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.
MORNING MESSAGE: The New Silent Majority
OurFuture.org's Richard Eskow: "Today there's a New Silent Majority, and it looks very different from Nixon's. The polling results are undeniable: This Majority is looking for somebody to fight the big banks, protect Social Security, and tax the rich to fund government's vital role in society ... If the President can let go of his attachment to his postpartisan self-image and embrace the policies most Americans want and need, they can be his North Star. "
Tax Cut Deal Advances, But Can It Be Tweaked?
Senate may formally begin tax cut debate today, reports W. Post: "In the Senate, lawmakers said they were warming to the package as they pored over the details of its provisions and reflected on the consequences of inaction..."
VP Biden gets an earful from House Dems. CNN: "Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon said Biden 'made it clear that this was it' and no changes to the proposal would be accepted. Well over half of the roughly two dozen Democrats who got up to speak at the meeting were strongly opposed to the deal, DeFazio said, including himself. The agreement shows that 'Republicans won a game of chicken,'..."
Politico reports House Dem criticism is not enough to derail passage: "... in the House, high-decibel liberal complaints were countered by a silent minority of Blue Dogs, New Democrats and even a handful of veteran liberals who said outright that they would vote for the bill or hinted strongly in private that they were leaning in that direction."
Dem senators push to add provisions to the tax cut deal. The Hill: "Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) is leading a push to extend authority for the Build America Bonds program to the deal ... Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) is pushing for the extension of the 1603 tax-grant program for the solar and wind energy industries. He would also like to add Health Coverage Tax Credits ..."
Tapped's Tim Fernholz suggests ways to improve the deal: "...$200 payments to Social Security benificiaries who didn't receive a cost-of-living adjustment this year ... one year extension to trigger tax reform ... One other understanding that should be reached as part of this deal is on next spring's debt ceiling vote..."
TNR's Jonathan Bernstein suggests some more: "... DADT repeal, DREAM, and New START ... [and] there are still quite a few uncontroversial executive branch and judicial branch nominations pending..."
Potential GOP prez hopefuls split on deal. The Hill: "'...we expect you to fight for us & America’s solvency,' Palin wrote in a series of tweets ... By contrast, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) said he supported the deal ... Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) also endorsed it."
Payroll tax cut doesn't help public employees. NYT: "The deal would end the Making Work Pay credit, which gave a tax reduction of up to $400 to workers with low and middle incomes. That credit will be replaced by a 2 percent decrease in the payroll tax for Social Security for people of all incomes. But more than six million federal, state and local government employees do not pay into Social Security at all. Instead, they pay into public pension systems. So if the agreed proposal becomes law, such employees will lose the $400 credit and would not reap any benefit from the payroll tax cut."
Deal doesn't fully reach low-income workers. McClatchy: "When comparing the Social Security reduction versus the current tax credit, middle- and upper-income Americans will fare far better under the new proposal. But some lower-income workers won't. The break-even point is $20,000 for an individual and $40,000 for a couple. All other things being equal, make less than those figures in a year, and your taxes will go up come Jan. 1, 2011 ... Added Roberton Williams, senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center ... 'It's not a huge increase. But if you're only making $10,000 a year, and your taxes go up a few hundred dollars, that's noticeable.'"
Jed Lewison also says the payroll tax cut won't be temporary: "[A]s I wrote yesterday, there's a problem: the payroll tax holiday won't be temporary. Sure, it's supposed to be for just one year, but if you think Republicans are going to miss an opportunity to demand permanent extension of a tax cut -- especially one that covers the cost of Social Security -- then you haven't been living in the same country as the rest of us."
Rep. Maxine Waters says Republicans are willing to grow the deficit and the wealth gap to help the richest Americans: "Now, in taking a hard line on the extension of the Bush tax cuts, the Republicans are doubling-down on old policies, essentially asking the American people to support a $900 billion compromise that includes unconscionable tax bonuses for the ultra-rich (even though tax revenue as a percentage of GDP is at its lowest in almost 60 years). ... I imagine that in the 112th Congress, the Republican majority in the House will attempt to pay for the tax breaks by cutting a variety of vital programs and services for America's working class and disadvantaged populations - taking away from the 'poor' to give to the 'rich.'"
