Each morning, Bill Scher and Terrance Heath serve up what progressives need to affect change on the kitchen-table issues families face: jobs, health care, green energy, financial reform, affordable education and retirement security.
Positive Notes After First Day Of Wall St. Reform Conference
Momentum for a stronger Volcker rule after first day of House-Senate conference. HuffPost: "Frank said that conference negotiators were moving in the direction of Merkley and Levin's amendment. 'I think there's conceptual agreement. You have several things: You have tough regulation of derivatives, which I prefer much of what the Senate did. You're going to have a tougher version of the Volcker Rule.' A reporter asked what the tougher rule would look like. 'I would say the general direction that Senators Merkley and Levin were moving in is a direction a lot of people are supportive of, but the final version, we'll see. It will be tougher than the House...'"
Rep. Frank promises a (mostly) open process. Politico: "House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the conference committee chairman, acknowledged that part of the proceedings would take place behind closed doors. Still, by Capitol Hill standards, the committee is expected to be one of the more open of its kind in years. The lawmakers will strategize on proposed amendments privately, but Democrats have promised to codify those decisions in public. 'This is going to be a very open process,' Frank said. 'Nothing will be put into this final bill that is not advanced, openly debated, subject to amendment by the conference process and voted on.'"
Key Fed official backs Senate derivatives firewall. HuffPost: "The top fiscal hawk and longest-serving policy maker in the Federal Reserve supports limiting banks' derivatives activities, a potential blow to Wall Street megabanks ... Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City President Thomas M. Hoenig endorsed a Senate provision Thursday that would force banks to strip their swaps desks out from their depository institutions, calling it 'of utmost importance to our nation's long-term financial and economic stability.'"
Anti-EPA Amendment Defeated, But Path To Climate Bill Muddied
Anti-EPA amendment defeated in Senate, but exposed lack of supermajority for comprehensive climate bill. Mother Jones' Kate Sheppard: "While Murkowski's loss might make some folks optimistic, it still means that there are 41 Republicans and six Democrats who think that it's okay to tell the EPA that science doesn't matter, and neither does the Supreme Court. It depends on how you want to look at it."
Grist's David Roberts sees little meaning in the vote: "After an extraordinary amount of political capital spent by environmental groups and a veto threat from Obama, 53 votes was the best they could do just to defend the basics of climate science ... It means the Senate is a dysfunctional institution and the climate movement in the U.S. is fatally weak. What does it mean for the climate and energy bill that's coming in July? Not much. That vote will be determined by the shape of the bill, the state of the economy, and the level of public anger on the oil spill."
More optimistic analysis from Environment Defense Fund's Tony Kreindler, in Politico: "The good thing is that there were plenty of senators who said that Congress should be taking the lead on crafting energy policy and several senators who I would consider to be important votes — Susan Collins for example ... To me that’s the most important thing that happened today.”
ClearView Energy Partners still sees path to climate bill this year. The Hill quotes: "Although American Power Act architect Lindsey Graham (R-SC) remains opposed to the legislation he helped craft, we reiterate that, with (a) a pro-drilling, pro-safety compromise that provides political 'containment' of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill; and (b) explicit support by coal state Democrats, Senator Graham and other green-leaning Republicans may find themselves with the opportunity to negotiate even greater provisions on behalf of their constituents in return for offering the decisive votes in support of passage..."
The Atlantic's Chris Good noted the mixed reasons for senators' votes: "...don't read too much into those [vote count] numbers. What's more important is the reasons senators had for voting the way they did. For instance, Nelson's office put out a memo to reporters saying the vote was decidedly not a test vote on climate change, in general. And Lincoln, in her floor speech, after many positive comments about building a clean energy future, said she voted the way she did because she wants Congress, not the EPA, to account for the federal government's response to climate change ... Whether senators voted for Murkowski's bill for that reason, or whether they just don't want emissions restricted, is the most significant question to answer."
No Senate Dem consensus yet on energy/climate bill strategy after Reid meeting. The Hill: "...no clear decisions were made on the scope of Senate plans ... [Reid] also acknowledged the need for GOP backing even while bashing Republicans in the same breath."
