the “courage to shut down the government.” Republican Congressman Steve King recently demanded a “blood oath” from House Minority Leader John Boehner to ensure the full repeal of health care reform — even if it means shutting the government down.

And former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, mastermind of the disastrous government shutdowns of the 1990s, has been crowing about a potential shutdown for months.

For Republicans, what once seemed radical is now wholly in the mainstream.

Even worse, they are pulling in huge donations from special interests who are comfortable with a shutdown that hurts the American people — so long as it gets them what they want.

We won’t stand by and watch this happen — and that’s why we’re growing the By the People Fund.

Grassroots Democrats have given 2.9 million donations to show that our voices won’t be drowned out by special-interest donations to fuel a special-interests agenda. Now we need to keep up the pace to reach our goal of 3 million individual donations — we need 20,000 contributors this week to hit the mark.

Can you donate $5 to help us keep growing the By the People Fund today?

All around the country this fall, Republicans are trying to convince voters to hire them for a job. But they keep saying that one of the first items on their agenda would be to go on strike.

A government shutdown would cut off the programs, benefits, and services relied upon by millions of seniors, veterans, and families around the country. Veterans’ hospitals would be closed; Social Security checks would not go out.

This is the political equivalent of a temper tantrum — and it hurts those who need help the most.

With just more than 40 days until the election, it’s time for us to step up.

We’ve got organizers on the ground in all 50 states, and we’re doubling down on efforts to register new voters and turn out the supporters who’ve helped us win all across the country.

The meaningful changes we’ve fought for and won have always been built on the energy and support of people like you.

So if you’ve been wondering when might be the best time to pitch in where you’re able, the time is now. And if you’re sick and tired of the notion that simply because Republicans are yelling louder, we are willing to go quietly — then it’s time for you to raise your voice.

I know that we can win this fall — but it’s going to take all of us.

Please donate $5 or more to the By the People Fund today:

http://my.democrats.org/Shutdown

Thanks,

Governor Tim Kaine
Chairman

~ politics petitions pollution and pop culture

Reality need not apply

10/08/2010 Nativegrl77

Reality need not apply: Fox continues to deny aid to poor is stimulative

http://mediamatters.org/research/201010070027

Fox News hosts and contributors have recently dismissed estimates of food stamp programs’ stimulative effect on the economy as “some strange multiplier effect study,” “liberal math” and a “complicated economic multiplier theory.” In fact, economists agree that food stamps are one of “the most effective ways to prime the economy’s pump.”

Malkin, Gingrich and Varney all dismiss economic theory to continue attacking food stamps

Malkin falsely claims “the only thing that these programs stimulate, of course, is a bigger government.” On the October 7 edition of Fox News’ Fox & Friends, co-host Steve Doocy stated that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said of food stamps: “It is the biggest bang for the buck when you do food stamps and unemployment insurance.” Fox News contributor Michelle Malkin replied by saying she would “like to know which economist [House Speaker Nancy Pelosi] is talking to. Of course, she’s promoting some strange multiplier effect study to argue this.” Malkin concluded by falsely claiming “the only thing that these programs stimulate, of course, is bigger government.”

Varney dismisses economic consensus regarding stimulative nature of food stamps as a “complicated economic multiplier theory.” Earlier on Fox & Friends, Fox Business Network anchor Stuart Varney dismissed Pelosi’s statement as “the complicated economic multiplier theory that they’re bringing in here.” Varney claimed “the evidence that’s before us” showing that a high proportion of the unemployed are on food stamps and unemployment is still high shows “it would seem you don’t get bigger bang for the buck.”

