Month: September 2008

McCain/Bush/Palin’s Sicko Health Plan

by tristero

A new study analyzes the McCain/Bush/Palin health plan. It is a horror:

Senator John McCain’s (R-AZ) health plan would eliminate the current tax exclusion of employer payments for health coverage, replace the exclusion with a refundable tax credit for those who purchase coverage, and encourage Americans to move to a national market for nongroup insurance. Middle-range estimates suggest that initially this change will have little impact on the number of uninsured people, although within five years this number will likely grow as the value of the tax credit falls relative to rising health care costs. Moving toward a relatively unregulated nongroup market will tend to raise costs, reduce the generosity of benefits, and leave people with fewer consumer protections.

Bob Herbert comments:

This entire McCain health insurance transformation is right out of the right-wing Republicans’ ideological playbook: fewer regulations; let the market decide; and send unsophisticated consumers into the crucible alone.

You would think that with some of the most venerable houses on Wall Street crumbling like sand castles right before our eyes, we’d be a little wary about spreading this toxic formula even further into the health care system.

But we’re not even paying much attention.

Read the whole thing.

The Debate We Need

by digby

If you get the New York Times, you will see a full page ad this morning that looks like this.

Campaign For America’s Future is taking on the thankless task of trying to focus this election campaign on seven important issues — that nobody’s talking about (or can’t get heard over the din of Pigs and POW blather.) This is the beginning of their campaign to engage the debate.

Who knows it it’s even possible to get people to pay attention to these important things. But, somebody needs to try.

You can go over to their site and get into the action. (Right wingers often appear, loaded for bear, if you’re of a mind to spar.) Click on the ad on the left column if you want to see what they’re up to on a given day.

.

Buzziest

by digby

Nerve.com has compiled the 50 buzziest blog posts of all time. And it includes some blogs and bloggers you know. (No, not this one.)

They sent out a request sometime back and I thought it said the “sexiest” blog posts. I don’t have a lot of those, but I did tell them that my most googled post is one I wrote about Laura Bush telling a joke about Junior “milking a stallion.” They didn’t pick it. I think it might have been too explicit even for Nerve. (Hey, politics is a dirty business.)

Nerve isn’t completely work safe, so be advised. And I only know that because somebody told me, I swear…

.

Conservatism Is A Luxury

by digby

…we can no longer afford

In democracies, all political factions run against an elite. Since the New Deal, Democrats have cast themselves against the financial and business elite. Since the 1960s, Republicans have thrashed the cultural and intellectual elite. Over the weekend, the moneyed class became much more vulnerable. The foolishness of our financial geniuses now threatens to bring economic sorrow to Main Street. Franklin Roosevelt’s 1936 attack on “the privileged princes of these new economic dynasties” never sounded so up-to-date. Americans don’t mind wealthy and even rapacious capitalists as long as they deliver the goods to everyone else. But when the big boys drag everyone else down, Americans rise up in righteous anger. The New Deal political alignment endured for decades because the financial elites were so profoundly discredited by the Great Depression. The New Deal coalition dissolved only when prosperity began to seem durable and only after the GOP discovered the joys of baiting Hollywood, the media and the academy.

When things are going well, people have the luxury of being able to argue over lipsticks on blowjobs and whether a blastocyst has more rights than a stem cell. When they aren’t, they don’t want the blastocyst and lipstick people in charge.

Why would they? Essentially Republicans are entertainers. When times are good, they bring you fun homegrown culture wars and violent foreign shooting wars. (Let’s go shopping!.) People barely pay attention and when they can’t help watching, as with the impeachment or 9/11, it’s turned into a media porn spectacle: Shock And Awe starring Jenna Jameson. It’s very cathartic.

But they don’t actually govern the country because they don’t believe in government (at least for anything but helping them wage their wars for profit and skimming from the taxpayers.) So, when people’s lives actually start to become affected by their malfeasance, it’s only natural that they get serious. They may just get serious now.

