Each morning, Bill Scher and Terrance Heath serve up what progressives need to effect change on the kitchen-table issues families face: jobs, health care, green energy, financial reform, affordable education and retirement security.
MORNING MESSAGE: Jobs v. No Jobs
OurFuture.org's Isaiah Poole: "The federal budget cuts being proposed by conservatives on Capitol Hill will 'close off the route to jobs' and out of poverty for millions of Americans, according to Deborah Weinstein, the director of the Coalition for Human Needs ... One of the examples Weinstein offers is YouthBuild U.S.A., a program that helps low-income young people who have dropped out of school avoid getting sucked into criminal activity and channels them into educational and construction job opportunities building affordable housing. It's a classic win-win program ... Yet this is one of the programs that House Republicans say we cannot afford because of the deficit that has been exacerbated by the extension of the Bush tax cuts to people earning more than $250,000 a year."
President's Budget Would Create 15M Jobs
15 million jobs in President's budget, finds USA Today: "The plan calls for $53 billion to build a high-speed rail system, $336 billion for highways and a 'national infrastructure bank' that would combine public and private money to build national or regional transportation systems. Associated General Contractors (AGC), a trade group for the construction industry, estimates the plan could create about 5.4 million construction jobs and 10 million more jobs in related industries and the broader economy."
President cuts deficit in part by taxing the rich. W. Post: "...Obama would rely heavily on new taxes to improve the government's finances in the longer term. His budget calls for $1.6 trillion in fresh revenue over the next decade, primarily through higher levies on businesses and the wealthy." The Hill adds: "...in an apparent bet that he is on the winning side of the issue, Obama upped the ante on taxes in the new budget, calling for a 30 percent cut to itemized deductions taken by the wealthy."
And the corporate lobbyists don't like it. W. Post: "The fiscal 2012 budget outlines more than $200 billion in higher taxes for oil and gas companies, banks and multinational firms - ideas that have been offered in the past and vehemently opposed by industry ... 'I'm just extremely disappointed,' said Caroline Harris, chief tax counsel for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. ... The budget also includes a new proposal that could increase costs for businesses by raising the fee they pay the government to backstop their pensions plans."
But the President scaled back proposed bank tax. HuffPost: "Not only had the president signed an extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy during the lame-duck session, his budget brought a yet-to-be-enacted bank tax down from an initial proposal of $90 billion over 10 years to about $30 billion."
But the President proposed increased fees on Wall Street to pay for regulatory enforcement. NYT: "The Commodity Futures Trading Commission would receive a long-awaited influx of cash under President Obama’s 2012 federal budget proposal, although much of the money would come from the financial and commodities industries rather than taxpayers ... The S.E.C., like other financial regulators, uses industry fees to offset its budget. The Obama administration on Monday requested a $300 million increase for the S.E.C., much to the delight of Mary L. Schapiro, the agency’s chairwoman. "
President's budget limits health spending with a 2% cut. NYT: "The budget would eliminate a $318 million program that trains doctors at children’s hospitals ... Food inspections and research into cancer, infectious diseases and new drugs would receive significantly more money under the president’s budget. But money to help states and cities prepare for health emergencies like pandemic flu would be cut ... Mr. Obama would finance the inspections, in part, with fees imposed on food manufacturers under legislation he signed in January. He hopes to impose more such fees on manufacturers."
Some progressive defense of education spending reform. HuffPost: "Rich Williams, a higher-education advocate for the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, the national lobbying arm of a coalition of public-interest organizations, noted that while billing in-school interest rates would result in further debt burdens for students, the money saved would be plowed back into funds to help prospective students pay for tuition. 'It is less bad than it sounds ... The in-school interest subsidies definitely helps kids out, but it is untargeted financial aid. While some show some level of need, by the time they finish their graduate degree not all of them will have trouble playing their loans back.'" More from Jonathan Cohn.
EPA faces cuts, but not on protecting climate. Time's Bryan Walsh: "Overall the EPA faces a 12.6% cut ... the White House is accepting some tough cuts, while allowing a few programs—including money for greenhouse gas monitoring and regulation—to rise."
Energy Dept. gets boost. NYT: "... if the administration had its way, budgets for solar, geothermal, biomass and wind energy would rise sharply ... The department wants three more [energy innovation hubs]: one each for battery and energy storage, smart grid technologies, and critical materials."
