Support NeoGAF

[cntr]

If you can't hire, you can't fire

Bruce Bartlett thinks that Timothy Geithner is becoming a liability to Obama, but there's not much Obama can do about it.

Geithner's political tone-deafness is becoming a serious liability to Obama. The problem with replacing him, as I have said earlier, is finding someone who is qualified, confirmable and not connected to Wall Street. Given that half the top political appointees at Treasury are still awaiting Senate confirmation, I think Obama may be stuck with Geithner no matter how low his stock falls. Is there a potential replacement who has paid his taxes, has populist leanings, knows Wall Street but isn't part of it, who wouldn't be filibustered by the Republicans?​

I made this point the other day, as well. A Senate that can't be trusted to confirm non-controversial nominees can't be trusted to confirm controversial nominees. In that way, holds and filibusters, which are supposed to make the executive branch's nominees more accountable, in fact makes confirmed nominees much less accountable, as the president can't trust his ability to easily replace them and so can't take the risk of firing them. I thought of ending this post with a line about how Republicans who want Geithner gone are actually making it impossible for him to go, but then I realized that Republicans probably don't want Geithner gone. They're served best by making him both unpopular and irreplaceable.

 

[cntr]

One Plus One Equals Two

A longtime reader sends in a thoughtful question ...

If you were a Democratic Congressman reading through 'Citizens United,' and contemplating the impending flood of corporate cash, would you rather:

(a) Postpone a vote on health care reform, perhaps indefinitely, incentivizing every corporation with a vested interest in the status quo to flood your district with negative ads, in the hope of dissuading or unseating enough Democrats to kill reform?

(b) Pass the Senate bill tomorrow, putting the issue to rest, since repeal would take a veto override - and then spend the summer on issues with a more immediate appeal to voters, while blaming any negative ads that do air on your willingness to stand up to powerful interests?

I'm not sure the implications of 'Citizens United' have really sunk in. But this is it for health care reform - it happens now, or not at all. And the only thing more dangerous than reforming a hugely powerful industry is coming achingly close, and then failing. How much would it be worth to the health care industry to unseat enough members to kill reform permanently? How badly do House Democrats want to find out?

​

 

[eznark]

Not politics just hilarious (and tangentially related) and I think you guys could use a chuckle.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,583653,00.html

But as every scorned lover knows, looks can be deceiving. This billboard -- which also has gone up in Atlanta and San Francisco -- is the ultimate act of revenge -- a very public retaliation by a dumped mistress aimed at a very wealthy, and married, businessman who is an adviser to President Obama.

YaVaughnie Wilkins posted the signs after she learned that her lover, Charles E. Phillips — president and director of the tech conglomerate Oracle Corporation and a member of Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board — had reconciled with his wife, the New York Post reported.

The billboards -- there are three in New York and one apiece in Atlanta and San Francisco, where Phillips lives -- may have cost Wilkins up to $250,000, at an estimated $50,000 each.

After the billboards surfaced, Phillips fessed up to his longtime affair through a spokesman on Thursday.

"I had an 8-and-a-half-year serious relationship with YaVaughnie Wilkins. The relationship with Ms. Wilkins has since ended, and we both wish each other well," he said.

That dudes wife needs to beat hell out of that chick. Also, how does your wife take you back after you admit an 8 year affair!

 

[cntr]

Amid Health Care Chaos, Progressives See Opening For Public Option Revival

Health care be on life support in the House of Representatives, but as Democrats work to revive it, some progressives see an opening to bring back an element of reform that flatlined weeks ago: The public option.

They say health care reform should pass, but only after an amending bill has been passed through the filibuster-proof reconciliation process--and that amending bill should include the public option.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee has delivered a strategy memo to the Chiefs of Staff of all Senate Democrats outlining this course.

"The best thing Democrats could do in 2010 is fight big corporations like insurance companies and Wall Street," the memo reads. "On health care, the path forward is obvious."

Step 1 -- The Senate passes a "reconciliation" bill with the popular public option and other budget-related fixes to the original Senate bill on issues like the national exchange and excise tax. This takes only a simple majority.