Why, Evuntheconservative Alan Greenspan says this is not business as usual:

The United States is mired in a “once-in-a century” financial crisis which is now more than likely to spark a recession, former Federal Reserve chief Alan Greenspan said Sunday.The talismanic ex-central banker said that the crisis was the worst he had seen in his career, still had a long way to go and would continue to effect home prices in the United States.”First of all, let’s recognize that this is a once-in-a-half-century, probably once-in-a-century type of event,” Greenspan said on ABC’s “This Week.”Asked whether the crisis, which has seen the US government step in to bail out mortgage giants Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, was the worst of his career, Greenspan replied “Oh, by far.””There’s no question that this is in the process of outstripping anything I’ve seen, and it still is not resolved and it still has a way to go,” Greenspan said.

Heckuva job conservatives. It’s been real. Now step aside and let the other guys try to fix it before you take the whole thing down with you.

.

The Shrill One!

by digby

If you didn’t see Paul Krugman on Olbermann, tune in to the repeat. He compared Bush to Hoover and took McCain downtown for his idiotic comment that “the fundamentals are good.”

Bravo.

.

Trusted Sources

by dday

Shankar Vedantam had a significant article in the Washington Post that essentially explains the campaign that John McCain has been running as an indirect way to fire up their own base:

As the presidential campaign heats up, intense efforts are underway to debunk rumors and misinformation. Nearly all these efforts rest on the assumption that good information is the antidote to misinformation.

But a series of new experiments show that misinformation can exercise a ghostly influence on people’s minds after it has been debunked — even among people who recognize it as misinformation. In some cases, correcting misinformation serves to increase the power of bad information […]

Political scientists Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler provided two groups of volunteers with the Bush administration’s prewar claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. One group was given a refutation — the comprehensive 2004 Duelfer report that concluded that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction before the United States invaded in 2003. Thirty-four percent of conservatives told only about the Bush administration’s claims thought Iraq had hidden or destroyed its weapons before the U.S. invasion, but 64 percent of conservatives who heard both claim and refutation thought that Iraq really did have the weapons. The refutation, in other words, made the misinformation worse.

A similar “backfire effect” also influenced conservatives told about Bush administration assertions that tax cuts increase federal revenue. One group was offered a refutation by prominent economists that included current and former Bush administration officials. About 35 percent of conservatives told about the Bush claim believed it; 67 percent of those provided with both assertion and refutation believed that tax cuts increase revenue.

In a paper approaching publication, Nyhan, a PhD student at Duke University, and Reifler, at Georgia State University, suggest that Republicans might be especially prone to the backfire effect because conservatives may have more rigid views than liberals: Upon hearing a refutation, conservatives might “argue back” against the refutation in their minds, thereby strengthening their belief in the misinformation. Nyhan and Reifler did not see the same “backfire effect” when liberals were given misinformation and a refutation about the Bush administration’s stance on stem cell research.

The logic here can be explained by the decades-long project by conservatives to delegitimize collective trusted sources – in particular, the “liberal media” – and cultivate their own. When conservatives hear about the Duelfer report, they can easily access a refutation from across the spectrum of wingnuttia, written by Stephen Hayes or Hugh Hewitt or some other wingnut welfare recipient. When they hear that tax cuts don’t increase revenue, they have dozens of bits and pieces of information they can store in their minds to refute the refutation. When they hear an obvious lie in one of John McCain’s ads called out by a fact-checking organization, they can hear Karl Rove tell them that the fact-checkers are biased.