House Dem leadership backs budget, but party divisions emerge. The Hill: "Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), senior Democrat on the House Budget Committee, called the proposal a 'tough-love budget' ... Rep. Jess Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) ... slammed Obama’s budget as something 'right from the Republican plan.' ... Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) welcomed Obama’s proposal, saying it 'takes critical steps' toward reducing deficits and growing the economy."
Several Senate Dems give "lukewarm" response. W. Post: "'This budget proposal raises a lot of questions about where the priorities of this administration are,' said Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.). Sens. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) each decried the cuts in low-income heating assistance, also known as LIHEAP ... Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), meanwhile, emphasized that she 'may not agree with everything in it,' as did Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)..."
Grist's David Roberts argues the President is conceding on message: "Decades of relentless conservative agit-prop have convinced the public that taxing is bad, spending is bad, government is bad, and all sensible people agree government spending must be cut. Rather than pushing back against that myth directly -- which admittedly would be a tough sell, given that half the Democratic Senate caucus buys it -- Obama is trying to maneuver as best he can within its confines. He's trying to get specific, so Republicans have to defend particular cuts, which are rarely popular. He's trying to argue that cuts need to be balanced with investments. Given the constraints, he's doing reasonably well. Those constraints are proving disastrous, though."
TNR's Jonathan Chait argues the President is skillfully defending liberal priorities: "The administration is loudly publicizing the fact that it's cutting programs it thinks are necessary. The message, sometimes made explicit, is that the budget actually does not contain a lot of waste ... I do think Obama is trying, in a passive-aggressive way, to do what liberals have demanded. He's explaining to the public that the free-ride view of budget cutting -- we can cut our way out of the deficit by eliminating waste and spending that only benefits foreigners -- is wrong. Obviously, having a budget in deficit during a period of mass unemployment and a GOP-led House immune to macroeconomic reason is a bad hand. I think ultimately Obama is playing it reasonably well."
President to hold press conference today at 11 AM ET reports The Hill.
House Will Pass Cruel Cuts This Week
House begins floor debate on GOP spending cuts. The Hill: "GOP leaders have pledged an open process for the floor debate on legislation to fund the government for the remainder of the year, and they are relishing the unpredictability that comes with it ... The three days of debate on the spending bill, all leading up to a planned Thursday vote, will be a first major test of Boehner’s promise to allow the House to 'work its will.'"
Concern that the GOP proposed spending cuts make March shutdown difficult to prevent. W. Post: "Some lawmakers have suggested another stop-gap measure, perhaps lasting just a few weeks, could be approved while the two sides and the White House continue negotiating ... Although members of both parties said they are determined to avert a shutdown, leaders acknowledged that the House Republican proposal, in both its scope and specificity, appears to leave little negotiating room ... Under the House GOP plan, Global AIDS funding would dry up. Road construction contracts would be terminated. Police departments, schools and the Chesapeake Bay cleanup effort would see federal support plummet."
Sec. of State slams GOP cuts to foreign aid. NYT: "...Mrs. Clinton sounded the alarm about reductions that she said amounted to a 16 percent decrease for the State Department from current spending and a 41 percent cut in money available for humanitarian programs. 'Cuts of this magnitude will be devastating to our national security, will render us unable to respond to unanticipated disasters and will damage our leadership around the world,' Mrs. Clinton said..."
"House GOP Proposes Cutting Special Education Funds, Despite GOP Chairman’s Call For More Funding" reports Wonk Room's Pat Garofalo.
Speaker Boehner expects amendment to continuing resolution that would defund health reform law. Wonk Room's Igor Volsky: " House Speaker John Beohner (R-OH) is telling reporters that GOP members will offer several amendments to stop the flow of federal dollars to the act ... Democrats, meanwhile, can ask some pointed questions about why the GOP is taking away coverage from 12,000 chronically sick individuals in high risk pools and increasing taxes on employers taking advantage of the early retiree grants and small businesses receiving tax credits."
GOP may fight President's attempt to restrain military spending. Bloomberg: "Less than 2 percent to 3 percent growth in defense may lead to 'dire consequence' for weapons and troops, said U.S. Representative Howard 'Buck' McKeon, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, in a statement yesterday. 'I have significant concerns,' he said."
Pentagon complains that government-by-continuing resolution is restraining its spending too much. NYT: "If that stopgap budget stays in place for the entire fiscal year, it would result in military spending of $526 billion, not counting the costs of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, or a cut of $23 billion from the administration’s request of $549 billion. Mr. Gates demanded that Congress approve 2011 spending of at least $540 billion."
