At the heart of the debate was a procedural maneuver made by Democrats to suspend the rules before consideration of the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act. The move allowed leadership to block potential GOP amendments to the measure (there was worry that Republicans would attach something overtly partisan in hopes that it could pass on the otherwise widely-popular measure). It also meant that the party needed a two-thirds majority vote.

When the final tally was announced, there were 255 representatives for the measure, 159 against. The defeat of the bill, which would have provided free health care to those affected during the 9/11 rescue and recovery, likely means that the court system will have to settle compensation issues.

Weiner spoke right before the vote when it was clear that Republican lawmakers would stake their opposition on grounds of procedural concerns. But for the grace of the C-SPAN cameras, he managed to stay physically behind his lectern.

"The gentleman will sit!" he declared at one point, addressing, it is believed, Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.). "The gentleman is correct in sitting!"

Posted in: Republican , Corruption , Video Spots  Tags:

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) | Comment RSS | E-mail | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us

From in Crooks and Liars

Contract high points include:

1. Repeal the Affordable Care Act (Health Insurance Reform)

   Put insurance companies back in charge, repeal tax credits for small businesses, allow insurance companies to deny coverage based on preexisting conditions and to drop coverage when a person gets too sick and make prescription drugs for seniors less affordable.

2. Privatize Social Security or phase it out altogether
   
   Turn the guaranteed retirement benefits of America's seniors over to Wall Street CEOs by putting Social Security at risk in the stock market or, as some Republicans have called for, phase out Social Security altogether and end a program millions of American seniors rely on for their survival.
3. End Medicare as it presently exists

   Phase out and end Medicare as it presently exists for future generations of seniors -- ending Medicare's guaranteed healthcare benefits for more than 40 million American seniors -- and replace it with a voucher system which will result in higher premiums and fewer services for seniors.

4. Extend the Bush tax breaks for the wealthy and big oil

   At a cost of nearly $700 billion, extend the Bush tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans and big oil, which are set to expire and which have and will continue to explode the federal budget deficit.

5. Repeal Wall Street Reform

   Roll back the toughest consumer protections ever enacted, allow banks to continue to grow too big to fail, and ensure that predatory lenders continue to utilize their most abusive practices.

6. Protect those responsible for the oil spill and future environmental catastrophes
   
   Cap liabilities for those responsible for environmental disasters like the Gulf oil spill and let companies like BP decide which victims deserve compensation for the disaster and what the timeline for relief should be.
7. Abolish the Department of Education

   Put the big banks back in charge of student loans and put an end to federal assistance for public schools.

8. Abolish the Department of Energy

   End America's investments in a clean-energy future and disband the organization responsible for oversight of nuclear materials.

9. Abolish the Environmental Protection Agency

   Gut the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act -- which together protect our kids from air pollution and keep drinking water safe -- and disband the watchdog that holds polluters accountable.

10. Repeal the 17th Amendment

    Take away your right to pick your U.S. Senator

That's what they've promised. Not just a walk back to the Bush years, a walk back to another century. Perhaps they could repeal the Emancipation Proclamation, too.

Posted in: Corruption , Republican  Tags:

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) | Comment RSS | E-mail | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us

Nicholas D. Kristof in New York Times

The war in Afghanistan will consume more money this year alone than we spent on the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, the Mexican-American War, the Civil War and the Spanish-American War — combined.

 

A recent report from the Congressional Research Service finds that the war on terror, including Afghanistan and Iraq, has been, by far, the costliest war in American history aside from World War II. It adjusted costs of all previous wars for inflation.

Those historical comparisons should be a wake-up call to President Obama, underscoring how our military strategy is not only a mess — as the recent leaked documents from Afghanistan suggested — but also more broadly reflects a gross misallocation of resources. One legacy of the 9/11 attacks was a distortion of American policy: By the standards of history and cost-effectiveness, we are hugely overinvested in military tools and underinvested in education and diplomacy. More...

Posted in:   Tags: war, afghanistan, corruption, dead soldiers

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) | Comment RSS | E-mail | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us

Financial reform law exempts SEC from information requests. Daniel Tencer

A business journalists' group has condemned an overlooked clause in the new financial reform law that allows the SEC to deny information on companies to reporters and the public.

The Society of American Business Writers and Editors says this change may mean the financial regulators charged with preventing future economic collapses will be able to avoid public accountability.

The Securities and Exchange Commission, the federal agency primarily in charge of overseeing the US's financial system, has said that, thanks to the Dodd-Frank financial reform law, it no longer has to provide information gathered from corporations to reporters or members of the public under freedom of information laws.

It appears the media covering the fight over the financial reform bill overlooked that clause in the law until the SEC contacted Fox Business to tell the news network it will not get a response to a request for information filed this spring.

The relevant clause in the new law states that the SEC "shall not be compelled to disclose records or information" if that information was obtained for the purposes of "surveillance, risk assessments, or other regulatory and oversight activities." Fox Business described that as amounting to "almost every action by the agency."

That may be something of an overstatement. Reuters reported Thursday that the restrictions apply only to information gathered about companies the SEC is investigating; the public can still request data about the SEC's own operations.

Yet it's the SEC's investigations of possible wrongdoing in corporate entities that are generally of interest when it comes to the SEC's activities.

