ThinkProgress Logo

Economy

Bill Kristol: Tea Party Won’t Care ‘If A Few Millionaires Pay A Couple Percent More In Taxes’

The Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol said that Republicans should allow the Bush tax cuts to expire on the richest 2 percent Americans, during an appearance on Fox News Sunday, explaining that the GOP may not have the leverage to maintain the top rate at 35 percent.

The comment comes one week after Kristol called on the party to stop “falling on its sword to defend a bunch of millionaires” and just as Republicans may be signaling a willingness to increase rates as part of a balanced package to avoid the fiscal cliff. Kristol speculated that the Tea Party could support the change:

I just don’t think Republicans have the leverage, or that it’s worth using all their – whatever leverage they have, to maintain rates at 35 percent instead of 37 or 38, especially if you can take it up to millionaires. I just don’t think it’s economically as a matter of policy important enough. [...] You know, a lot of the Tea Party guys don’t care that much if a few millionaires pay a couple percent more in taxes, honestly.

He also predicted that policy makers would reach “a deal by December 31, and I believe Republicans will yield a bit on top rates.” “I mean, President Obama ran twice on this platform and he won last I looked, both presidential elections,” Kristol added. Election Day exit polls found that 60 percent of Americans support higher taxes for the wealthy.

Climate Progress

Grantham To Climate Scientists: ‘Be Persuasive. Be Brave. Be Arrested (If Necessary)’

I have yet to meet a climate scientist who does not believe that global warming is a worse problem than they thought a few years ago. The seriousness of this change is not appreciated by politicians and the public.

Uber-hedge fund manager Jeremy Grantham has a must-read opinion piece in the journal Nature.

Grantham is cofounder and Chief Investment Strategist of GMO (with some $100 billion in assets) — a self-described “die hard contrarian.” He is also one of the few leading financial figures who gets both global warming and growing food insecurity, two cornerstones of Climate Progress analysis. See Grantham’s piece “Welcome to Dystopia,” which explains in detail that “We are five years into a severe global food crisis that is very unlikely to go away. It will threaten poor countries with increased malnutrition and starvation and even collapse.

Grantham’s key message to the readership of one of the world’s leading science journals is that humanity is headed pell-mell towards disaster, and scientists must speak out more:

President Barack Obama missed the chance of a lifetime to get a climate bill passed, and his great environmental and energy scientists John Holdren and Steven Chu went missing in action. Scientists are understandably protective of the dignity of science and are horrified by publicity and overstatement. These fears, unfortunately, are not shared by their opponents, which makes for a rather painful one-sided battle. Overstatement may generally be dangerous in science (it certainly is for careers) but for climate change, uniquely, understatement is even riskier and therefore, arguably, unethical.

It is crucial that scientists take more career risks and sound a more realistic, more desperate, note on the global-warming problem. Younger scientists are obsessed by thoughts of tenure, so it is probably up to older, senior and retired scientists to do the heavy lifting. Be arrested if necessary. This is not only the crisis of your lives — it is also the crisis of our species’ existence. I implore you to be brave.

Hear! Hear!

And some have heard — and are leading (see Lonnie Thompson on why climatologists are speaking out: “Virtually all of us are now convinced that global warming poses a clear and present danger to civilization”).

Here’s Grantham summarizing the dangerous path humanity is now on:

Read more

Election

Republicans Abandon Romney in Droves After ‘Gifts’ Comments

Mitt Romney’s comments to donors about the “gifts” that President Barack Obama gave to constituents to win the election continue to cause members of his party to run away from the former candidate. Despite their insistence during the election that Romney’s position on entitlement in America was accurate, the new consensus among the GOP politicians, if not their pundits, is that Romney’s statements could not be more wrong.

After several prominent Republican governors expressed their disagreement with Romney’s statements, the hits have continued coming. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, considered at one point by the Romney campaign as a possible running mate, said on Friday, “You can’t expect to be a leader of all the people and be divisive. You have to talk about themes, policies that unite people, and play to their aspirations and their goals and their hopes for their family and their neighbors.”

