Chambliss And Nelson ???

So John King of CNN has Chambliss and Nelson on as champions of the "Gang of Six" plan? That is just wonderful, Right and Righter as champs. Maybe you can figure out why legislation today winds up to the right of '70s GOPers. You got a health care reform plan right out of the GOP opposition to Hillary Care that is now Obama sCare and banking reform that is that in name. Go down the damn list and tell me why I should listen to a single thing Nelson has to say as a Democrat.

Democrats will define themselves for pretty much a generation with what they do. Wanna make any bets?

If you think the plutocrats will be in the least inconvenienced by anything Chambliss and Nelson won't oppose or that the poor and working class won't get the knife in the process you are an optimist of real proportions.

OK, I'll hold fire ... for awhile. I know DC gives a damn if I just up and quit.

BTW - "Gang" is probably charitable as an appellation.

GOPers And Debt

The GOPers seem to be in hostage taking mode or in the position of dead hostages don't matter. Either position works for opposing Democrats. Now it does seem as though almost all economists are scared spitless of default and yet a good sized piece of the GOPers are stating publicly that it just doesn't matter. Another piece simply don't seem to be able to follow the numbers from the BushCo tax cuts sufficiently to have reason get into play.

The dead hostage bunch likes to make the case that the President has the ability to decide who gets paid, which is true. The problem is that a ten percent whack to the GDP will result in a serious crash no matter who gets paid what. They will tell their ignorant true believers that the crash happened because the President made the wrong (ie socialist) choices. They win with their nut-base no matter what when the crash comes.

The hostage takers are betting that the President and Democrats will blink (or more correctly swerve in the game of chicken). What they ignore at their peril is that Democrats would be committing electoral suicide to swerve. Not just some, but almost all of them, and the polls are real clear. They also manage to ignore that doing anything about the deficit without taking back some of the gifts to the plutocrats is impossible. Electorally the consequences to them depend on whether they can continue to successfully play their "job killing tax increases" mythology to their base and some "middle" voters in the face of what history says since BushCo did it.

It is my guess that the President and a bunch of Democratic legislators believe some sort of reason will seap into the ranks of the GOP. I see a complete lack of evidence of such a thing. Most of us have zero ability to do anything to prepare for the consequences of a failure of that optimism. It seems the results will be either a car crash involving a tree or a long fall off a cliff depending on default or cave in and the same 27%ers* will be cheering - despite what happens to them.

*Those who'd be crushed by drastic cuts will also continue to not vote - either from GOP disenfranchisement or apathy. The GOP** knows it and counts on it.

**So do the "Ben Nelsons" of the Democratic world.

Democrats Will Define Themselves

Thanks to the bullpucky argument about the debt ceiling (this is debt not new expenditures) the deficit hawks and others in the GOP will force Democrats to define themselves. I'd say it is the case that Democrats don't want to define themselves as shown by their behavior over the past couple years (or hell - decades). I don't suppose there's much debate that the GOPers have defined themselves as the Party of Theocracy and Plutocracy with their voters opting for one or the other of those defining features.

While the Democrats have shown little inclination (through results) to do something other than coddle the Plutocrats, there has been a continuing mythology that it is the party of the ordinary citizen. What the GOPers have managed with the debt ceiling nonsense* is to force, through the application of a gun to the head approach, the Democrats to actually take some kind of public stand. It seems the GOPers are unwilling to let them weasel out of the defining business.

What I have decided to do is to let this month's nonsense play itself out and see just how the Democrats do define themselves. Since they've already caved to the idea that the existing debt/debt ceiling is the budget I don't have a lot of optimism for what that definition is going to be.**

*you can certainly include WI, OH, FL, & ETC

**certain definitions could make me willing to join the the ranks of "as if it matters"

Don't expect much in the line of posts... Heh - you already don't.

Democrats Lose By Joining Cuts Jabber

Congress and then the White House have budget difficulties to deal with along with a looming debt ceiling problem. There sure are a lot of issues at play in this mess but one thing is real clear, spending and revenue are out of joint - pretty seriously. You sure can try to address such a problem from only one edge, but that does mean that half results ensue or unacceptable consequences ensue.