Rob Reuteman, president of the SABEW, said in a statement Wednesday that his organization's membership was "appalled" by the change to the law, which "appears to roll back 43 years of transparency in government under the Freedom of Information Act."

Thanks to freedom-of-information requests, "we now know that the SEC itself botched investigations of Bernie Madoff, who fleeced investors of tens of billions of dollars and now sits in prison," Reuteman said. "The SEC has been forced to institute internal reforms as a result of its own investigative shortcomings that came to light. ... But under the provisions in this new law, the SEC no longer has to comply with such requests for information."

Reuteman said that the SEC has argued that it needs to be exempt from FOIA requests because it will be easier to obtain documents needed to prosecute financial criminals.

"Don't fall for that line of reasoning," Reuteman said. "Government agencies have always been able to censor the documents they are forced to release, in order to withhold such sensitive information."

Critics of the Obama administration have wasted no time in criticizing the White House over the provision. Aaron Gee at American Thinker notes that President Obama sold the bill to the public by saying it "will finally bring transparency to the kind of complex and risky transactions that helped trigger the financial crisis."

"The stunningly bad idea of providing legal cover for a regulating body that has a history of getting it wrong is par for the course when it comes to 'financial reform'," Gee writes.

Posted in:   Tags:

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) | Comment RSS | E-mail | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us

Here's a new web ad rolled out by Democrats to underscore the party's midterm message.

Democrats are planning to link the tea party and Republicans, overlapping the two groups to paint the GOP as a party of extremists and the grassroots activists as tools of the establishment.

Democratic National Committee sources say the party's strategy is to pose the November midterm elections as a contest between Democrats and a joint GOP-tea party plan for the country. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity ahead of the official launch of the plan Wednesday by DNC Chairman Tim Kaine.

Democrats plan to cite tea party activists' statements and GOP support and introduce a "Republican-Tea Party Contract With America," a send-up of the 1994 GOP Contract With America that helped Republicans win control of the House for the first time in four decades.

Democrats plan to say the tea party is "the most potent force in Republican politics," as stated on the DNC website:

For the better part of the past year, Republicans have tried to come up with a new agenda for the American people with mixed results. However, with the Tea Party now the most potent force in Republican politics, and with the recent launch of the Tea Party Caucus on Capitol Hill garnering the support of Republican leaders like National Republican Congressional Committee Chair Pete Sessions and Republican Caucus Chair Mike Pence, the Republican Party agenda has become clear. Republican leaders and Tea Party supported Republican candidates can now rally around the "Republican Tea Party Contract on America" as the blueprint for how they would govern.

Democrats plan to point to the Tea Party Caucus on Capitol Hill and its high-powered members, including Rep. Pete Sessions, who runs the GOP's effort to elect House candidates, and Republican Caucus Chairman Mike Pence. Both have voiced support for the Tea Party Caucus and have been strong supporters of lawmakers who have wrapped themselves in its anti-tax, smaller-government, libertarian cloth.

The Democrats, sensitive to last summer's backlash over President Barack Obama's health care bill during town hall-style meetings, plan to send their incumbents home for the August recess armed with a message that the fringe tea party candidates and Republican lawmakers are the same.

"We are also going to use this from now until the election as a pre-emptive strike against GOP's August rebranding effort," the Democratic source said.

Democrats plan to present a 10-point blueprint on how Republicans beholden to the tea party would govern. The Democratic official said the plan would dovetail with what House Democrats planned in their districts while on August recess.

Here's a new web ad rolled out by Democrats to underscore the party's midterm message.

Posted in: Corruption , Republican , Video Spots  Tags:

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) | Comment RSS | E-mail | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us

Senior Citizens in the Dark on Benefits of Health-Care Reform

Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be limited to senior citizens. Over the past couple of months, the Chamber of Commerce has taken great pains to misinform small businesses about what the Affordable Care Act does for them, too. But out of nearly 700 seniors quizzed about what health-care reform meant for them, not one was able to get all of the answers right.

A recent National Council on Aging poll conducted between July 9 - July 12, 2010 yielded some pretty startling statistics.

• 21% of respondents said they were "very familiar" with the law, and an additional 64% said they were "somewhat familiar" with it. Of those, 60% said they were satisfied that the information they received was accurate and reliable.
• Yet, when asked if the new law would result in future cuts to their basic medicare benefits, 55% of the "very familiar" group answered "Yes", as did 47% of the "somewhat familiar" group.
• 62% of the "very familiar" group said they believed the new law would increase the federal budget deficit over the next 10 years, with 57% of the "somewhat familiar" group concurring.
• Half of those "very familiar" with the law believes it does not improve the quality of care for beneficiaries with chronic illnesses, and 46% believe Medicare payments to doctors will be cut.
• Remarkably, only 52% of the seniors "very familiar" with the law agreed that uninsured Americans will be covered and younger people would have extra protections.

I would love to know how many of those claiming to be "very familiar" with the law watch Fox News. I would put money on it being more than half. Reading these results made me want to go out and scream from a tall building "This is why we can't have nice things!!!!".

Fortunately, NCOA is a little more measured than me. They've created materials to help seniors understand the law and what their benefits are under the law. Now we need to get out there and help them understand it, because seniors' health is as important a feature of the new law as coverage of the uninsured.

Oh, and maybe we should get them to turn off Fox News for awhile, too.

Posted in: Health Care  Tags:

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) | Comment RSS | E-mail | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us