Tim Pawlenty, former Minnesota governor and another potential running mate for Romney, though silent on Romney’s 47% comments, likewise shot-down Romney’s “gifts” theory.

Those who didn’t outright disagree with Romney’s words disagreed with his message. Appearing on Meet the Press on Sunday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) stated that it wasn’t his intention to vilify those who are beneficiaries of public assistance programs:

People can be on public assistance and scheme the system and that’s real, these systems are teetering on bankruptcy. But most people on public assistance don’t have a character flaw. They just have a tough life. I want to create more jobs. The focus should be on creating more jobs, not demonize those who find themselves on hard times.

Meanwhile, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) gave an interview highlighting his issues with Romney’s belief. “I don’t want to rebut him point by point. I would just say to you, I don’t believe that we have millions and millions of people in this country that don’t want to work,” Rubio said. “I think we have millions of people in this country that are out of work and are dependent on the government because they can’t find a job.”

New Mexico governor Susana Martinez (R) and top Romney surrogate to the Hispanic community Carlos Guiterrez have also joined in the chorus disparaging Romney’s statements and calling for more inclusiveness in the Republican party. It’s unfortunate that this many Republican politicians seem to have discovered the divisiveness of their party’s policies towards minorities and the working class only after a massive loss to President Obama.

Update

Newt Gingrich also dismissed the remarks during an appearance on ABC’s This Week. “I just think it’s nuts,” he said. “I mean, first of all, it’s insulting.” “The job of a political leader in part is to understand the people. If we can’t offer a better future that is believable to more people, we’re not going to win.”

Justice

Top Republican Suggests Obama Sat On Petraeus Scandal Until After The Election

During a Sunday appearance on Meet The Press, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-MI) baselessly claimed that President Obama knew about Gen. David Petraeus’ affair before the election, implying that the administration somehow manipulated the timeline of the scandal. “I’m not sure the president was not told before the Election Day,” he asserted. “The Attorney General said that the Department of Justice did not notify the President. But we don’t know if the Attorney General did.”

Attorney General Eric Holder defended his department’s handling of the investigation earlier this week, noting that standard protocol prohibits DOJ from sharing information about pending investigations with members of Congress or the president, so long as they do not undermine national security. Later in the program, former Clinton Chief of Staff and Chair of the Center for American Progress, John Podesta, explained that the rule has been in place since 1993 and is designed to prevent politics from contaminating the process. He encouraged Obama to improve that buffer:

PODESTA: With respect to what Andrea [Mitchell] said about Mike Rogers tossing this hand grenade on the table, I would note he did it with zero evidence. In 1993, back to the Clinton era, Andrea will remember this, I recommended strict protocols between the Justice Department and the White House, which were implemented. I’m sure they have changed to some extent. But there is a reason why the Justice Department doesn’t talk to the White House about ongoing active investigations. I think that President Obama ought to direct the Attorney General to obviously review those and report to him about whether they could be improved. But there are very good reasons why the Justice Department doesn’t talk to the White House about investigations.

Watch it:

Justice Department officials had known about the investigation since the summer, but were told that the matter did not affect national security. Petraeus’s boss, Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr, was notified about the affair on Election Day, after the FBI concluded its review. That night, Clapper advised Petraeus to resign.

Politics

McCain Refuses To Support Any Secretary Of State Nominee

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has not hesitated to voice his distaste towards U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice, who may be nominated to replace Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. On Face the Nation Sunday morning, McCain went even further than simply opposing Rice’s nomination and said that, “until we find out all the information” on the Benghazi consulate attacks, he would not support any Secretary of State nominee.

McCain at first said it “might be a beginning” if Rice could come on the program to explain her position. But when pressed by host Bob Schieffer, the Arizona senator dug in and refused to support any nominee “under the present circumstances”:

SCHIEFFER: Until then, you will remain opposed to her nomination?