Varney hosts Santorum to attack food stamps and claim that “the numbers are phony.” On the October 7 edition of Fox Business Network’s Varney & Company, contributor Tracy Byrnes attributed Pelosi’s claim to “the health care calculator that they use…the keys are not working correctly if she’s thinking this is the best bang for our buck.” Fox News contributor Rick Santorum then stated of Pelosi’s claim: “So if that’s the case, why don’t we turn the whole economy over to the government have them pay out all of this money and have a great multiplier effect. It doesn’t work and in fact there have been studies done show just the opposite.” Santorum further claimed “I don’t know where she’s getting the funny numbers, the calculator is not working as Tracy said, but the numbers are phony.”

Gingrich: “I don’t understand how liberal math turns one dollar into $1.79.” On the October 6 edition of Fox News’ On the Record with Greta Van Susteren, Fox News contributor Newt Gingrich said:

I carry around a bumper sticker that says two plus two equals four, so I’d be very curious how a dollar given to somebody becomes $1.79. And I think if we could get that to work at the U.S. Treasury, so if people gave the treasury $1,000, it became $1,790, we could pay off the federal debt and never worry about spending or anything. Somehow, I don’t understand how liberal math turns one dollar into $1.79.

Economists widely acknowledge stimulative nature of food stamps

Elmendorf: “Nutrition assistance” would “have a significant impact on GDP.” In January 27, 2009, written testimony before the House Budget Committee, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf stated that “[t]ransfers to persons (for example, unemployment insurance and nutrition assistance) would … have a significant impact on GDP.” He added: “Because a large amount of such spending can occur quickly, transfers would have a significant impact on GDP by early 2010. Transfers also include refundable tax credits, which have an impact similar to that of a temporary tax cut.”

Zandi: “[E]xtending food stamps are the most effective ways to prime the economy’s pump.” In his July 24, 2008, written testimony before the House Committee on Small Business, economist Mark Zandi, who advised John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign, stated that “extending food stamps are [sic] the most effective ways to prime the economy’s pump.” Zandi further explained: “People who receive these benefits are very hard-pressed and will spend any financial aid they receive within a few weeks. These programs are also already operating, and a benefit increase can be quickly delivered to recipients.” Zandi included with his testimony a table stating that a “Temporary Increase in Food Stamps” had the highest “Fiscal Economic Bank for the Buck” of any other potential stimulus provision he analyzed, providing a $1.73 increase in real GDP for every dollar spent.

Attack is the latest in Fox’s ongoing assault on aid to poor and unemployed

Fox regularly ignores economic consensus to attack unemployment insurance. As Media Matters has noted, Fox regularly ignores economic consensus and analysis to baselessly attack unemployment insurance. For example:

On February 22, Hannity falsely suggested the Federal Reserve said unemployment benefit extension increased unemployment.
During the May 15 edition of Fox News’ Bulls & Bears, host Brenda Buttner claimed Americans were “turning down good paying jobs to stay on unemployment. I wish I were kidding.” During the tease, the on-screen graphic said “Cut off freeloaders?”
On July 2, Fox & Friends guest host Alisyn Camerota didn’t understand the “logic” behind Pelosi’s claim that unemployment insurance “injects demand into the economy” and “is a job creator.” Guest co-host Clayton Morris said that “would love to know what economists say that.” Co-host Dave Briggs claimed there were a “few holes in that logic to say the least.”
On the July 15 edition of Fox News’ Fox & Friends, co-host Brian Kilmeade hosted Partnership Staffing Inc. CEO Bill Auchmoody, who claimed that unemployment benefits prevent unemployed workers from searching for jobs. During the segment, Kilmeade played Pelosi’s comments and asked Auchmoody to comment. Auchmoody stated: “I don’t know how an unemployment check creates jobs. You know, businesses create jobs. The economy and the government getting out of the way, in my opinion, helps create jobs.” Kilmeade concluded the interview by telling Auchmoody that “maybe” the elimination of “unemployment benefits will get people to sober up and take some of your offers.”
On the August 10 edition of Glenn Beck, Beck said “Nancy Pelosi actually made the point that unemployment payment stimulate [sic] the economy.” After playing the clip, Beck suggested Pelosi was wrong that unemployment insurance creates jobs by saying “have you ever worked for a guy who was saying ‘hang on just a second, I’m going to pay you out of my unemployment check.”
On the August 31 edition of Fox & Friends, Fox Business host Stuart Varney cited a Wall Street Journal op-ed by Harvard economics professor and Hoover Institute senior fellow Robert Barro to claim that, in Varney’s words, “If we had not extended unemployment benefits to 99 weeks from the standard 26 weeks, [Barro] says, unemployment would be at 6.8%, not the 9.5%.” According to Varney, Barro argued that “you extend benefits like this and it discourages people from going out to look for work especially, you know, the start of the benefit period because it’s nearly two years.”
On the September 16 edition of Fox News’ Fox & Friends, Stuart Varney attacked the unemployed by falsely claiming that rises in disability were due to the unemployed committing fraud. In fact, what led to the increase in claims from 2008 to 2009 was legislation that President Bush signed into law in 2008, which changed the ways that the requirements for being disabled could be interpreted. The growth in the program was expected and is the result of intentional changes to policy which make it easier to qualify.
During the September 29 edition of Fox & Friends, co-host Gretchen Carlson asked “when will the government turn off government spending and extend tax cuts to stimulate the private sector.” Carlson was referring to a program that “directly paid the salaries of unemployed people so they could get jobs in government, at nonprofit organizations and at many small businesses.