The second Democrats start to talk about cuts, sensible cuts, or any kind of cuts without taxation reform they have accomplished two things that are bad for them and the nation. First they have ceded to the one side approach and the two prong approach simply disappears. Secondly by engaging in cuts dialogue they put themselves into comparison with the GOPer while admitting that cutting is the way to go.

Any approach that involves simple humanity in relation to cutting by itself will result in virtually nothing and assuage no one concerned with the budget without slamming military spending (not gonna happen). Democrats cannot with any conscience or hope of electoral success slam hell out of people who are already over the edge or going over and the GOP gives a damn. The Democrats cannot look as though they are doing anything and will at the same time make quite a few lives just enough more difficult to take a lot of heat. Some people will notice that wealth makes out and poverty increases and the only people who will care an iota aren't voting GOP.

In order to end DADT and get a START treaty the Democrats let the BushCo tax cuts get extended. In order to get a treaty nobody opposed for any principle whatever and to get a policy that affects a vanishingly small minority of the nation revenue was decreased. Any attempt to cover that lost revenue will badly harm a hell of a lot more people who cannot take it than DADT would over years of extension. If you think I in anyway ever supported DADT you're ... well, way wrong. But that is now the proposition Democrats face if they go to cuts alone. The plain politics of it is that they would lose a lot more votes than they gained. Was DADT flat wrong, yes - was the mechanism also flat wrong, yes; and that is what you get when you do deals with the Devil.

Our tax code is so completely skewed to the favor of absolute wealth that leaving it in that state is damn near criminal and will continue to crush the economy of this nation. It is simple enough to understand that wealth will always do well short of fires and murder. It is not difficult to stay wealthy in a system that operates with capitalism at its base and I don't have a real big problem with that since most of us can benefit as well. We do not benefit as well, but the operative word is can. The fault is not with a system based on capitalism, it is the matter of making sure that not even crumbs fall off that capitalistic table. This is the crux of what Democrats face - well that and the reaction of wealth.

Democrats pretty much take anyone left of Obama for granted as voters because they have nowhere else to go and the alternative is generally nasty enough to get them to vote. It may be the case that the 2010 election results showed Democrats that a campaign of "not as bad as" can have bad results. There is also the aspect that the results of 2010 scare the hell out of anybody left of Genghis Khan. I would not want to bet on how that tension plays out and I'd sure think Democrats sure shouldn't unless smashing the country to teach us a lesson is part of the thinking.

I don't think many Democrats expect much in the line of taxation reform and that they'll go along with essentially half-measures. What I don't see them going along with is absolutely nothing done other than a ball bat taken to the poor, disabled, and disadvantaged. It no longer matters how many lies the GOP tells about "job creators" in the wealth category, only a few deluded souls believe it.

I'd like to see President Obama re-elected and Congress in responsible hands other than GOPers but there really should be some reason to do it.

GOP Defining Insanity

One of the "recovery community's" sayings has to do with insanity. 'Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.' In regard to the "modern" GOP is would seem that both they and the voters suffer from mind boggling insanity. If it just stopped with a political party it would be bad enough.

What just kills me is that over the past four decades the GOP drives the country into a ditch and the Democrats partly dig it back out and the voters put the GOP back into that driver's seat. They then proceed to crash the car again and we're in a worse position than before since it was only partially repaired previously. As your shampoo bottle says, "wash, rinse, repeat."

I admit to some pretty strong feelings about the Democrats' inadequate ability or dedication to putting the wheels back on the wrecked car. I sure the hell don't understand, even with all the social warfare crap, the voters' decisions as demonstrations of sanity. Other than their self-labeling I cannot understand the idea of the GOP as being fiscally responsible and I sure can't see how their victims see it.

GOP Budget "Balancing"

Lately there's been a lot of rhetoric and even proposed bills that are based on the "morality" of deficits or the absolute requirements of State governments to keep budgets neutral. Somehow "budget crisis" doesn't mean shit about budgets and the revenue stream versus expenses.

You could start looking at this from the point of extending the BushCo tax cuts for everybody; whether they could afford it or not. Once that head-scratcher went through - damn near everything else follows because the issue is no longer about a budget.

Go ahead and look at the Federal GOP's ideas about correcting the budget, then move on to the various states that are or aren't in the news. Michigan has escaped the notice of the news world and offers up some real meat. Wisconsin and Ohio and to an extent Florida have caught a bit of notice. Everywhere you turn there are tax cuts and slash and burn in general public interest items. Buried inside all this shit are ideological/plutocratic agendas like union busting or even, in Michigan, town busting.

