ThinkProgress Logo

Politics

Conservatives Co-Opt Christmas: ‘Tis The Season To Kill Health Care Reform

Conservatives turned out on Capitol Hill today for a “Code Red Rally” to “kill” health care reform legislation, organized by groups such as the right-wing Americans for Prosperity (AFP). The Tax Day Tea Party website promoted the event by appealing to Americans to make a “sacrifice” right before Christmas and promised plans for a controversial “die-in“:

We call this plan “Government Waiting Rooms”. The intention is to go inside the Senate offices and hallways, and play out the role of patients waiting for treatment in government controlled medical facilities. As the day goes on some of us will pretend to die from our untreated illnesses and collapse on the floor. [...]

We know it’s a sacrifice to do this right before Christmas. But throughout history American Patriots have made far greater sacrifices than this to protect our liberty. Now the burden (and the honor) falls on us.

ThinkProgress attended the rally and the subsequent dispersal to Senate offices, and we observed no die-ins. One activist we spoke with confirmed that the original die-in strategy wasn’t going on, but didn’t seem to know what had happened. However, the events of the day did take up the mantle of co-opting Christmas as the season to “kill the bill.”

At a small gathering this morning in Upper Senate Park, Tea Party activists sang The 12 Days of Christmas, refashioned with lyrics about the problems under President Obama. Later on at a larger gathering organized by AFP, both Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and conservative radio host Laura Ingraham invoked Christmas as a reason to defeat reform. Watch it:

In the morning, there was also a vehicle driving around Capitol Hill with a large “Kill the Bill” sign and a “Merry Christmas” banner (as well as a crossed-out photograph of two men kissing). At the rally, there were several Christmas-themed signs, including one saying that “Obama Claus” was going to “redistribute your presents,” placed next to pictures of Obama as socialist and fascist figures:

Christmas Tea Party Signs

AFP staffers were also handing out a list called “The 12 Days of Christmas: Health Care Edition” about what Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) gave the country, including “a doctor shortage” and “what women don’t want” (view a larger image here):

AFP Christmas List

Climate Progress

Holland Leads, Time For United States To ‘Step It Up’

The Wonk Room is blogging and tweeting live from Copenhagen.

Last night, the Netherlands became one of the first European nations to commit to an extension of the Kyoto Protocol, the central issue for developing nations, especially the most vulnerable to climate change. Linda Ijmker of Friends of the Earth Netherlands explains how Holland is taking the lead in an exclusive interview with the Wonk Room. Her message to the people of the United States was simple: “don’t be scared” and “step it up”:

My message to the American people is: Act now, take leadership, commit to forty percent reductions. You can achieve it. It’s good for the economy, it creates green jobs, it creates a lot of opportunity. Don’t be scared. So, step it up.

Watch it:

The Netherlands also pledged to new short-term financing for countries already hit by the impacts of climate change, “over and above” its existing commitments to official development assistance (ODA) of 0.8% of its total gross national product.

Top historical polluter United States, which has no intention of ever joining the Kyoto Protocol, has put $1.2 billion in short-term financing in its 2010 budget, but is avoiding making formal international commitments. Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) has called for the administration to commit to $3 billion in international climate finance in the fiscal year 2011 budget, and has released a draft bill for international climate funding.

Yglesias

Endgame

Your little world’s based on lies, lies, lies:

— Jon Cohn on Joe Lieberman.

— Israeli police shoot 21 year-old tourist’s MacBook.

— Dramatic emissions reductions are possible in the extremely short term.

— I don’t think additional layers of local government is going to enhance transparency or accountability.

— Pakistan hearts the Haqqani Network.

As health reform continues to oooze its way through the Senate, consider Operation Ivy’s anti-exercise anthem “Healthy Body”.

Climate Progress

Coming to Copenhagen commits Obama to getting the bipartisan climate and clean energy bill passed

E&E: “U.N. negotiations will help reset Senate’s clock”

President Obama and congressional leaders can expect to have a new target completion date in mid-to-late 2010 for passing a global warming and energy bill after the U.N. negotiations wrap up here at the end of the week.The 193 countries are likely to leave with an agreement to finish their work either at a June meeting or at the next annual U.N. conference slated for Nov. 8-19 in Mexico City.