Step 2 -- The House passes both the original Senate bill and final reconciliation bill back-to-back and sends them to the President.

Step 3 -- A signing ceremony takes place that Democrats and voters can be proud of.​

The memo cites this poll, showing that many Obama voters soured on Democrat Martha Coakley in the Massachusetts Senate race because the party hadn't been aggressive enough in pursuing its agenda.

The idea that the Senate could work with the House on a fix bill has been floating around since before Coakley lost, but as of yet, the Senate hasn't shown many meaningful signs of being on board.

You can read the entire memo below.

[Go to to the article to see the full memo]

 

[Aaron Strife]

Amid Health Care Chaos, Progressives See Opening For Public Option Revival

This is exactly the course of action that should be pursued.

Therefore, it will not happen.

 

[Diablos]

This is exactly the course of action that should be pursued.

Therefore, it will not happen.

Yeah. Makes too much sense.

 

[eznark]

This is exactly the course of action that should be pursued.

Therefore, it will not happen.

Does the senate even have a simple majority for a public option?

 

[mckmas8808]

why would you be opposed to critical thinking in this way? Isn't one of the strongest arguments for health care reform the fact that it has already been so widely implemented throughout the civilized world? Being insular in your thinking helps noone.

I'm not opposed to it. I want a health care bill that more reflects what some other countries in Europe has.

I'm just saying that calling Obama a conservative just purely based on politics from overseas seems a bit silly to me. He's obviously left of center when compared to American politics. And most of the time that's what people mean when they are throwing these "labels" around.

Like I wouldn't call Dennis Kucinch a bit left of center. I'd say he's on the far left. Nothing wrong with that of course.

 

[Tamanon]

Does the senate even have a simple majority for a public option?

Theoretically, yes. But when push comes to shove and an actual vote is required, I don't know.

 

[RiskyChris]

He's obviously left of center when compared to American politics. And most of the time that's what people mean when they are throwing these "labels" around.

No, he's not.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Does the senate even have a simple majority for a public option?

Yes.

 

[WickedAngel]

Part of me wants health care reform to fail altogether just to remind these ignorant assholes what I was talking about a decade from now when 90%+ of the bankruptcies in this country are related to health care expenses and premiums have jumped another 100% with less and less coverage on private insurance and fewer employer-offered options.

This won't matter to them until it's personal and they've seen someone they love suffer because of this piss poor system.

 

[gcubed]

Yes.

well, they did, how many of them have cold feet now?

 

[The Librarian]

Theoretically, yes. But when push comes to shove and an actual vote is required, I don't know.

They just need 50 votes.

 

[Diablos]

well, they did, how many of them have cold feet now?

The "conservative Democrats" like Bayh, Nelson, Landreau, etc. who should have never had a say in the fucking process to begin with as they proved to be even greater obstructionists than the GOP.

They have 51 votes.

All these months and Obama could have been advocating for a robust public option behind closed doors, he had the simple majority, all he had to do was get a little aggressive. Legitimate reform was staring them right in the face. It's painful to think about this. Honestly, I don't know if a party/President has ever shot themselves in the foot this badly. Even Hillarycare looked like more of a fight that was fought until the bitter end.

Bush did whatever the fuck he wanted for six years, basically. Obama likes to sit back and watch things fall apart. Awesome.

 

[GhaleonEB]

well, they did, how many of them have cold feet now?

Hard to say. With the panic right now, probably seven.

A week from now? Probably 51 again.

It seems like there are two camps emerging on reform (pass chunks, or pass Senate bill and fix it), and it will take some time for the ideas go gel. Some leadership would be nice from, well, anyone at this point.

But getting the Senate bill passed enables much more than not passing it. I'm hoping that's the conclusion enough House Dems come to realize.

 

[eznark]

Theoretically, yes. But when push comes to shove and an actual vote is required, I don't know.

That't what I mean. I could see them losing any ear-marked support they had previously acquired thanks to the MA results. Plus, Reid certainly cannot afford to champion that strategy.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Yes.

http://standwithdrdean.com/whipcount-results

So Lieberman is the only one who's firmly opposed to it (according to that).

