The daily Progressive Breakfast serves up what progressive movement members need to know to start their day.
WH Seeks To Claim Mantle of Calm
WH explains health care strategy to W. Post: "Tuesday's town hall gathering was the start of what White House officials promise will be a more pointed response to the crescendo of what Obama called 'misinformation' coming from critics of his health-care reform efforts. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel argued that the contrast between Obama -- whom he described as 'reasoned, calm, looking like an adult in the room' -- and some of the more bombastic protesters would also work to the administration's advantage. 'I think the public looks at screaming, swastikas, attacks. . . . It's not a persuasive argument,' he said Tuesday. 'If anything, it is the opposite.'"
The Hill reports on Senate Dem message memo: "The document suggests senators take a strong stand on the effort of reform on private insurance, stating that mergers in the industry have led to “near-monopolies” in the insurance industry, 'with 94 percent of insurance markets highly concentrated' as profits and CEO salaries have soared. The talking points also emphasize repeatedly that health reform 'will be fully paid for,' and that 'the cost of inaction is clear,' stating that insurance premiums have outpaced wages and that insurance companies are improperly deciding patients’ coverage needs. One of the most common criticisms, that the effort would lead to a 'government takeover,' is answered with repeated assurances that the Senate effort 'will increase choices — not take them away,' and that there will be no 'rationing' of care. 'Health insurance reform will actually result in MORE options for Americans to make informed decisions about what type of coverage they need and how much they want to pay for that coverage,' the document states."
LA Times and Politico explore resistance from seniors. LAT: "Seniors are an influential group of voters who bring a unique perspective to the topic: They already have guaranteed healthcare under Medicare ... But as Gail Wilensky, who was administrator of the Medicare and Medicaid programs under President George H.W. Bush, pointed out: 'The major focus of reform is clearly not on seniors. It is on expanding coverage to the under-65 population.' Another problem is that many seniors, said Rep. John Tanner (D-Tenn.), don't seem to understand that Medicare basically is a government-run healthcare plan."
WH health adviser Ezekiel Emanuel debunks right-wing distortions of his views to TIME: "In her [NY] Post article, [the thoroughly discredited Betsy] McCaughey paints the worst possible image of Emanuel, quoting him, for instance, endorsing age discrimination for health-care distribution, without mentioning that he was only addressing extreme cases like organ donation where there is an absolute scarcity of resources. She quotes him discussing the denial of care for people with dementia, without revealing that Emanuel only mentioned dementia in a discussion of theoretical approaches, not an endorsement of a particular policy. She notes that he has criticized medical culture for trying to do everything for a patient, 'regardless of the cost or effects on others,' without making clear that he was not speaking of lifesaving care but of treatments with little demonstrated value. 'No one who has read what I have done for 25 years would come to the conclusions that have been put out there,' says Emanuel. 'My quotes were just being taken out of context.'"
TPMMuckraker debunks a fresh one: "The hot new conservative health-care lie is that the bill will give the government direct access to Americans' bank accounts at any time, which, in some variations of the lie, will then be raided to finance the legislation ... this is no different from setting up an automatic online bill-pay in order to pay back a student loan, calling it 'completely uncontroversial, and totally not scary.'"
More debunking from Miami Herald: "Two veteran health-care policy experts, Gerard Anderson of Johns Hopkins and Steven Ullmann of the University of Miami, say much of the fear talk is based on innocuous references in the dense House bill to funding consultations on end-of-life care for those who want it and a proposal to set up a panel of health-care experts to decide what medical care treatments are effective."
Sen. Isakson recoils from his debunking role. Ezra Klein: "Sen. Johnny Isakson's office is not happy that Isakson is being used to rebut attacks on the 'end-of-life counseling' provision in the House's health-care reform bill. 'I categorically oppose the House bill and find it incredulous that the White House and others would use my amendment as a scapegoat for their misguided policies,' reads the press release. [But in] our conversation yesterday, it was Isakson himself who brought up the House bill ... he was pretty specific in trying to ratchet down the misinterpretations of the House's end-of-life counseling section ... the 2007 Medicare End-of-Life Care Planning Act, which Isakson co-sponsored, is actually very similar to the section on end-of-life planning in the House bill. And Isakson wasn't the only Republican on the legislation."
Liberal ads pressuring Sen. Ben Nelson have him worried enough to run response ads. The Fix: "Nelson's decision to run two weeks of statewide television ads more than three years before he will again stand before voters is evidence of the seriousness with which he takes the attacks from his left flank. It is also a testament to the bind that many moderate to conservative Democrats are almost certain to find themselves in ... Mary Rickles, a spokeswoman for DFA, said the group will 'absolutely' be running more ads against wavering Democrats. 'We currently have 900 responses from DFA members who have volunteered to share their stories, so we can run ads in any state we want at any time,' Rickles added."
The Plum Line on new ad buy from anti-reform Chamber of Commerce: "Big money in this round of buying is concentrated in Indiana, Colorado, Arkansas, and North Carolina."
