ThinkProgress Logo

Security

Democrats, Remember Your History

Our guest blogger is John Halpin, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress Action Fund and co-author of “The Power of Progress: How Progressives Can (Once Again) Save Our Economy, Our Climate, and Our Country.”

franklin.gifAnyone who thinks that the Fed’s rescuing of AIG and Treasury Secretary Paulson’s unconditional, blank-check bailout plan somehow validate the beliefs of FDR needs a serious tutorial in the history of the Democratic Party.

Democrats, since the days of Thomas Jefferson, have always stood on principle against the predatory instincts of Wall Street, speculators, and bankers.

As political theorist Michael Sandel has noted, the fight between Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton over the First Bank of the United States (and Hamilton’s larger government-sponsored economic agenda) was a legendary battle about competing visions of the nation. Jefferson, seeking to uphold the civic republican tradition of the nation’s founding, argued that Hamilton’s national bank was unconstitutional and a “treasonous” tool of oppression supported by northern financial interests. Jefferson believed a central bank and national capitalism would undermine the economic independence and civic virtue of farmers and small producers. Hamilton, in turn, thought Jefferson’s economic vision for the country was quaint and would inhibit the nation from becoming a world leader in manufacturing and finance. He viewed the national bank as an essential engine of the American economy.

Hamilton won that debate but the Jeffersonian skepticism of a national bank and government-sponsored capitalism lived on. Sounding similar themes, President Andrew Jackson accused the Second Bank of the United States of supporting an economic elite that controlled Congress and was neglectful of southern and western agrarian interests. Three-time Democratic presidential candidate, William Jennings Bryan, picked up this strand of thought in his attacks on the early plans for the Federal Reserve system put forth by Republican Senator Nelson Aldrich, the Hamiltonian-inspired nemesis of progressives at the turn of the twentieth century. Aldrich, a close associate of J.P. Morgan, devised a plan to create a system of regional reserve banks with a central authority run by private bankers. The thought of turning the nation’s finances over to the “money trust” set the hair on fire of progressives like Bryan and Republican Senator Robert La Follette of Wisconsin who wanted full public control of the nation’s money supply and credit. After fierce congressional wrangling, President Wilson heeded Bryan’s warnings and eventually negotiated the hybrid Federal Reserve system we have today that preserves privately owned banks with a publicly controlled central board.

Which brings us to Franklin Roosevelt. Read more

Politics

T. Boone Pickens: I’m Having More Problems Working With Drill-Only Republicans Than Democrats

Today, Texas oil-tycoon-cum-alternative-energy-spokesman T. Boone Pickens spoke to the National Press Club about his “Pickens Plan” to ramp up production of wind power and the use of natural gas. Given his notorious past opposing progressives, the Press Club’s moderator asked him if he’s been having trouble working with Democrats to promote his plan. Pickens replied that he’s been having more trouble working with conservatives:

Q: you told the New York Times last month that you’d never vote for a Democrat. Are you finding that difficult in reaching out to Democrats then with your plan? [...]

PICKENS: So I am having no problem working with the Democrats. Having a little problem working with the Republicans. They don’t like it because I want to do more than just drill. And they, somehow have gotten it, a lot of them have, that you can drill your way out of this. But you can’t do it. There’s not enough oil there to do it.

Watch it:

Pickens made it clear that, despite five straight weeks of calls for an “all of the above” energy strategy, congressional conservatives are interested in little besides drilling. In fact, last week, when the House passed an energy bill that included conservatives’ demand for offshore drilling, House Republicans opposed it because it would have repealed Big Oil tax breaks to invest in renewable energy. Apparently to Republican ears, “all of the above” sounds just like “Drill Baby drill.”

Health

McCain’s Ambiguous Stance on Stem Cells

Our guest blogger is Michael Rugnetta, a Fellows Assistant for the Progressive Bioethics Initiative at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

stemcells.jpgThe World Stem Cell Summit gets underway today in Madison, Wisconsin. The Summit brings together scientists and research advocates from all over the world to discuss the future of this revolutionary area of medical research. According to the Chicago Tribune, many of those assembled at the summit have misgivings about John McCain’s stance on the issue, which once seemed solid but has since come into question due to his ambiguous policy statements and his selection of the staunchly pro-life Sarah Palin as his running mate.

Indeed, John McCain’s tightrope act on stem cells is getting even more harrowing – and frustrating for anyone that wants a straight answer. McCain’s statement to Science Debate 2008 reveals that he would “support federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.” Although it does not go into explicit detail, that statement suggests that a McCain administration would allow federal funding on stem cells that are derived from embryos left over from IVF clinics.

But McCain’s stem cell policy is more restrictive than it sounds. While supporting stem cell research generally, McCain opposes – and may attempt to criminalize – SCNT, which is a necessary and vital area of regenerative medicine.