Coal-state Sen. [Jay] "Rockefeller said many senators in the closed meeting expressed 'real worry about cap and trade'" reports Politico.
Fellow coal-stater Sen. Roberty Byrd breaks with Rockefeller on Murkowski bill. Coal Tattoo quotes: "This in essence is like voting to assert that there is no climate change or global warming going on, and to dismiss scientific facts that already exist. As I have pointed out before, to deny the mounting science of climate change is to stick our heads in the sand and say 'deal me out.' West Virginia needs to stay at the table, as should all Senators who have concerns about our energy policy.”
Pew Center suggests path for a compromise on the compromise bill, to The Atlantic's Nicole Allan: " Reid and the White House have voiced a desire to build a 'buffet' bill, selecting elements of each [pending proposal] ... [Pew's Eileen] Claussen would choose Kerry-Lieberman's emissions reduction targets and a version of their carbon pricing scheme that was gradual enough in implementation and narrow enough in scope to attract the necessary votes. She would include Cantwell-Collins' carbon trading controls, Bingaman's renewable energy standard, and Lugar's phase-out of coal-burning plants ... 'The challenge on the carbon cap is what is capped ... From the effectiveness and efficiency point of view, the more that's covered, the better. But from the practical point of view, aiming for 60 votes, you may have to limit that.'"
Obama meets with BP officials today. Bloomberg: "BP Plc Chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg is being summoned to Washington for a meeting with President Barack Obama as politicians step up pressure on the company to settle damage claims and suspend the dividend."
BP to speed up payment of claims, but will it be fast enough? W. Post: "The Obama administration announced Thursday that oil giant BP has agreed to expedite payments to people and businesses harmed by the widening oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico. But that was no cause for celebration for Lance Authement, a fourth-generation Louisiana shrimper who says he will have to shutter his family's seafood plant if help does not arrive soon."
Time Magazine's Alex Altman on why BP's "company culture is partly to blame": "Much as their counterparts on Wall Street designed ever more exotic financial instruments to uncork new revenue streams, BP embraced risk in its drive for profit."
House GOP leader John Boehner and the Chamber of Commerce think taxpayers should foot the bill for the clean-up in the Gulf. TPMDC: "'I think the people responsible in the oil spill--BP and the federal government--should take full responsibility for what's happening there,' Boehner said at his weekly press conference this morning. Boehner's statement followed [similar] comments last Friday by US Chamber of Commerce CEO Tom Donohue..."
Compromise To Avert Some Teacher Layoffs Floated, As Jobs Battles Continue
Partial help to prevent teacher layoffs may come out of other stimulus efforts. Politico: "Crossing a line they had hoped to avoid, Democrats are actively discussing cuts from White House priorities in last year’s Recovery Act in order to come up with $10 billion to avert threatened layoffs of public school teachers next fall ... rescinding these sums will then affect planned investments, many of which are Obama favorites such as broadband, high-speed rail, electrical grid improvements and medical information technology."
W. Post's Steve Pearlstein argues against short-term stimulus, for long-term infrastructure investment: "At this point, neither the politics nor the economics support the idea of spending large sums, directly or through tax breaks, just to shave a percentage point off this year's unemployment rate. But with plenty of slack in the economy and interest rates at historic lows, this is the ideal time to borrow and invest heavily in public infrastructure that has been badly neglected over the past 30 years. I'm referring not only to roads and bridges but also to airports and air traffic control systems, urban transit, high-speed rail, schools and university facilities, national laboratories, national parks, 'smart' electric grids, broadband networks, green generating plants, and health information networks. Properly chosen, these projects can have huge long-run economic payoffs while tangibly improving the lives of all Americans."
Robert Reich says the decline in household debt is a sign that the Main Street economy isn't getting any better: "...the news that household debt is dropping is being celebrated by business cheerleaders as reason to believe we're on the mend. Baloney ... now Americans have no choice but to pare back their debt. That's bad news because consumer spending is 70 percent of the economy. It helps explain why we so few jobs are being created..."