Don’t call it a deadline. But whichever date they pick, it will become critical for Obama back in Washington as he will essentially be putting his credibility on the line and pledging to the world that he can return to the bargaining table with firm commitments on how to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, as well as hundreds of billions of dollars in long-term financing to help developing countries cope with climate change.

That E&E News (subs. req’d) analysis affirms what I said late last month after President Obama said he would attend Copenhagen, bringing “a U.S. emissions reduction target in the range of 17% below 2005 levels in 2020″³:

Much of the status quo media remains stuck in an everything-progressives-are-doing-will-fail bandwagon, so they missed the key implications of that amazing announcement “” Obama just doubled down on a domestic climate bill.  Yes, I know, you keep reading stories about how the administration is walking away from the bipartisan climate and clean bill.

Here’s more from the E&E News story:

Read more

Economy

Romney’s Got It Wrong: Public Sector Employees Still Make Less Than Those In Private Sector

Our guest bloggers are Lawrence Korb, Senior Fellow, and Jacob Stokes, a national security intern, at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

AP090601044366Last Sunday on Meet the Press, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney blamed American economic woes on what he sees as excessive salaries and benefits for public sector workers:

[T]he real threat right here… is that if we don’t take action to rein in the scale of government and the growth of government spending and the compensation levels of government workers — you saw government workers, average government workers, are now making $30,000 a year more than the average private sector worker. These kinds of excesses and the massive deficits that, that, that government is putting in place, over a trillion dollars a year for these coming several years, this threatens our long-term viability, because it, it, it suggests that we could have runaway inflation.

The $30,000 number is a convenient statistic for someone like Romney, who has an ideological drive to slash the public sector for the sake of slashing it. And he’s hitting on an issue that has become something of a hobby horse for the wider conservative-libertarian movement. USA Today even ran an article on the subject on Dec. 11, with only a one-sentence defense for the other side buried deep in the piece.

But the problem with this statistic — as this post from Amherst economics professor Nancy Folbre points out — is that in many important ways, it compares apples to oranges. And in doing so, it ends up being completely misleading.

Although technically true — the average public sector worker made $71,206 in 2008, compared with $40,331 in the private sector — those numbers mask important factors about the public workforce that must be taking into account when making comparisons to the whole of the private workforce.

Most importantly, a much higher proportion of private workers — 43 percent — work in jobs that earn less than $25,000 a year. Most public sector employees fall into the $25,000-$75,000 range. Why the pay disparity? Overall, federal employees have more education than private employees. Forty-five percent of public sector workers hold a college degree or higher; only 29 percent of private sector workers can say the same. It’s hardly surprising that a population with significantly more education would make more money. That’s the same way in the private sector.

Figuring out how public sector pays stacks up against private sector pay for comparable jobs would offer a much more insightful look into whether the public sector is bloated with overpaid bureaucrats. Lucky for us, Harvard economist George Borjas has done just that (hat tip, Folbre). He found that at the high end of the spectrum — where so many of those free-riding government lifers reside — public sector workers are paid comparably less than their private sector brethren. And this makes sense: why do so many senior officials leave to take lucrative positions at private firms if not for the money?

The level of intellectual rigor practiced by Romney is, unfortunately, par for the course for many people on these shows. But the public should demand more from a probable 2012 GOP presidential candidate.

Yglesias

Health Reform Would Dramatically Expand Access to Health Insurance

Nate Silver has pulled together a nice chart showing the impact of health reform on a family of four trying to buy health care on the individual market in 2016:

hcbill

I’ve seen Marcy Wheeler characterize the plan as an “industry bailout.” And, indeed, if I were a small government conservative one political tactic I would employ would be to start characterizing all initiatives involving government spending as a “bailout.” You could say that ARRA’s provisions funding K-12 education are a “bailout for teacher’s unions.” You could call ACES a “bailout for windmill makers.” And you can call the health care bill an “insurance company bailout.” But the mechanism by which insurers can get extra money under reform is that . . . more people get health insurance at a price they can afford. The bill will also expand Medicaid eligibility to include many currently uncovered poor and near-poor people.