During SCNT, a subject’s DNA is placed in an egg that has had its DNA removed, thereby creating a cloned embryo that can divide and produce genetically matched stem cells. McCain’s website, condemns the process: “John McCain opposes the intentional creation of human embryos for research purpose” and the Republican Party platform also calls for a ban on the “creation of or experimentation on human embryos for research purposes.”

But McCain’s policy may criminalize SCNT research. In 2006, McCain voted to ban “fetal farming,” a horrific and universally condemned practice in which a pregnancy is deliberately initiated and terminated solely to obtain fetal tissue for research. Since then, McCain has used an expansive definition of “fetal farming” which, on its face, incorporates and criminalizes SCNT research.

On his website and in the Science Debate 2008 questionnaire, McCain correctly notes that the 2006 law bans research on fetal tissue from human pregnancy that was deliberately initiated for such research and outlaws research on tissue or cells from a human embryo that was gestated in a nonhuman animal. Yet McCain ignores that the regulations allows for the creation of embryos for research purposes (e.g.: SCNT), just as long as the embryos are not put in a human or nonhuman womb.

McCain’s selective interpretation could stifle critical medical research. The McCain campaign must clarify its understanding of fetal farming and articulate a policy toward SCNT or research on stem cells obtained from embryos leftover from IVF clinics. As it stands, McCain’s proposal remains shrouded in what seems like a carefully constructed cloud of ambiguity.

Politics

McCain Campaign Has Strong Ties To Corporate Lobbyists At Center Of Bailout

mccaintie.jpgThe Wall Street Journal reports that lobbyists for Wall Street firms have dispensed with traditionally subtle lobbying tactics and launched an aggressive campaign to ensure that the terms of the Treasury’s proposed bailout are as favorable to the finance industry as possible.

A major player in this effort is the Financial Services Roundtable, a “lobbying group representing the nation’s banks” with significant ties to Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) presidential campaign. According to a MotherJones report, current and former lobbyists for the Roundtable that have worked or fundraised for McCain’s campaign include:

Former Rep. Susan Molinari: McCain campaign fundraiser, member of Women for McCain committee, and co-chair of Honest and Open Election Committee. [Huffington Post, 8/20/08; JohnMcCain.com, 9/15/08]

Carlos Bonilla: former McCain campaign economic adviser. [TPM, 6/9/08]

David Crane: McCain campaign fundraiser and former aide to McCain at the Senate Commerce Committee. [USA Today, 3/24/2008]

Samuel Geduldig: McCain campaign fundraiser. [Public Citizen, 1/29/08]

Former Sen. Phil Gramm: While not a lobbyist for the Roundtable, Gramm did address the group as a McCain campaign surrogate at the RNC. [Bloomberg, 9/2/08]

The Roundtable’s agenda in the current economic crisis appears to be two-fold.

First, to expand the size and scope of bailout. Over the weekend the Roundtable successfully lobbied the Treasury to make the proposed bailout “broad enough to include different types of assets” — including those held by foreign banks. “Depending on how many foreign banks participate,” the provision could increase the cost of the bailout to $1.4 trillion, according to Institutional Risk Analytics.

And second, to block struggling homeowners from benefiting from the bailout. The Roundtable is working hard to ensure that the bailout is limited to firms on Wall Street, calling “a proposal to grant bankruptcy judges new powers” to restructure the mortgages of struggling homeowners a “deal killer.” The Center for American Progress notes, however, that such a provision would serve to limit the total cost of the bailout.

Update

The New York Times reports today that McCain’s campaign manager, Rick Davis, was paid “$30,000 a month for five years as president of an advocacy group set up by the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to defend them against stricter regulations.” ThinkProgress documented Davis’s lobbying ties to the financial crisis here and here.

Climate Progress

GM’s Lutz is nuts. His PR guy ain’t much sharper.

http://www.mzb-group.com/commons/imgsUpl/2/mzb/br_chock.gifWhen we last left GM Vice Chair Bob Lutz, he had dismissed global warming as a “total crock of shit” (see “General Motors is full of crocks“). That would be Vice Chair of Global Product Development, not, say, a finance or sales guy, but somebody who is in charge of scientists, engineers, technicians, and oh, I don’t know, the entire future product line of the largest U.S. automaker.

So this bastion of good judgment goes on cable TV’s leading ridicule-fest, The Colbert Report — justification enough to fire him for cause — to plug the Volt, as it were, and goes Cro-Magnon again:

NUTS LUTZ: I accept that the planet is heated, but like many noted scientists, I don’t believe in the CO2 theory.
COLBERT COLBERT: … It’s just sunspot activity.
NUTS LUTZ: In the opinion of about 32,000 of the world’s leading scientists, yes.

Well, I accept that Lutz is a human being, but like many noted scientists, I don’t believes he is evidence of the evolution theory.