MCCAIN: Under the present circumstances, until we find out all the information as to what happened, I don’t think you would want to support any nominee right now. Because this is very very serious and it has even larger implications than the deaths of 4 Americans. It really goes to the heart of this whole light foot print policy that this administration is pursuing.

Watch it:

McCain’s scapegoating of Rice has been soundly debunked, as the ambassador was simply given talking points provided by the intelligence community. Even other Republican senators have backed away from his plan to block her nomination. Despite the lack of support behind him, McCain appears willing to take his politicization of the Libya attack to new heights in the nomination process.

Security

Gingrich: U.S. Should Abandon The Middle East Peace Process

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) on Sunday dismissed the idea of having peace talks between Israel and Palestine, saying that it is too late to talk about peace.

While Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) was on Face the Nation saying that it’s “very important that we recognize that the United States of America has got to push as hard as we can to resolve this Israeli-Palestinian issue, and so many events hinge on making that [peace] process go forward,” Gingrich was on ABC’s This Week, arguing that we should “end the talk about the peace process”:

GINGRICH: One, end all the talk about the peace process. You have a permanent war in the region. You have people determined to destroy Israel. They spent all the periods of non-war building up the weapons to have war. And then when they think it’s appropriate, they wage war. And then they go back to saying, oh, no, let’s talk about a peace process while we accumulate more weapons.

Watch it:

The U.S. is committed to helping Israel negotiate a peace agreement. On Sunday morning, just hours before Gingrich called for an end to peace talks, Obama was asking for peace from both sides, saying, “Those who champion the cause of Palestinians should recognize that if we see a further escalation of the situation in Gaza than the likelihood of us getting back on any kind of peace track that leads to a two-state solution is going to be pushed off way into the future.”

Security

Lieberman Breaks With McCain, Graham On Libya Investigation: ‘I Respectfully Separate From My Two Amigos’


Today on Fox News Sunday, Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) said they did not think the U.S. Senate should create a special committee to investigate the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya on Sept. 11. Chambliss and Lieberman said the Senate currently has the capacity to investigate the matter and that a new committee is not needed.

Republican senators John McCain (AZ), Lindsey Graham (SC) and Kelly Ayotte (NH) this week called for a Watergate-style special “select committee” to investigate the attack, claiming that the Obama administration, particularly U.N. Ambasss misled the public about the attack resulting from protests against an anti-Islam video.

But Chambliss and Lieberman, both close friends of McCain and Graham (Lieberman, Graham and McCain are often referred to as “The Three Amigos“), rejected the proposal. “I respectfully separate from my two amigos on this one,” Lieberman said:

WALLACE: Do you think that we need … do we need a special committee or can your standing committees do it?

CHAMBLISS: Well first of all these two guys are two of my best friends and two of Joe’s best friends. We travel a lot together to some very dangerous places but the committees within the United States Senate are very capable of investigating this in the right way and this is one time I have a slight disagreement with my good friends.

LIEBERMAN: Yeah I respectfully separate from my two amigos on this one and I agree with Saxby. This was a tragedy but it doesn’t rise to the level of 9/11/01. Our committees can handle this and come up with answers.

Earlier in the segment, Lieberman undermined the central case McCain, Graham and Ayotte made in arguing for the special committee, namely the suggestion that Rice willfully inaccurately described the events of the Libya attack. “As I look at what we now know the intelligence community was saying that week and I look at Ambassador Rice’s statements on television on the following Sunday morning, I don’t find anything inconsistent between those two,” he said. Watch the clips:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) on Friday rejected McCain’s request for a special committee on Libya in a strongly worded letter. “I refuse to allow the Senate to be used as a venue for baseless partisan attacks,” Reid wrote.

Climate Progress

Meet The New Dust Bowl, Same As The Old Dust Bowl

Ken Burns’ 2-part documentary “Dust Bowl” premieres tonight on PBS. Sadly, Burns fails to make the link between then and now. Climate Progress has done so in regards climate change many times (see “We’re Already Topping Dust Bowl Temperatures — Imagine What’ll Happen If We Fail To Stop 10°F Warming“). But the piece below makes clear there’s much more to the link — JR.

by Don Carr, via Environmental Working Group

Ken Burns, America’s premiere documentarian, has tackled topics from jazz to the Civil War. His new film chronicles the Dust Bowl, the massive ecological disaster that plagued a large swath of U. S. farmland during the 1930’s.