None of the real issues of budgetary considerations are addressed. Those of you who've accused me of being an excessive partisan can kiss my ass. BYW - you GOPlite (D)s can line up right behind them.

Tax Bracket Stupidity

Marginal Tax Rate[3] Single Married Filing Jointly or Qualified Widow(er) Married Filing Separately Head of Household
10% $0 – $8,350 $0 – $16,700 $0 – $8,350 $0 – $11,950
15% $8,351– $33,950 $16,701 – $67,900 $8,351 – $33,950 $11,951 – $45,500
25% $33,951 – $82,250 $67,901 – $137,050 $33,951 – $68,525 $45,501 – $117,450
28% $82,251 – $171,550 $137,051 – $208,850 $68,525 – $104,425 $117,451 – $190,200
33% $171,551 – $372,950 $208,851 – $372,950 $104,426 – $186,475 $190,201 - $372,950
35% $372,951+ $372,951+ $186,476+ $372,951+

If you look at this table of Federal Tax Brackets you begin to understand how the government looks at wealth. Keep in mind that "marginal tax rates" apply only to the portion of income that exceeds the ceiling of the previous bracket. The gazillionaire pays 10% on his Adjusted Gross up to $8,350 and then he pays 15% on the amount from 8,351 on to ... etc. Once you make $372,951 you pay 35%, after all your deductions and excluding capital gains (on which you pay 15%) right up to ... well, gazillions.

Now somehow there is sufficient difference, $25,600, in incomes between 10% and 15% to justify a 5% increase in tax liability. There is no difference in income once you make $372,951, the government can't see it. As an individual you'll sure the hell see a difference in how you're treated and frankly the budget deficit sees it. If you toss the Alternative Minimum Tax into the picture you'll pretty quickly start to get some negative ideas.

Don't get me started on the idea that the SS/FICA tax with employer "contributions" at nearly 16% applied to all income up to $106,000 and nothing beyond doesn't have implications.

Which part of the fact that tax policy is not just about a budget, but also about behavior is it that misses most people? You do understand that in a given year there is a finite amount of income to be made in this year and that when some one person takes out huge amounts there is less left to go around. The fact that things like AMT and tax brackets aren't tied to median income amounts each year but rather to fixed dollar amount further states the problem.

Deficit Idiocy

Sometimes you want to smash your head into something when you hear about "popular" concerns like the deficit.

This graph of what programs people want cut versus their percentage of the budget from The Washington Independent (h/t Newshoggers) ought to create that reaction amongst everybody including the GOP. The problem is that each little bunch has their preferred devils and their angels and none of it has anything to do with reality. Can this deficit spending continue? No, it cannot and this graph makes it obvious that taxes are the only solution that the public will tolerate despite their denials.

If you're gonna Teabag this post, point out which of these you propose to affect.

The GOP And Dunce Caps

Since the roll out of the Republican Road to Recovery Budget plan Thursday I've seen people wondering when the GOP became the Party of Epic Fail - how we lost to them or what happened to the ones we lost to? I suppose it's fair to postulate that the Republicans have gotten so used to being stenographed by the media that they didn't realize that running out a Budget that was lacking any numbers beyond a goofy tax cut wouldn't cut it with the media because it said mean things about the 'Democrat Party' budget. Maybe they thought that between Boehner's Faux Tan (is he now darker than Obama?) and Cantor's star power nobody would notice the entire and complete lack of information and the silliness of whatever those circles were supposed to be. [in the spirit of honesty the crew at Balloon Juice gets credit for some of the humor]


But the topic was "how did they get this bad?" There is a little matter of when the last time they had to do any work occurred. Bill Clinton presented certain challenges to the Republicans in Congress, he was a good politician and he was President, since then... George II (Rove) told them what to do and like good little soldiers they did. Thinking was not required and the only political calculations required were just exactly how to scare the electorate a little more this week. There is something to be said for practice in politics and having more than one arrow in your quiver. Multiple approaches bring experience in what works and doesn't, how to modify and tweak, and how to capitalize on successes. Try real hard to remember the last time they had to do the work of governing.