There's also (I'm guessing) Bayh, Lincoln, Baucus, Nelson, Landrieu...

They could stand to lose a total of 9 votes (Biden breaks the tie). Lot of maybes on there too.

I think it could happen but man, this whole thing just sucks.

Hopefully Obama's SOTU will mark the emergence of a new strategy, and please god don't let it be "Let's pass chunks of it!" because that would be complete shit.

 

[Tamanon]

The "conservative Democrats" like Bayh, Nelson, Landreau, etc. who should have never had a say in the fucking process to begin with as they proved to be even greater obstructionists than the GOP.

They have 51 votes.

All these months and Obama could have been advocating for a robust public option behind closed doors, he had the simple majority, all he had to do was get a little aggressive. Legitimate reform was staring them right in the face. It's painful to think about this.

Bush did whatever the fuck he wanted for six years, basically. Obama likes to sit back and watch things fall apart. Awesome.

OK. Where were the 60 votes for the public option? Who would've flipped?

 

[Diablos]

OK. Where were the 60 votes for the public option? Who would've flipped?

I'm talking about a simple majority. Reconciliation. Obama can't force Reid's hand but he could have played a bigger role in the process. Leaving the Congress to its own devices 100% with little to no input from the WH besides Rahm saying "umm, pass something kthx" at the last minute is NOT LEADERSHIP.

 

[Tamanon]

I'm talking about a simple majority. Reconciliation. Obama can't force Reid's hand but he could have played a bigger role in the process. Leaving the Congress to its own devices 100% with little to no input from the WH besides Rahm saying "umm, pass something kthx" at the last minute is NOT LEADERSHIP.

Alright, so you're saying they should've used Reconciliation from the start then, correct? Just making sure your legislative strategy is in place beyond just "Obama should've just made them do it"

 

[PhoenixDark]

Yes.

But they wouldn't have 60 votes to break the republicans stalling tactics (points of order)

 

[GhaleonEB]

http://standwithdrdean.com/whipcount-results

So Lieberman is the only one who's firmly opposed to it (according to that).

There's also (I'm guessing) Bayh, Lincoln, Baucus, Nelson...

They could stand to lose a total of 9 votes (Biden breaks the tie). Lot of maybes on there too.

I think it could happen but man, this whole thing just sucks.

Hopefully Obama's SOTU will mark the emergence of a new strategy, and please god don't let it be "Let's pass chunks of it!" because that would be complete shit.

Yeah, Lieberman, Lincoln, Landrieu and (combo breaker) Nelson were the obstructionists on the public option. Toss aside those wavering now like Bayh and there's still plenty of wiggle room on whip count.

Really, it's all just fantasy right now. To me there's a very logical path forward, and I'm hoping cooler heads prevail in the next week or so. Things do seem to be calming down a bit.

But they wouldn't have 60 votes to break the republicans stalling tactics (points of order)

You don't need 60 votes to break a point of order if the point of order is ruled, um, out of order. It has to be correct - and then be overridden. Stuff that can pass reconciliation legitimately only takes 50 votes.

 

[Tamanon]

Yeah, Lieberman, Lincoln, Landrieu and (combo breaker) Nelson were the obstructionists on the public option. Toss aside those wavering now like Bayh and there's still plenty of wiggle room on whip count.

Really, it's all just fantasy right now. To me there's a very logical path forward, and I'm hoping cooler heads prevail in the next week or so. Things do seem to be calming down a bit.

Logical path is that the House will break down, vote for the Senate version. Then reconciliation later on to tack on certain other things. It won't be simultaneous because the Senate won't want to pass anything without knowing for sure that the House will pass the bulk.

 

[Diablos]

Tamanon: Not from day one, but the instant things seemed to be heading south in mid/late summer and left for a couple key Senators to decide, the White House should have stepped in and played a bigger role. The discussion was clearly being hijacked at that point and they needed to intervene. If no progress was made, yes, simple majority/reconciliation. You don't fuck up what you were campaigning on since day one, basically. You can't use reconciliation for everything, but for something that for Democrats basically comes once every 15-20 years, it is completely unacceptable to just sit back and think that Nancy Pelosi alone will be able to find common ground with that inept simpleton Harry Reid and a bunch of other poor excuses for Democratic Senators.