~ politics petitions pollution and pop culture

Here is your AFSCME Federal Legislative Report

09/25/2010 Nativegrl77

Welcome to the AFSCME Federal Legislative Report which is produced by the Legislation Department weekly when Congress is in session. We hope you find this report as valuable as we do in keeping up to date on significant action by the U.S. Congress affecting AFSCME members. We know when we work together as a team we accomplish more for AFSCME members across the country.

Gerald W. McEntee, President
Lee A. Saunders, Secretary-Treasurer

AFSCME LEGISLATIVE REPORT
SEPTEMBER 24, 2010

To view on the AFSCME website, click here

In this issue:

Republican House Members Release “Pledge” to Return to Failed Policies
Senate Takes Up Campaign Finance Legislation – Again
Democrats Vote to Protect Labor Elections Rules
Republicans Block Repeal to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”
Congress Fails to Approve Multiyear FAA Bill

Republican House Members Release “Pledge” to Return to Failed Policies

On Thursday, House Republicans unveiled their pre-election campaign document, “A Pledge to America,” which is modeled after Newt Gingrich‘s 1994’s Contract with America. For the most part, it is set of warmed over, failed ideas aimed at voters for the midterm elections in November.

The document’s jobs and economy section calls for more tax cuts for millionaires and businesses by retaining all of the Bush tax cuts, rejecting President Obama’s plan to eliminate tax cuts for those earning above $250,000 to capture $830 billion in revenues. It calls for slashing spending by cutting the federal budget back to 2008 spending levels, which would mean a 21 percent reduction in yearly-appropriated programs including more than $8 billion in cuts in K-12 education and significant reductions for Head Start, child care, public safety, unemployment insurance and Employment Services, transportation, and other vital public services that AFSCME members provide. House Republicans also support canceling unspent Recovery Act funds, including the increased federal Medicaid match (FMAP) that now is available to states through June 30, 2011 and cannot be drawn down by states any faster than quarterly.

Not surprisingly, the document calls for a repeal of health care reform, putting insurance companies back in control. This would result in ending safeguards against skyrocketing premium increases, increasing the cost of prescription drugs for seniors, abandoning initiatives to improve health care, and ensuring that the ranks of the uninsured continue to grow. Instead, the House Republicans offer a litany of retread, failed ideas including expanding health savings accounts, allowing individuals to purchase health insurance across state lines, and medical malpractice reform.