Most of the moderate Republicans are gone, the 2010 Senate race may well take out most of what's left of them. Spector has shifted right to stave off a Primary challenge and it may be a question whether he can, but he has now lost a lot of credit with the electorate outside the right wing. Maine voters are going to be asked why they're hanging on to not quite Democrats when they could have the actual thing - not a bad question if the country is looking better. Boehner and Cantor are creatures of the right and while they know how to lie and be snotty and hold their caucus together in the matter of actual public discourse around ideas - not so much.

Why they took the school yard dare tossed at them by the President is open to question, it certainly isn't smart strategy to provide something that should have numbers without them or to provide numbers that can be tested. Statements of ideology absent numbers aren't really testable in the public argument unless the opposing side makes them up. The Republican mess masquerading as a budget cannot pass that kind of scrutiny when providing its own numbers, it is flatly impossible to dump out of the federal budget sufficient funds to cover not only the Bush hole but the accumulating hole going forward created by Bush policies. The Republicans are providing nice fat targets for Democrats.

Medicaring Insurance Companies

Insurance companies bid for Medicare and the GAO says the government can recoup over payments. It seems that Medicare doesn't do it, about $59 million in 2003, when they audited 49 of 220 providers and found significant errors at 41 of them. They are supposed to audit 1/3 of the companies annually, in 2006 they managed 14%.

In a completely "unrelated" story, Medicare is going after beneficiaries for unpaid services, it seems that they've sent letters to about 135,000 people telling they still owe money, in most cases money that they failed to withhold from Social Security checks. As Kerry Weems, acting administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said, “I am intently focused on this matter and will make it a priority to correct the errors and minimize them in the future.”

Thanks to NYT Health .

So, $59million in 2003 with decreasing audits each year and now they're going after beneficiaries? Sounds like the BushCo we know and loathe, give to corporations take from the poor, an inverted Robin Hood.

Minimum Sense

The House lived up to its promise and passed a nice clean minimum wage bill, raise the minimum wage, period. The Senate put one together, same idea. Well, not gonna happen that way, no siree, not in our Senate. This is the responsible outfit, the six year guys, they know better than to go off half-cocked, you gotta look it over real careful like and make some changes.

Now just exactly who has suffered from the minimum wage being stagnant for over a decade? Who is it that has benefitted from the minimum wage being stagnant for over a decade? There is a case for saying there is membership in these classes. This ought to be a part of the consideration given this matter by the Senate. Workers suffered and business gained. So the Republicans in the Senate will make sure this doesn't move forward unless business gains. Even in labor intensive agriculture, labor is the smallest single component in the cost picture. Labor costs do not become significant until you get to high cost labor which is a completely different scenario than minimum wage labor.

The Republicans want a tax credit for small business. This is laughable on two issues, the government is going broke from tax breaks and the outfits they call small business are anything but the mom and pop concerns they want you folks to think of when they say it. Tell your Senators no. Tell your Representatives no. They'll send this back to the House to reconcile the two bills, the House needs to send the clean one back, that's it, period. If the Republicans want to play stupid games, there is less than year until the Senate election games start up, they can damn well be made responsible for their crap.

Liars, Cheats, and Thieves

The Republicans have been running the show in DC for six years, both houses and the Presidency have enabled them to pretty much do as they pleased. This has included taking us to war, blasting the constitution and ancient English law, and spending us into a huge hole while enriching the very rich. The latter involves one of the most basic of Congressional duties, setting a budget.

Now, they're not going to do it. Nope, they'll pass stopgap spending authorizations and duck out of town. You see, their forever majority evaporated a couple weeks ago and they want it back. They want it back bad enough to leave not only the deficit mess they've made but also not bother with the 2007 budget so the Democrats in their new majority can have that to deal with. To be sure, some of them are talking like deficit hawks, now. You'd be hard pressed to find anything more than rhetoric in regard to their previous votes, but they've suddenly found principles as long as they don't have to deal with them. Now there's a bunch that needed replacing. That solution is a little late, and now they'll play political games with our budget and our nation's health. Isn't it nice to know just how much Americans count in their math (must be some of that Rovian math).

I suppose the title is a little harsh...no I don't. Liars - oh c'mon. Cheats - they were hired to legislate for the nation; party, power, and money don't qualify. Thieves - lobbiests...our children's future financial health - stolen for the highest bidders and the richest blood suckers.

Liars, Cheats, and Thieves - Republican Congress