Collective trusted sources aren’t going to be much of a help here among your hard-core wingnuts (among moderates and independents, the type who say “all politicians are full of it and I think for myself,” it probably won’t either). It is not enough to show a chart with verifiable facts about how earnings for everyone but those with professional degrees are dropping in the Bush economy – wingnut supply-siders argue the economy’s doing great, and that chart was probably from some liberal think tank (it was from the Census bureau). It is not enough for someone like Joe Klein to plainly state the facts of John McCain’s health care policy, which amounts to a huge tax increase on the middle class (not enough has been made of this. McCain wants to tax employer-provided benefits as income, and the goal is to get employers to drop their benefits packages, leaving the individual on their own to manage a largely unregulated individual insurance market armed with a tax credit too meager to pay for decent coverage. McCain’s core philosophy about health care is that Americans have TOO MUCH of it, and if they were forced to buy it themselves, they would buy less.) – he’s part of the liberal media. US News and World Report can can chronicle John McCain’s journey from maverick to liar, and so can the National Journal and just about every major media organization. But they are just more liberal house organs.

In fact, it’s not enough for someone like Alan Greenspan to admit, several years too late, that McCain’s plan to “finance tax cuts with borrowed money” is distasteful, or even for McCain’s own economic adviser to admit that tax increases are inevitable for the next President AND that McCain is lying about this because tax cuts for Republicans are “a brand, and you don’t dilute the brand” – there’s a whole industry of economic denialists who will spin and shape and distort to tell you that federal revenues are bigger under Bush, and tax cuts equal increased revenue, and all the other discredited arguments.

Which is why Meghan Kelly’s demolition of Tucker Bounds today on Fox News is arguably more important than the independent analyses or comprehensive takes from sources that ought to be trusted more.

You see that Bounds falls back on “you can’t trust what Obama will say because he voted to raise taxes 94 times,” etc. He’s trying to delegitimize anything that comes out of Obama’s mouth. And for some wingers, that will be enough. But seeing this argument play out on conservative media is far more likely to be impactful to those who have seen traditional sources trashed and conservative sources elevated and made trusted over the years. “Why is John McCain saying Obama will raise taxes on the middle class when he’s not?” is a pretty compelling argument coming from an embedded conservative trusted source, I would imagine. And Bounds had no answer for it.

We all have the power to be trusted sources in our spheres of influence. Instead of passing around links to the New York Times saying something or Time saying another, the only way to persuade in an environment of diminishing trusted sources is to create your own arguments. Cracks in the facade like Meghan Kelly showed today are not going to be plentiful, important as they may be.

.

Failed Philosophy

by digby

Barack issued a statement on the meltdown today that I think is quite good. He does, unfortunately, say that he doesn’t blame McCain personally for the meltdown on Wall Street, which I think was an unnecessary disclaimer. (Why do they keep doing that?)

But he goes on to say that the meltdown is a consequence of:

… the economic philosophy he subscribes to. It’s a philosophy we’ve had for the last eight years – one that says we should give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyone else. It’s a philosophy that says even common-sense regulations are unnecessary and unwise, and one that says we should just stick our heads in the sand and ignore economic problems until they spiral into crises.Well now, instead of prosperity trickling down, the pain has trickled up – from the struggles of hardworking Americans on Main Street to the largest firms of Wall Street.This country can’t afford another four years of this failed philosophy. For years, I have consistently called for modernizing the rules of the road to suit a 21st century market – rules that would protect American investors and consumers. And I’ve called for policies that grow our economy and our middle-class together. That is the change I am calling for in this campaign, and that is the change I will bring as President.

As anyone who regularly reads this blog knows, I think one of the tasks of liberal politicians is to expose the bankruptcy of the modern conservative philosophy. If you don’t run against that, you end up running against some guy who, even though he’s been an elected member of that party for nearly thirty years, can claim that he’s a change agent. You have to indict the philophy and the party that adheres to it. (Think about what they did to liberalism…)

These financial failures are a recurring consequence of Republican governance. Their faux laissez faire economic policies (in which the rich get richer from unregulated feeding frenzies until taxpayers are forced to bail out the institutions or risk economic catastrophe) inevitably lead to these crises. It is the single most enduring feature of their philosophy. If John McCain doesn’t believe in that then he wouldn’t be running as a Republican. It’s fundamental.