President Shies Away From Social Security Cuts ... Maybe
President's budget includes principles for Social Security compromise. Ezra Klein quotes: "The President believes that we should come together now, in bipartisan fashion, to strengthen Social Security for the future ... The Administration will oppose any measures that privatize or weaken the Social Security system ... While all measures to strengthen solvency should be on the table, the Administration will not accept an approach that slashes benefits for future generations ... No current beneficiaries should see their basic benefits reduced."
Daily Kos' Chris Bowers interprets: "Privatization is out ... Raising the retirement age is on the table ... No 'slashes' to benefits, but possible tweaks..."
WH aide David Plouffe further suggests that Social Security cuts are not likely. HuffPost: "[Said Plouffe,] '[A]s the President said in his State of the Union, he views Social Security primarily as an issue about shoring it up for the long term as opposed to a deficit issue ... if there are proposals out there that are acceptable, that don't reduce benefits, don't slash benefits, that don't affect current retirees, the President is open to proposals that would shore the system up in the long term.' Plouffe's inclusion of the word 'reduce' alongside the pledge not to 'slash' may have been an innocent rhetorical addition to a common administration talking point ... But for advocates working to make current benefits sacrosanct and fretting that the White House had left the door open to either cost of living adjustments or other benefit 'tweaks,' it was noteworthy."
President responding to progressive pressure, argues OurFuture.org's Daniel Marans: "We should all thank the President for refusing to include Social Security cuts in his 2012 budget. But we should not take the President’s decision for granted. Apparently, the White House was prepared to include specific cuts in Social Security benefits in the 2012 budget just to bring Republicans to the table, but a groundswell of progressive opposition helped stop it in its tracks..."
Breakfast Sides
TARP inspector general resigns. Treasury not sad. W. Post: "[Neil Barofsky] quickly emerged as an aggressive overseer, viewed as a much-needed cop monitoring for waste and fraud within TARP by some lawmakers and watchdog groups, and, by Treasury officials and financial-industry representatives, as a self-promoter whose overreaching investigations scared some needy banks away from participating in the federal aid program."
USA Today examines impact of Obama policies on small-town Wisconsin: "Unemployment that hit 14.4% a year ago is down to 8.8% ... the stimulus law provided more than $3 million for harbor dredging and $1.8 million for a bus transfer station ... Orion Energy Systems, which produces energy-efficient power technology, received loans from the SBA, grants from the Energy Department, investment tax credits and more ... Banks in Manitowoc are benefiting from the higher limits, reduced fees and greater federal guarantees on SBA loans ... [But the] housing market remains in the doldrums. Jobs are scarce in bedrock professions, including teaching. Many retailers have yet to see business pick up."
Hints of increased inflation. NYT: "By the fall, people will most likely be paying more ... as rising prices hit most consumer goods, say retailers, food companies and manufacturers of consumer products ... Economists say the increases may eventually show up as inflation, though they are not yet projecting rates that would set off alarms. Despite some fears, inflation has been extremely low ... Some do see the creeping signs of higher inflation, and warn that the Federal Reserve will need to raise interest rates or at least stop pumping more money into the economy. Others argue that such moves would choke off economic growth sorely needed to get companies hiring again."
Wisconsin labor leaders and progressive activists fight Gov. Scott Walker's threat to use National Guard to bust public employee unions. Donna Jablonski: "Wisconsin activists are answering Gov. Scott Walker’s outrageous assault on middle-class jobs and collective bargaining with neighborhood canvasses, a two-day lobbying and rally blitz at the state capital, television ads and social media campaigns. Backers of Walker’s proposal to strip away almost all collective bargaining rights from public employees in the state are trying to push the legislation through this week 'with almost no public input or discussion,' ...
Federal government builds zero-energy office building. NYT: "Commercial buildings use about 18 percent of the nation’s total energy each year, and many of those buildings, especially in years past, were designed with barely a thought to energy savings, let alone zero net use. The answer at the research energy laboratory, a unit of the federal Department of Energy, is not gee-whiz science. There is no giant, expensive solar array that could mask a multitude of traditional design sins, but rather a rethinking of everything, down to the smallest elements, all aligned in a watt-by-watt march toward a new kind of building."
Inflation in China may further delay currency reform. AP: "China's public is struggling with a monthslong surge in food prices that has defied government efforts to combat inflation with interest rate hikes, price controls and a campaign to boost vegetable and grain output ... Higher inflation also might prompt Beijing to slow the rise of its currency, the yuan, against the U.S. dollar to help its exporters compete. That might add to strains with Washington and other governments..."