The tax increases in the bill fall overwhelmingly on richer-than-average people and it also includes important reforms to the delivery system, promising ideas to reduce the growth in health care costs, curbs overpayments to Medicare Advantage, etc. Personally, I’d be happier with Swedish health care or what have you. But politics is about real impacts on the lives of real people, and measures that make things better are very good measures.

Politics

Dick Armey sneers at ‘a woman named Maddox’ who ‘has a Ph.D. in something that doesn’t matter.’

During today’s AFP-sponsored “Code Red” anti-health reform rally on Capitol Hill, one of the speakers — former House Majority Leader and current corporate defender Dick Armey — derided MSNBC host Rachel Maddow. Armey was prepared to introduce Sen. Tom Coburn (whom he bizarrely referred to as “Doc Colbin” a couple of times), but Coburn wasn’t there yet. So instead, he told a story that was a shot at Maddow:

ARMEY: The last time [Coburn] and I were together, I had the amazing opportunity to watch him receive a lecture on health care from a woman named, uh, uh, uh, “Maddox.” A television personality. Who I’m told has a Ph.D. in something that doesn’t matter. Who knew she was qualified to lecture the good physician on health care in America because she had actually gone to a doctor once.

Watch it:

For the record, Maddow is a Rhodes scholar and an Oxford Ph.D. in political science. Her doctoral thesis was titled, “HIV/AIDS and Health Care Reform in British and American Prisons.” (Armey has a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Oklahoma.) Armey is apparently referring to a Meet the Press roundtable that he sat on with Maddow and Coburn this past August. During that segment, Maddow took Coburn and Armey to task for condoning the “threats of violence” in the course of the heated health care debate.

Update

On her show, Maddow corrected the record about her exchange with Sen. Coburn:

Security

Neocons Beating War Drums On Iran

pletka200Just as the House is preparing to pass extremely counterproductive legislation on sanctions, neoconservative outlets, while supporting these measures, are now vocal in saying that if enacted they won’t work. In a rash of action in the op-ed pages today, neoconservatives were busy deploring the Iranian regime arguing that they can’t be deterred and calling on Obama to do something – and while none of these writers explicitly stated what that something is, we have a pretty good idea.

Danielle Pletka in the Washington Post argues the Iranian regime is not like the Soviet Union – it can’t be deterred:

It is wrong to think a nuclear Iran can be contained. … The Obama administration should be pressed to find a new way forward. At the very least, we must hope the president’s new policy will not find footing in the false notion that a nuclear Iran can be contained.

Bret Stephens Wall Street Journal floats a conspiracy theory that Iran is helping Venezuela go nuclear which will lead to Cuban Missile Crisis 2.0:

Forty-seven years ago, Americans woke up to the fact that a distant power could threaten us much closer to home. Perhaps it’s time Camelot 2.0 take note that we are now on course for a replay.

The Washington Times editorial page says that Iran is just two weeks away from having a bomb!

The Mullahs could have a bomb any day now… The greatest national security challenge that will face the Obama administration is coming, and Mr. Obama will either shape events or be shaped by them. He said in Oslo that “those who seek peace cannot stand idly by as nations arm themselves for nuclear war.” However, the United States has been standing idle for years, and time is running out. … According to our calendar, that window opens about two weeks from now.

These three pieces should be seen for what they really are: an attempt to beat the war drums loud enough to put the US on the path toward war with Iran.

Since even the most effective and coordinated of international sanctions regimes (such as those that the Obama administration is trying to gather support for) will take time to have an effect, neoconservatives – by preemptively arguing that sanctions are not enough or will fail – will argue from now until forever that Iran is on the verge of attacking someone (Israel or the US), that those suicidal Mullahs can’t be deterred, and that military action is needed right now. Hence, the Washington Times laughable claim that Iran will have a weapon in two weeks.