Dan Froomkin says while Obama was busy whacking his critics, he also got the facts wrong: "Obama's overall point -- that Social Security wasn't born fully grown -- was exactly right. But his facts were exactly wrong. The Social Security Act, as first signed into law by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1935, paid retirement benefits to the primary worker -- and not to their widows and orphans. It wasn't until a 1939 change that the law added benefits for survivors and for the retiree's spouse and children ... the public option was not simply a matter of enrollees. What the president conspicuously disregarded was that the central point of the public option was that its existence would exert enormous competitive pressure on the private insurance system."
W. Post's E.J. Dionne says casting liberals aside will hurt Obama in the long run: "Obama's comments make you wonder: Whom does he think he can count on when conservatives try to repeal the health-care law, force cuts in programs he supports, investigate his administration down to the last pencil and continue to denounce him as an un-American socialist?"
Michael Tomasky suggests that progressive Democrats' opposition may give Obama reason to ignore them: "If they kill this deal, they will have liberated Obama to pay them no attention for the next two years."
Clean Energy Tax Credits Not In Deal ... Yet
Joe at Climate Progress says Obama outmaneuvered the GOP on tax cuts, but still needs a clean energy fix: "...the final deal is remarkable. Obama got a $900 billion stimulus that creates or saves 2.2 million jobs and - from a bunch of former anti-stimulus 'deficit hawks.' ... 'but' - the final bill may even be bigger ... if we follow Jon Coifman's advice to 'Steal the Republican Playbook - Now.' we must not 'raise taxes on clean energy jobs in the middle of a recession.'"
Rep. Ed Markey pushes for energy provisions in Grist: "In its current form, the deal would allow the only effective federal support mechanism for renewable electricity to expire, killing the 20,000 wind energy jobs and 11,200 jobs in geothermal that would be created in 2011 and the 65,000 jobs in solar over the next two years ... THIS Congress and the president must immediately move to protect and extend both the Renewable Energy Grant Program and the Clean Energy Manufacturing Program."
"Sen. Udall: Some Dems see renewables grants as ‘quid pro quo’ for backing tax package" reports The Hill.
Sens. Kerry and Lieberman plan to keep pushing energy agenda in next Congress. The Hill: "Lieberman also said he will 'focus' on nuclear energy as a key component of the bill ... Though he said an extension of energy tax provisions seen as essential by many environmentalists might not be included in the final version of a White House-negotiated tax package, [Kerry] said many of these issues would be considered as part of next year’s energy bill."
Tense international climate negotiations in Cancun. W. Post: "The developed countries are pushing language for a climate fund that would commit them 'to the goal of mobilizing jointly $100 billion a year by 2020.' There is a lot of wiggle room in such words as "goal" and "jointly." The least-developed countries want the document to read that wealthy countries such as the United States would 'commit to provide 1.5 percent of GDP per year by 2020,' a global price tag approaching $600 billion a year. ... As China and the United States do the smackdown in the center ring, hundreds of negotiators are trying to advance their countries' positions. The Saudi negotiators, representing the world's largest oil producer, try to slow everything down. Farrukh Iqbal Khan represents Pakistan, which suffered punishing flooding this year. He is a vigorous agent for movement and serves as a counterbalance to the Saudis in the Muslim bloc."
Oil speculators may be driving up gas prices again, undercutting additional stimulus. McClatchy: "If oil prices keep climbing beyond $100 per barrel, as Goldman Sachs projects for 2011, higher fuel prices may blunt efforts by the Obama administration and the Federal Reserve to stimulate the weak economy ... Obama's departing chief economic adviser, Lawrence Summers, shrugged off rising oil prices Wednesday. 'Oil goes up, oil goes down,' he said."