Sticking to a campaign promise on what was essentially his biggest domestic talking point is vital for his credibility. It's decisions like that which would solidify Obama's base and keep them interested in electing Democratic candidates to office. He had such an epic win and the base grew so much in 2008; he's pissing on that, now. He was on the verge of expanding a more center-left ideology much like Reagan did with his conservative ideology in the 80's. Now, I'm not so sure. Lots of people are let down, and far too early, and when you fuck up this badly... it's hard to win them back. So much wasted potential.

 

[mckmas8808]

Does the senate even have a simple majority for a public option?

They did a couple months back I believe. They only need 50 Senator votes.

 

[soul creator]

They just need 50 votes and Biden being all Bideny.

fixed?

 

[Aaron Strife]

fixed?

Personally I think seeing Biden break the tie would be amazing.

 

[loosus]

If they had gotten one piece of healthcare legislation passed at a time rather than trying to revamp the entire system in one swoop (just as most Americans had wanted since day fucking one), then we'd have a better chance of getting some truly good changes passed. As it is, they went against what the voters wanted, and now they are paying.

 

[Gruco]

Okay, Stewart's Special Comment is amazing. :lol

 

[mckmas8808]

The stock market has been crashing for the past 3 days due to Obama's crack down purposal on the banks.

I seriously wonder why everybody is selling so fast? What do they think will happen?

 

[WickedAngel]

The stock market has been crashing for the past 3 days due to Obama's crack down purposal on the banks.

I seriously wonder why everybody is selling so fast? What do they think will happen?

They see their free lunch flying out the window. Investors don't mind shady, predatory practices because that is what makes them the quickest money.

 

[The Librarian]

If they had gotten one piece of healthcare legislation passed at a time rather than trying to revamp the entire system in one swoop (just as most Americans had wanted since day fucking one), then we'd have a better chance of getting some truly good changes passed. As it is, they went against what the voters wanted, and now they are paying.

That would be much harder and take much longer.

 

[scorcho]

well then now's the time to buy! considering the pooh pooh Geithner is raining on the prospect you can bet that Wall Street's interest will be massively represented at every single Cabinet and congressional meeting held.

 

[GhaleonEB]

If they had gotten one piece of healthcare legislation passed at a time rather than trying to revamp the entire system in one swoop (just as most Americans had wanted since day fucking one), then we'd have a better chance of getting some truly good changes passed. As it is, they went against what the voters wanted, and now they are paying.

While some relatively small pieces of heatlhcare reform can be broken off, the biggest chunks are interconnected in a way that makes them impossible to separate. As Krugman succinctly put it:

Start with the proposition that we don’t want our fellow citizens denied coverage because of preexisting conditions — which is a very popular position, so much so that even conservatives generally share it, or at least pretend to.

So why not just impose community rating — no discrimination based on medical history?

Well, the answer, backed up by lots of real-world experience, is that this leads to an adverse-selection death spiral: healthy people choose to go uninsured until they get sick, leading to a poor risk pool, leading to high premiums, leading even more healthy people dropping out.

So you have to back community rating up with an individual mandate: people must be required to purchase insurance even if they don’t currently think they need it.

But what if they can’t afford insurance? Well, you have to have subsidies that cover part of premiums for lower-income Americans.

In short, you end up with the health care bill that’s about to get enacted. There’s hardly anything arbitrary about the structure: once the decision was made to rely on private insurers rather than a single-payer system — and look, single-payer wasn’t going to happen — it had to be more or less what we’re getting. It wasn’t about ideology, or greediness, it was about making the thing work.

Unless you mean pass single-payer, which is a lot simpler than the current bill.

 

[TomServo]

Damn Krugman can make so much sense sometimes.

 

[thefit]

The stock market has been crashing for the past 3 days due to Obama's crack down purposal on the banks.

I seriously wonder why everybody is selling so fast? What do they think will happen?

Not really crashing so much as whatever bubble they were conning up is deflating and the reality of money for nothing settling in. With Geithner, Summers and Bernanke signaling from the get go unequivocal support for Wall St no matter what, the resent announcement has dissolved whatever comfort greed pact Wall st enjoyed with the WH.