You would not be remiss for thinking this sounds an awful lot like 2002, when neoconservatives were claiming that the sanctions regime levied against Iraq had failed and began inserting frightening talk of mushroom clouds and yellow cake into a highly charged debate. However in this case, Iran actually has a nuclear program and there is considerable evidence that Iran is developing a nuclear weapons capacity – in other words right-wing fear mongering is not as completely baseless as it was in 2002. Yet the notion that time has run out on diplomatic engagement with Iran and the only way to deal with a threat is to bomb them is totally bogus.

A coordinated and targeted international sanctions regime, not the counterproductive IRPSA legislation in the House, could potentially put real intense targeted pressure on the Iranian regime, squeezing it financially, isolating it internationally, and further undercutting its legitimacy inside Iran. Sanctions that seek to contain Iran, combined with deterrence will likely be just as effective vis-a-vis Iran as it was during the Cold War. And the notion that Iran can’t be deterred or contained is exactly what we have heard about every nuclear-armed adversary of the United States since the end of the World War II. Fareed Zakaria made this point succinctly in 2007, while debating bomb-Iran enthusiast Norman Podhoretz. Watch it:

Transcript: Read more

Politics

Latino Group Invokes The Bible To Counter A Pastor’s Census Boycott Campaign, Encourage Participation

censusadx-large Earlier this year, the Rev. Miguel Rivera, chairman of the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders, began encouraging a full-out boycott of the U.S. Census on behalf of the Latino and immigrant community in protest of the failure to enact immigration reform. Rivera’s efforts have been widely perceived as damaging to the Latino and immigrant community he claims to be empowering. In response, the National Association of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO) has started using the Bible to target religious Latinos with a different message: What would Jesus do?

NALEO is handing out posters that illustrate the arrival of Mary and Joseph in Bethlehem. NALEO explains that the Gospel of Luke indicates that the reason Jesus was born in Bethlehem is because Joseph and Mary were fulfilling their civic duty by returning to the town to be counted by the Roman census. A poster printed by NALEO reads: “This is how Jesus was born, Joseph and Mary participated in the Census.” Nick Kimball, spokesman at the Commerce Department (which oversees the Census Bureau), said that the government played no role in creating the posters.

However, Rivera calls NALEO’s new campaign a “blasphemous” “assault against our Christian faith” and accuses the group of violating “the concept of separation of church and state.” Rivera, who has been using his position as an influential religious leader to promote his boycott, seems to be missing the irony. A lot of Rivera’s own critics have quietly accused him of staging a personal publicity stunt at the expense of his own community. Publicly, they have described him as a “misguided figure who could cause the loss of billions of federal dollars to Latino neighborhoods that need it most.” Even Latino pastors have affirmed that “a man of the cloth should not be pushing Latinos to do something that will ultimately hurt their community.”

Whether the poster is in poor taste or not, NALEO is responding to Rivera on his own turf by making an explicit religious appeal. The Pew Hispanic Research Center estimates that one in every six Latinos belongs to an evangelical church. Undocumented immigrants are among the least likely to participate in the Census and the Drum Major Institute warns that their non-participation could lead to inaccurate demographic information and result in costly mistakes in infrastructure, education, health care planning, and representation.

Climate Progress

UPDATED: Gore Derangement Syndrome

Yes, Maslowski predicted just two years ago that the Arctic could be ice-free by 2013 — see graph of projected ice volume

UPDATE:  The videos of Gore’s talk at COP-15 can be found here. Here is his powerful closing (transcript below) — I have an excellent graph (large PDF) of ice volume trends from several leading scientific institutions based on Maslowski’s 2009 paper at the end:

Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013′

That’s the headline from a December 2007 BBC story on Professor Wieslaw Maslowski’s American Geophysical Union talk about “Our projection of 2013 for the removal of ice in summer.”  In fact, I heard Maslowski in a May 2006 seminar predict that we could be ice-free in the Arctic by 2016 (search my book, Hell and High Water for “ice-free”).

So the flap over the former Vice President’s accurate statement of what Maslowski said is, indeed, symptomatic of an underlying medical condition — one that, I’d add, is often confused for ASS [see "Diagnosing a victim of anti-science syndrome"]:

Read more

Older

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

Sign Up