Paul Krugman says Brad DeLong is being too generous to the austerity advocates:: "There should be a standard phrase for the construction of anti-straw-men - for attributing to your intellectual opponents sophisticated, reasonable positions they do not in fact hold, ignoring the nonsense they actually espouse. ... Brad suggests a possible 'confidence' argument for fiscal austerity, and also suggests that this must be what lies in the minds of the OECD, Ragu Rajan, Jeff Sachs, etc.. But wait a second: both the OECD and Rajan are calling not just for fiscal austerity but for raising interest rates, a move that makes no sense unless you fear inflationary pressures when the economy is at 10 percent unemployment ... It's very hard to see what their argument is - but one thing is for sure, it really is murky and muddled."
Another conservative congressman, Rep. John Linder, believes unemployment benefits create unemployment. HuffPost quotes: "...even when businesses are willing to hire, nearly two years of unemployment benefits are too much of an allure for some."
Negotiation with China over currency manipulation hasn't worked yet, concedes Treas. Sec. Geithner. W. Post: "Negotiation with China has failed to produce a clear sense of when the country might change its controversial currency policy, Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said Thursday, as new trade data produced disappointing results for the Obama administration's export efforts and congressional leaders renewed calls for a tougher stance with Beijing."
Senate moves toward vote to sanction China for currency manipulation. Bloomberg: "The Senate will vote 'soon' on a measure aimed at getting China to raise the value of the yuan, Senator Charles Schumer of New York told Geithner ... [Sen. Lindsey Graham] Graham said ... that the measure has 'huge' support in Congress and President Barack Obama 'runs the risk' of being overridden by lawmakers if he attempts to veto it. 'Despite the administration asking us not to do it,' lawmakers will proceed with the legislation ... said Schumer, a Democrat and lead sponsor of the legislation. He said this week the Senate would vote within two weeks. Geithner, in response, said 'I recognize, and I think it’s very important for China to understand,' that Schumer’s legislation 'has very broad support' from Democrats and Republicans."
House approves GOP move to punish underwater homeowners reports HuffPost.
Dean Baker lashes out supposed free-market conservatives for using government to keep down distressed homeowners: "Apparently, the Republicans are outraged over the fact that many homeowners are now 'strategically defaulting' on their mortgages. They have stopped paying a mortgage even though they can still afford the payment because they decided that they would be better off just giving the house back to the bank ... They have now proposed a bill to have the government punish strategic defaulters by denying them the option to receive a loan insured by the Federal Housing Authority ... the Republicans are doing the country a valuable service by showing us in the clearest possible terms that they couldn't give flying f*** about the 'free market.' They are about redistributing income upward."
Breakfast Sides
Sens. Lincoln and Kyl still pushing estate tax deal to benefit multi-millionaire heirs. CQ: "Asked Thursday whether he planned to push for an estate tax amendment on [the upcoming small-biz] bill, Minority Whip Jon Kyl said: 'Count on it.'"
WH and labor leaders try to make up after Arkansas rift. W. Post's Greg Sargent: "Labor officials pointedly told the White House reps that they stood by their effort in Arkansas and were proud of it, and that they would continue making endorsement decisions not according to the letter next to the incumbent's name, but solely on who was better for their members. In response, Gaspard, the White House official with perhaps the deepest roots in labor, assured those present that he understood that unions should remain independent. He asked the labor officials not to let one comment foul up relations between labor and the White House."
Weak 401ks prompt lawmakers to explore strengthening retirement saving. Bloomberg: "Legislators and regulators are focusing on income guarantees such as annuities to supplement traditional retirement plans. ... The administration has no plans for a mandate, said Jared Bernstein, executive director of the White House Task Force on the Middle Class ... One pending bill, introduced in December by Senators Jeff Bingaman, a New Mexico Democrat, Johnny Isakson, a Georgia Republican and Herb Kohl, a Wisconsin Democrat, would require corporate retirement plan sponsors to disclose how much monthly income employees’ portfolios would generate in retirement."