Misguided farming practices at the heart of the disaster

The opening episode of the 4-hour epic that premieres on PBS on November 18 goes right to the cause of the problem.  In a short time, farmers converted an area twice the size of New Jersey and centering in the Oklahoma Panhandle from native grassland to wheat fields.  They did so because of a concerted policy in the 1920’s to industrialize agriculture and to “turn farming into a factory.” But the wind-swept prairie that dominated the region was unsuited for growing much, aside from drought- resistant grasses. Once farmers turned over the firm soil, they set the stage for a monumental disaster.

“Suitcase” farmers from back East –precursors to today’s Wall Street investors and absentee landlords – added to the problem by irresponsibly abandoning 4 million acres to “blow with each new wind” when the drought hit.

Burns’ film makes clear what really caused the disaster.

“A sea of grass once the domain of Indians and buffalo disappeared beneath the plow,” says Peter Coyote, the actor who narrates the documentary.

“We were just too selfish and we were trying to make money. It didn’t work out,” says an Oklahoma survivor of the disaster.

“A classic tale of humans pushing hard against nature and nature pushing back,” says New York Times columnist Timothy Egan, who authored the book, “The Dust Bowl.”

Hugh Bennett, founder and head of the Soil Conservation Service, was tasked by President Roosevelt to find a solution. He characterized the basic cause of the problem as “an attempt to impose upon the region, a system of agriculture to which the plains are not adapted.”

Because of this human-caused disaster, American agriculture went into a downward spiral as land prices cratered, cattle herds were culled at government expense, farmers committed suicide rather than face foreclosures, and children succumbed to deadly pneumonia caused by inhaling wind-blown dust or got lost and died when “dusters” hit.

Conservation worked

Read more

Justice

Head Of Romney’s Hispanic Outreach: ‘I Was Shocked’ By ‘Gifts’ Comment

Carlos Gutierrez, Mitt Romney’s director of Hispanic outreach, slammed the former GOP presidential candidate’s claims that minority voters supported President Obama because he bribed them with “gifts,” suggesting that Romney may not have even known that his comments were offensive. Romney made the remarks last Wednesday, in a post-election call with donors.

During an appearance on CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday, Gutierrez took umbrage at the remarks and called on Republicans to support comprehensive immigration reform that could help them win over Hispanic voters:

CANDY CROWLEY (HOST): You know what Mitt Romney has said. He is talking to a group of donors and talking about the Obama campaign. He said that he went out and gave a lot of stuff to groups that they hoped would vote for them and motivate them. specifically the African-American community, the Hispanic community, and young people…. What do you make of that kind of argument?

GUTIERREZ: I was shocked. I was shocked, and frankly I don’t think that’s why the Republicans lost the election. I think we lost the election because the far right of this party has taken the party to a place that it doesn’t belong. [...]

CROWLEY: And you would admit, though, that your candidate said a lot of things seen as anti-latino. You yourself said that they fear the Republican Party, and he was the head of it.

GUTIERREZ: He failed at that. And that is true, and, you know, the unfortunate part and we were just talking about this, I don’t know if he understood that he was saying something that was insulting. The language, the attitude, the body language, that’s what Latinos watch.

Watch it:

A growing number of Republicans are distancing themselves from Romney’s claims, while prominent lawmakers like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) have re-started negotiations aimed at achieving comprehensive reform “that would create a limited guest-worker program and enable illegal immigrants already in the U.S. with no criminal record to pay fines and eventually apply for legal status.”

Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Marco Rubio (R-FL) are calling for a narrower approach and are considering a DREAM Act-like bill that would allow young undocumented immigrants to stay in the country.

Older

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

Sign Up