The “Pledge” takes a swipe at the Employee Free Choice Act, stating: “We will fight for the rights of workers and oppose ‘card check’ schemes that put union bosses before individuals’ right to a secret ballot.” It requires that all federal legislation cite the constitutional authority upon which the bill is justified (another jab at health reform), makes it easier to strip spending out of appropriations bills, and proposes increased spending for national security, including fully funding missile defense.

The plan has been roundly criticized by the White House and congressional Democrats as “nothing more than a repackaging of the same failed special interest policies that caused this recession: cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires; cut rules for big corporations and special interests and leave the middle class to fend for itself” and “giv[ing] insurance companies control over Americans’ health care.

Rather than charting a new course, it is a continuation of the failed Bush economic policies. Interestingly, the plan says little about Social Security and Medicare, including Republicans’ privatization schemes, probably in recognition that this is a political third rail.
(Fran Bernstein- fbernstein@afscme.org)

Senate Takes Up Campaign Finance Legislation – Again

Thursday, Senate Democrats took another shot at moving their flawed version of the DISCLOSE Act (S. 3628) campaign finance legislation aimed at addressing the U.S. Supreme Court‘s decision in the Citizen’s United case. Fortunately, the bill failed to garner the 60 votes needed to begin debate. The vote was 59 to 39, with all Republicans opposing the bill and all Democrats supporting it.

While AFSCME supports reasonable requirements for disclosures and disclaimers of the Union’s political and advocacy activities, we were forced to oppose the Senate bill due to extraordinarily burdensome requirements it would impose on AFSCME affiliates.

Unlike the House bill, the Senate bill creates substantial burdens for AFSCME affiliates for the mere act of transferring membership dues to AFSCME. While the bill does not require local unions and state affiliates to make reports to the Federal Election Commission, the bill does require AFSCME to report on revenues received by affiliates and to do so within a 24-hour deadline. In order for AFSCME to make these reports, it would be necessary for affiliates to provide information on its revenue sources during the previous year and to do so quickly enough for AFSCME to meet the 24-hour deadline. The bill includes civil and criminal penalties for violating the reporting requirements

The House previously approved its version of the DISCLOSE Act (H.R. 5175). It does not create burdensome requirements for AFSCME affiliates.
(Barbara Coufal- bcoufal@afscme.org)

Democrats Vote to Protect Labor Election Rules

Senate Democrats defeated a resolution of disapproval that proposed rejecting the National Mediation Board’s (NMB) amended election rules for airline and rail union elections. The resolution would have overturned revised union election procedures recently issued by the NMB under the Railway Labor Act (RLA). The new rule makes clear that representation elections under the RLA will be decided based on whether a majority of the votes cast are for or against the union. Under the previous NMB rule, all workers who did not cast a ballot were counted as voting against the union. The changes, which went into effect on July 1, advanced a simple democratic proposition: the majority opinion of workers who participate should decide the election.

The challenge to the National Mediation Board’s updated union election procedures was led by Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA) in an attempt to undo reforms that are giving tens of thousands of airline and rail workers the hope of a union fighting for them for improved wages and retirement security. Earlier in the day, President Obama issued a statement that he would veto the resolution if it passed.
(Cynthia Bradley- cbradley@afscme.org)

Republicans Block Repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”

This week, Senate Republicans blocked an attempt to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy that prohibits gays and lesbians from openly serving in the U.S. military. By a vote of 56-43 Democrats lost an attempt to have a vote on the Defense Authorization Act, which contains language repealing DADT. The Democrats fell below the 60 votes needed to proceed. The Arkansas Democrats, Sens. Blanche L. Lincoln and Mark Pryor, sided with all 40 Republicans present in opposing debate.
(Cynthia Bradley- cbradley@afscme.org)

Congress Fails to Approve Multiyear FAA Bill

On September 23, the House and Senate both passed clean extensions for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) through the end of the calendar year. This action sends a clear signal that approving a multiyear reauthorization of the FAA bill will not happen before Congress adjourns in October.
(Cynthia Bradley- cbradley@afscme.org)