 

[GaimeGuy]

I want to see someone go on the senate floor and propose a change in the senate procedure that cloture votes to bring bills to the floor and to end debate require 50% of the senate's approval.

This 60 vote bullshit needs to stop. 60 votes to end debate on a bill, and 50 votes to pass a bill, is fucking retarded.

 

[mckmas8808]

Not really crashing so much as whatever bubble they were conning up is deflating and the reality of money for nothing settling in. With Geithner, Summers and Bernanke signaling from the get go unequivocal support for Wall St no matter what, the resent announcement has dissolved whatever comfort greed pact Wall st enjoyed with the WH.

Damn you're so right. But my 401k was starting to look pretty too.

But at least whatever it's going to be now will be more reliable than some inflated 11K Dow that was coming.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Hmm. Laugh or cry, laugh or cry, decisions decisions...

 

[thefit]

Damn you're so right. But my 401k was starting to look pretty too.

But at least whatever it's going to be now will be more reliable than some inflated 11K Dow that was coming.

Your 401k was bound to disappoint you again when whatever bubble they were building up blew up because really thats exactly what was at hand here. There has been ZERO done to stop our insane bubble economy the Volker rule proposal is here to try to do that and so what you have happening is the reality market coming back and the shadow bubble economy running to the hills.

 

[Gruco]

That comic is completely ridiculous. Why would the democrats choose between and field goal and punting when they could just forfeit and avoid the formality of playing?

Maybe take a knee?

 

[besada]

Unless you mean pass single-payer, which is a lot simpler than the current bill.

Yep, you could change this:

Sec. 1811. [42 U.S.C. 1395c] The insurance program for which entitlement is established by sections 226 and 226A provides basic protection against the costs of hospital, related post-hospital, home health services, and hospice care in accordance with this part for (1) individuals who are age 65 or over and are eligible for retirement benefits under title II of this Act (or would be eligible for such benefits if certain government employment were covered employment under such title) or under the railroad retirement system, (2) individuals under age 65 who have been entitled for not less than 24 months to benefits under title II of this Act (or would have been so entitled to such benefits if certain government employment were covered employment under such title) or under the railroad retirement system on the basis of a disability, and (3) certain individuals who do not meet the conditions specified in either clause (1) or (2) but who are medically determined to have end stage renal disease.

To this:

Sec. 1811. [42 U.S.C. 1395c] The insurance program for which entitlement is established by sections 226 and 226A provides basic protection against the costs of hospital, related post-hospital, home health services, and hospice care in accordance with this part for all United States citizens.

And in the change of a single clause create a single-payer system identical to Medicare Part A. You'd need a few more changes to bring parts B, C, and D online.

This would literally be the simplest way to do it. Suddenly everyone in the country would be covered by Medicare, at which point you could shut down Medicaid altogether. There would have to be a tax increase, but that's not such a big deal since at that point companies could divest themselves of their existing coverage (should they so desire) and reinvest the massive amount of money they're now paying for health care coverage, either in new equipment or hiring, both of which create jobs.

It's amazing that the simplest change is also the most radical.

 

[gcubed]

Hmm. Laugh or cry, laugh or cry, decisions decisions...

both

 

[PhoenixDark]

Yeah, Lieberman, Lincoln, Landrieu and (combo breaker) Nelson were the obstructionists on the public option. Toss aside those wavering now like Bayh and there's still plenty of wiggle room on whip count.

Really, it's all just fantasy right now. To me there's a very logical path forward, and I'm hoping cooler heads prevail in the next week or so. Things do seem to be calming down a bit.

You don't need 60 votes to break a point of order if the point of order is ruled, um, out of order. It has to be correct - and then be overridden. Stuff that can pass reconciliation legitimately only takes 50 votes.

Ah ok, good to have that cleared up.

Health care could possibly be in a better position next week than its been in a very long time. If dems do the right thing. I have no idea how the progressives think they can possibly get anything better. Just 51 senators could get you a god damn public option.