As McCain often says himself he’s just a foot soldier in the revolution. But he’s fought for thirty years on their side, pretending to be a maverick, when all he’s ever really been is an intemperate jackass. At the end of the day, it’s his tribe and he’s as responsible as any one of them for the mess they’ve created.

As scary as this whole thing is, it’s the first news I’ve heard in a long time that makes me feel confident again hat the Democrats will win this election. No member of the Republican party should be put in charge at a time like this — it would letting the lunatics run the asylum. I don’t think that’s hard for people to figure out (even in the midst of our new number one reality TV hit: Culture War XXI: The Alaska Chronicles.)

BTW: I don’t suppose anyone noticed that gas prices jumped to five bucks a gallon in some places over the week-end.

Update: I wonder if Phil Gramm’s whiney at all today. His employer’s looking a little bit shaky. (h/t to bb)

.

Word On The Street

by digby

Kevin Hayden has a neat idea that some of you might want to be involved with. Check it out:

Why do you blog? Or read political blogs? How’s the economy impacted you and your family in the last eight years? What do you think about the presidential tickets? Are there other races you’re concerned about? Know any troops who’ve been to Iraq? What issues really matter a lot? Do you have a message for your elected officials?

Then, if you’re along (or near) my coast-to-coast route, why not let me interview and video you?

Here’s how to make the Word On The Street project happen. Time’s short before the launch, so act today.

We’ve heard the candidates pitch their issues, heard the pundits and the partisans. Isn’t it time that they took time to hear what Americans like you want?

This is your chance. Our chance. There’s no time to hesitate: click on the link above, offer to help, and let’s stop complaining that we never get heard. This year, let’s change that dynamic once and for all.

I have a feeling some of you might have something to say …

.

Von Spakovsky 2.0

by digby

Biden mentioned the latest caging gambit in his speech this morning and progressives in Michigan are gearing up for it:

Stop McCain’s Plan to Deny Votes of People Who Have Lost Their Homes

Sign below and tell John McCain and the Republican Party to stop their outrageous plans to prevent Michigan residents who have lost their homes to foreclosures from voting this November!

Republican Party officials have admitted they plan to suppress the vote in November of families that have lost their homes. Plans include party officials who will monitor polls on election day and use foreclosure lists in an attempt to stop voters who have lost their homes from casting their ballots (MI Messenger 9/10/08).

Families who have lost their homes to foreclosure should not be kicked when they are down. Their homes have already been taken away from them because of the disastrous economic policies of the last eight years and the unfair, policies of the Bush administration.

Do not take away their right to vote this November. Having lost their homes, losing their right to vote would be a slap in the face of all Americans.

Here’s the story:

Republican leaders have since disavowed plans to use foreclosure lists as part of their plan to challenge the eligibility of some voters, but an attorney for the party, Eric Doster, did confirm that the party would use returned mail to challenge voters based on residency. As veteran Republican activist Allen Raymond told Michigan Messenger in a recent interview, holding down Democratic turnout is a key part of Republican strategy for victory in November.

Raymond knows about Republican campaign tactics. For almost a decade he managed campaigns for Republicans running for state and national office. In the 2002 New Hampshire elections, he ran a phone-jamming operation aimed at blocking elderly people from arranging rides to the polls, an illegal action that he says was approved by the highest levels of the party. He spent three months in federal prison. Earlier this year Raymond published a book about his life and work as a Republican operative, titled “Confessions of a Republican Operative: How to Rig an Election.”

As for our report that the Michigan GOP planned to use foreclosure lists to block likely Democratic voters, Raymond said: “It’s a very good tactic. It works.”

“It is actually a very smart thing to do,” he went on, “particularly in this climate with so many foreclosures.”

For Republicans, he said, targeting the foreclosures would be a cost-effective and “probably” legal method of reducing Democratic votes.

If he were still in the election business, he said, “I’d be doing that all day long.”

Raymond explained how he would use foreclosure lists.