Sen. Durbin signals Obama less concerned about first Senate bill then final House-Senate bill. TPMDC: "Durbin told small businessmen in Illinois[,] 'So we are trying to walk this tightrope to get this bill through. The House [of Representatives] is likely to include [public option]. The Senate may not. Then we go into conference committee and President Obama has to roll up his sleeves and see if he can bring us all together. And when I've spoken to him about this a couple times, all he's said is: "Get me to a conference committee. Let me bring these folks into a room, and let me work and get it done."' That statement's obviously vague on a couple levels: Who will lose out on the merits--progressives or conservatives--if Obama can't 'bring us all together'? And how far will Obama stray from his own vision of health care reform if it's a choice between getting it done and not getting it done?"
The Treatment's Jonathan Cohn explains the difficulty responding to right-wing mischief: "...conservatives have been making two separate arguments--arguments that cut in completely opposite directions. ... For some conservatives, the problem with health reform is that it’s too expensive ... Now a (mostly) different set of conservatives are arguing that health reform will put the government in charge of medical treatment and that, as a result, we’re on our way towards harsh rationing of care." Change.org Tim Foley adds: "Despite this mass of contradictions, ever single one of these is a concern for somebody. It's like pellets from a shotgun. All those sticking up for the status quo need to do is hit the right key and shazam, you’re feeling anxious about change. Those on the attack receive no penalty from the contradiction – only one of these items needs to be true to scare the bejeesus out of you."
Climate Bill Widely Popular Finds New Poll
Grist's Jonathan Hiskes reports on new Zogby poll: "Seventy-one percent of likely voters say they like the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) passed by the House of Representatives earlier this summer. Two-thirds of them think Congress either should be doing more (45 percent) or is doing the right amount (22 percent) to address climate change ... 54 percent saying the Senate should take action soon ... The poll results also suggest that doomsday messages that ACES would destroy American jobs have largely fallen flat ... there was evidence of bipartisan support too, with 45 percent of Republicans and 73 percent of independents reporting a favorable opinion of ACES..."
W. Post explores challenges ahead for carbon capture pilot projects: "...the AEP project illustrates the tremendous obstacles ahead. As big as it is, the equipment there will only capture the emissions from 20 megawatts of power generation, a meager 15 percent of the plant's output. Morris's predecessors were smart enough to buy lots of extra land at the West Virginia plant, but other coal plants would have trouble finding room ... The huge carbon capture and storage devices are hugely expensive, too ... about $100 for a ton of carbon dioxide ... The Waxman-Markey bill would give the first six gigawatts of plants -- equal to around seven average-sized plants -- a $90 per ton subsidy in the form of free allowances."
Stimulus Working, But More Still Needed
Econos find stimulus is working. Bloomberg: "Recovery from the worst recession since the 1930s has begun as President Barack Obama’s fiscal stimulus -- derided as insufficient and budget-busting months ago -- takes effect, a survey of economists indicated. The economy will expand 2 percent or more in four straight quarters through June, the first such streak in more than four years, according to the median of 53 forecasts in the monthly Bloomberg News survey. Analysts lifted their estimate for the third quarter by 1.2 percentage points compared with July, the biggest such boost in surveys dating from May 2003. "
W. Post summarizes econo concerns of a jobless recovery without more action: "Weak spending is one of the major reasons economists cite in their forecasts for a sluggish recovery. With fewer people and businesses willing to buy things, it will take longer for the economy to work off all the excess capacity that was built up during boom times. Think of thousands of idled factories, acres of empty strip malls and ports packed with unsold automobiles, not to mention millions of workers who lost jobs as business scaled back production to keep up with falling demand."
Bloomberg on Fed mtg today: "Federal Reserve policy makers may today acknowledge economic growth will be faster than they anticipated, while committing to keep the benchmark interest- rate target near the lowest level on record. Central bankers gather in Washington as analysts project 2 percent growth or faster in the second half of 2009 -- twice the pace the Fed forecast in June. At stake in today’s statement: delivering a message that the Fed will ensure the recovery is sustained, without stoking inflation expectations."
WH Proposes Derivatives Rules
CQ offers a run-down of the new WH proposal: "The White House on Tuesday sent Congress a plan to ramp up the regulation of over-the-counter derivatives that echoes a proposal from prominent House members ... to force most 'standardized' over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives transactions onto regulated clearinghouses and exchanges. Customized transactions between two parties would face less regulation. The plan would allow the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to establish a relatively broad definition of what constitutes a standardized contract. And it would give regulators the leeway to stop 'spurious customization to avoid central clearing and exchange trading.' The proposal would impose higher capital and margin requirements on firms trading in non-standardized derivatives. Because those firms would have to hold more money in reserve, they would have less to invest, and thus might more inclined to standardize their contracts ... The White House plan is broadly similar to a conceptual agreement reached between House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., and Agriculture Chairman Collin C. Peterson, D-Minn."
W. Post asks if Congress will go farther: "One open question is whether lawmakers will push for derivatives legislation to go beyond what the administration has requested. Many derivatives are used to hedge against various investment risks. Increasingly, however, traders have bought and sold derivatives simply to speculate on market moves -- not as a hedge. This speculative trading has fueled concerns about wild gyrations in a variety of markets -- from commodities to corporate bonds -- and also about fraud. Some analysts think lawmakers may seek to ban this type of derivatives trading. The administration, which thinks that financial speculation in derivatives can serve as a lubricant to the overall derivatives market, has not endorsed such a ban."