Power companies back EPA rule, in letter criticizing WSJ edit board: "To suggest that plants are retiring because of the EPA's regulations fails to recognize that lower power prices and depressed demand are the primary retirement drivers. The units retiring are generally small, old and inefficient. These retirements are long overdue. Contrary to the claims that the EPA's agenda will have negative economic consequences, our companies' experience complying with air quality regulations demonstrates that regulations can yield important economic benefits, including job creation, while maintaining reliability."
DREAM Lives In House, Dies In Senate?
House passes DREAM Act, but Senate prospects murky. McClatchy: "DREAM Act proponents say Senate inaction or a vote against the measure would be a major setback for the drive for a comprehensive overhaul of the nation's immigration laws for years to come because of the pending Republican takeover of the House and Democrats nervous about their re-election prospects in 2012."
Unclear where swing vote Justice Kennedy stands on state anti-immigration laws. LAT: "Kennedy, who often casts the deciding vote in close cases, did not say definitively how he would decide. But near the end of the argument, he said he agreed with criticisms voiced by the three liberal justices."
Union Movement Splits Over Korea
Split in union movement emerges over Korea deal. NYT: "The United Automobile Workers are pleased that the agreement will increase auto exports to Korea, and the United Food and Commercial Workers are encouraged that the pact will bolster meat exports to Korea ... The machinists’ union has denounced the Korea deal, while two other powerful unions, the steelworkers and the communications workers, will announce their opposition on Thursday, union officials say. Some trade experts say that the support of the autoworkers and the food and commercial workers is likely to sway enough Democrats in the House and Senate to ensure ratification."
China responds to pipe tariff by investing in Texas plant. Bloomberg: "In the case of Tianjin Pipe, whose exports to the U.S. have plunged since the tariffs were imposed, China may have a workaround. The company is set to begin construction next year on a $1 billion steel pipe plant in south Texas, near Corpus Christi, that is designed to produce 500,000 metric tons of pipe from recycled steel scrap each year. The plant will create 300 jobs in the first year it operates and lead to a total of 600 jobs ... In Texas, Tianjin Pipe is getting a boost from government support of a different kind: State tax breaks to offset the cost of pollution-control equipment and property tax reductions."
Deficit Commission Meets With WH
Deficit commission members to meet with Obama administration today, reports CQ: "Obama budget director Jack Lew will be at the meeting, and Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner also may attend the gathering ... Erskine Bowles, a former chief of staff for President Bill Clinton, was planning to be at the meeting, while the other co-chairman, former Republican Senator Alan K. Simpson, was not expected to be there."
Bowles criticizes tax cut deal. HuffPost: "'I am deeply disappointed that we have this short-term deal,' he said, before quickly expressing his determination that 'it must be absolutely linked to long-term fiscal restraint.' ... 'I'd like to see a commitment by all sides, before they agree to these tax cuts, that they're going to address the long term fiscal problems.'"
Tea Party, Dumped
GOP names "Prince of Pork" to head Appropriations Committee. Politico: "Over the past two years, [Rep. Hal] Rogers has requested $175,613,300 in earmarks, including funding for a cheetah protection nonprofit that his daughter works for [and] a sparkling airport terminal in Somerset, Ky., that gets very little traffic..."
Tea party winners hiring lobbyists as top aides. W. Post: "In addition to hiring lobbyists, many newly elected House Republicans have begun holding big-dollar fundraisers in Washington to pay off debts and begin preparing for 2012."
House Bill Passes To Fund Government, At Odds With Senate
House passes year-long "continuing resolution" to fund government, at odds with Senate "omnibus" effort and GOP attempts for short-term bill. Politico: "Senate Democrats still hope to substitute a more detailed omnibus bill that would restore about $18 billion, chiefly for the departments of Defense, State and Homeland Security ... the White House already appears to have stepped back, putting its chips on the House bill ... , the administration has spent the past week salting the House bill with extra money for the president’s priorities — within the context of an overall freeze ... [The House bill] matches the 2012 spending target recommended by the president’s deficit reduction commission. Obama must consider this in February, when he writes his own 2012 budget ... The House resolution is free of the typical spending earmarks ..."