Anyway, responding to a piece on Huffingtonpost by Josh Nelson, “General Motors Executive Doesn’t Recognize Global Warming as Fact — He Should Be Fired,” GM’s Director of News Relations, Tom Wilkinson, had this helpful comment:

Read more

Politics

Palin will reportedly assist the ‘Troopergate’ probe she requested.

On Sept. 2, just after she was chosen as John McCain’s running mate, Sarah Palin filed an ethics complaint against herself with the state’s Personnel Board in an effort to squelch the state legislature’s investigation into her firing of the state Public Safety Commissioner. The Personnel Board consists of three members appointed by Palin’s predecessor, Frank Murkowski (Palin re-appointed one of them). The McCain campaign recently sent lawyers to Alaska to shut down the investigation. But according to ABC News, Palin may now cooperate with her own inquiry:

Attorneys for Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin met with a special investigator for the Alaska Personnel Board earlier today to broker her cooperation with the panel’s own probe of the scandal now known as “Troopergate,” according to sources close to the matter.

Update

The McCain campaign says Palin fired former Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan because he traveled to D.C. “to seek federal money for investigating and prosecuting sexual assault cases.”

Yglesias

Economists at War

Here’s an interesting poll of American Economic Association economists and their view of the McCain-Obama matchup:

scottadamschart.jpg

It’s no surprise to see general pro-Obama sentiment here, since people with advanced degrees are, on the whole, very solidly behind Obama. But still the variances from issue to issue are interesting. Most notable, to me, is that the economists rate “wars and homeland security” as one of Obama’s strongest issues, whereas the conventional wisdom and the bulk of the public sees this as McCain’s strong suit. It’s part of a larger trend I’ve noticed of economists, who appreciate the positive-sum nature of international relations, having generally sounder views on foreign policy than do “foreign policy experts,” who seem to me to tend in the direction of being captured by the military-industrial complex over time.

Yglesias

CRA Again

This Robert Gordon article from April pretty much demolishes the notion that the Community Reinvestment Act is responsible for the current crisis. Key points:

  • First, as I said earlier, the timing is all wrong.
  • Second, only a quarter of subprime loans came from institutions to which CRA was fully applicable; half came from institutions that are exempt from CRA requirements.
  • Last, non-CRA institutions were making these loans at twice the rate of institutions covered by the CRA.

Long story short, there’s no relationship here.

Yglesias

Rush: Obama is Arab

It’s true, of course, that Barack Obama isn’t an African-American in the traditional sense. Why this makes Rush Limbaugh think he’s Arab I couldn’t quite say:

On the September 22 broadcast of his syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh baselessly claimed that Sen. Barack Obama is “not black,” and went on to ask: “Do you know he has not one shred of African-American blood?” Limbaugh continued: “He’s Arab. You know, he’s from Africa. He’s from Arab parts of Africa. … [H]e’s not African-American. The last thing that he is is African-American.”

Check it out:

Obama’s father was, for the record, from Kenya which is not an Arab part of Africa.

Politics

Conflict Of Interest? Report Says Goldman Sachs ‘Among Biggest Beneficiaries’ Of Paulson’s Bailout

paulsonwallstreet.jpgIn making his push to administer the largest federal bailout of Wall Street in history, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson is seeking unfettered authority. McClatchy poses the question today, “can you trust a Wall Street veteran with a Wall Street bailout?,” referring to Paulson, the former CEO of Goldman Sachs:

But the conflicts are also visible. Paulson has surrounded himself with former Goldman executives as he tries to navigate the domino-like collapse of several parts of the global financial market. And others have gone off to lead companies that could be among those that receive a bailout.

In late July, Paulson tapped Ken Wilson, one of Goldman’s most senior executives, to join him as an adviser on what to about problems in the U.S. and global banking sector. Paulson’s former assistant secretary, Robert Steel, left in July to become head of Wachovia, the Charlotte-based bank that has hundreds of millions of troubled mortgage loans on its books.

Goldman Sachs cashed in under Paulson, with earnings in 2005 of $5.6 billion; Paulson made more than $38 million that year. A 2005 annual report shows that “Goldman was still a significant player” in issuing mortgage bonds. The conflict of interest is increasingly clear today, as Bloomberg reports that “Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley may be among the biggest beneficiaries” of Paulson’s bailout plan:

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley may be among the biggest beneficiaries of the $700 billion U.S. plan to buy assets from financial companies while many banks see limited aid, according to Bank of America Corp.

Its benefits, in its current form, will be largely limited to investment banks and other banks that have aggressively written down the value of their holdings and have already recognized the attendant capital impairment,” Jeffrey Rosenberg, Bank of America’s head of credit strategy research, wrote in a report today, without identifying particular investment banks.”

The conflict of interest provides all the more reason for the bailout legislation in Congress to have more stringent oversight that the administration opposes.

The Wonk Room notes six months ago, Paulson claimed, “our banks and investment banks, are strong.”

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up