 

[RiskyChris]

That comic is completely ridiculous. Why would the democrats choose between and field goal and punting when they could just forfeit and avoid the formality of playing?

Maybe take a knee?

Fake-punt a field goal but they can't even get the snap right and the pubbies make a 98 yard TD.

Sports analogies.

 

[mckmas8808]

Hmm. Laugh or cry, laugh or cry, decisions decisions...

OMG! I love who either decision makes them lose the game.

 

[mckmas8808]

Yep, you could change this:



To this:


And in the change of a single clause create a single-payer system identical to Medicare Part A. You'd need a few more changes to bring parts B, C, and D online.

This would literally be the simplest way to do it. Suddenly everyone in the country would be covered by Medicare, at which point you could shut down Medicaid altogether. There would have to be a tax increase, but that's not such a big deal since at that point companies could divest themselves of their existing coverage (should they so desire) and reinvest the massive amount of money they're now paying for health care coverage, either in new equipment or hiring, both of which create jobs.

It's amazing that the simplest change is also the most radical.

And THERE'S your problem!

 

[PhoenixDark]

Hmm. Laugh or cry, laugh or cry, decisions decisions...

 

[avaya]

Financial Reform proposals are basically absolute rubbish, they do not address the main issues. The banks were the secondary cause of the crisis. Not the primary. They need to cover three main issues.

1. Credit Ratings. Broken business model. This is a service that impacts the price of virtually all instruments either directly or indirectly. A for-profit credit rating system fails because it encourages awarding better ratings over actually giving proper ratings.

S&P, Fitch and Moody's are the REAL cause of this mess. They certified the securitisations as safe. The whole show would have stopped if they upheld their standards.

Only way to solve this is to abolish the current system and offer an international credit rating agency, independent of governments and funded by a fee....

2. Accounting Standards Reform. There needs to be a concerted effort to ban/re-engineer Mark-to-Model, the bastard child of mark-to-market for insolvent garbage. The bank decides what it thinks the asset is worth. Which is a shambles of a situation. Lehman Brothers failed because it was too optimistic doing this. Same for Merrill.

What they need to do is allow a consensus opinion to develop on mark-to-model, so you take the lowest or median value of that asset from a set of valuations conducted by other market participants independent of your firm. The whole point of mark-to-market is to provide transparency and encourage confidence. What is more transparent than letting others in the market decide how much they would pay for your asset? No more batshit valuations.

Along with this there needs to be a wholesale overhaul of off-balance sheet. That overhaul should actually see that practice banned. All it does is allow the creation of opaque structures. Even to this day no one can claim that they know what AIG has actually done in the derivatives market. The managers of these firms even admit they do not know shit about the deals they were making.

IFRS is adopted by the US this decade. This makes changing the code on an international basis far simpler since there will be broad agreement as long as no one is placed at a competitive disadvantage. Laissez-faire practices lead ALWAYS lead to mutually assured destruction because competition drives it to that point.

3.Glass-Steagall 2.0 with VaR
Commercial and investment banking do not belong together and if left unfettered will make the current too big to fail look like childs play in a decade or two. You have to explicitly state that you ban hedge funds and Private Equity businesses for retail banks. If you don't they will find the loopholes.

What the new version of this act should also do is tax by Value at Risk. VaR minimisation tricks and mathematical philandering will still occur but a prohibitive tax on certain VaR magnitudes will guaran-fucking-tee that too big to fail will not cross a threshold. Any firm that collapses can be swallowed up wholesale by the system. This works because it will affect hedge funds too. Doesn't matter if you're public or private.

....that fee. Tobin Tax.

You tax every financial transaction, short of retail customers removing their money from accounts a 1cent fee. This has no real material impact on business. It's totally transparent. However it will raise a lot of cash. That cash pays for the credit ratings agency, and can be placed in a fund that can be used for dealing with another bailout situation. I believe the figures being thrown about said the US could see around several billion dollars a year raised by this fee. On an international basis it is absolutely massive. This is the best financial industry tax ever conceived. There is no logic arguing against this tax. No material impact on business and will accumulate extremely large sums of money overtime that will be readily available when inevitably the shit hits the fan.