“You would go into certain geo-political areas and make a selection based on voter history and performance, and then what you would do is look for foreclosures within those geopolitical areas, and you would mail letters, and then those letters would come back and say that that person’s not there any more because their house has been foreclosed on, and they get challenged,” he said.

He explained why it makes sense for Republicans to seek to disqualify people who have lost their homes.

“If you look at who is being foreclosed upon, it is going to be sub-prime [borrowers]. Sub-prime [borrowers] are generally going to be low-income people, and low-income people are generally going to be Democratic voters.”

“You got to remember this is a cost-per-contact business,” he explained. By targeting households in foreclosure, for the price of a letter and first-class postage, Republicans get a high rate of return, because people in foreclosure are very likely to move and to have their mail returned.

Raymond estimated that people might have moved out of as many as a third of homes listed as foreclosed. “That is a huge number,” he said, noting that people enduring the stress of foreclosure are not likely to think to change the address of their voter registration.

Raymond said that, barring some legislative action, Republicans will be free to challenge people who’ve lost their homes at the polls.

“They will get challenged and they will get denied,” he said

.

John Fund, who’s recently written a book on “voter fraud” said on Bill Maher that the Republicans would be challenging every provisional ballot, which means if the race is close it could get thrown into the conservative courts. It’s unlikely that would happen, just as it’s unlikely they could cull enough voters from foreclosure lists to swing an election. But a lot of this is just designed to create havoc at the polls on election day and make the process so arduous that busy people with jobs and kids and lives just don’t have the time to wait.

The last presidential election I had to vote by provisional ballot. Even though I’d been on the same voter roll for 15 years, for some reason my name didn’t show up. It happens even by acident. But it took me nearly an hour to vote. After standing in line for 30 minutes, I had to go through many hoops before I could get my ballot. People were very nice, but it was a frustrating experience. I can only imagine what happens in someplace with a high population density and fewer machines — and you’re already late for work.

They’ve built this vote suppression machine since the 1980s. There is absolutely no reason to believe they will not use it — particularly in an election that’s going to be won or lost on turn out among first time voters.

.

Sheldon Whitehouse Gets “Senator For Life”

by dday

While John McCain and the Republicans are steadfastly trying to eliminate issues and facts from the election altogether, there is one exception to that rule – offshore drilling. There’s a large enough group of lawmakers working on this that something is likely to come out of Congress in the waning days of the session, and most likely it won’t be that great. From a practical standpoint, Republicans can simply wait out the Congressional moratorium which has to be renewed every year and let it elapse, meaning that they would then be able to deliver leases to oil and gas companies allowing for exploration as close as 3 miles from the shoreline. Democrats are trying to gain a political advantage by showing how bankrupt the “all of the above” energy plan Republicans appear to endorse truly is, by forcing a series of votes where the GOP will cling to its Big Oil buddies, and vote down removing their tax breaks, incentives for solar and wind, etc. And there is some movement by more threatened Republicans to embrace a more comprehensive bill which would incentivize renewables and cut Big Oil subsidies in addition to limited allowances on drilling.

However, I think that this argument made by Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse is the one worth repeating a thousand times between now and November.

WHITEHOUSE: Gentlemen, we’re in the middle of a near total mortgage system meltdown in this country. We have a health care system that burns 16 percent of our GDP, in which the Medicare liability alone has been estimated at $34 trillion. We’re burning $10 billion a month in Iraq.

This administration has run up $7.7 trillion in national debt, by our calculation. And there is worsening evidence every day of global warming, with worsening environmental and national security and economic ramifications. In light of those conditions, do any of you seriously contend that drilling for more oil is the number one issue facing the American people today?

(Long silent pause during which nobody answers.)

WHITEHOUSE: No, it doesn’t seem so.

And relatedly, the Republicans who brought you all of these policy failures, in the economy, health care, Iraq, housing, and the environment, are telling you that the answer completely lies in drilling.

Trust them?

The words “snake,” “oil” and “salesmen” come to mind.

.