house-democrats

Huffington Post…

WASHINGTON — After some encouraging signs that Republicans might cooperate with them, the two House Democrats trying to give the long-term jobless extra weeks of unemployment benefits are dismayed the GOP has instead moved a bill that could take benefits away. Reps. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Bobby Scott (D-Va.) want to give the long-term unemployed another 14 weeks of unemployment insurance. In a remarkable April meeting , House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) encouraged them to work with Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.), chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, which oversees unemployment insurance. Instead, Camp is pursuing a bill that would give states the option to spend federal unemployment dollars on paying down debt instead of paying for extended unemployment benefits. “Instead of acting on our bill to extend aid to unemployed workers who have exhausted their benefits, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Camp wants to gut unemployment benefits and deny millions of jobless workers the means to help make ends meet,” Lee and Scott said in a statement. “As we face an unemployment rate of 9 percent nationwide, an unemployment rate for teenagers three times as high as the national average, and an economy where there are 4.4 unemployed workers for every available job opening, it is simply wrong to propose a bill that would further penalize unemployed workers across the country.” Camp’s office declined to comment. Ways and Means will vote on Camp’s bill on Wednesday. Federal extensions of jobless aid have given the unemployed access to 99 weeks of benefits in the states with the worst jobs markets. The Lee-Scott bill would give another 14 weeks of benefits to anyone who’s been unemployed longer than six months, so it would benefit Nebraskans who’d exhausted the 60 weeks of benefits they are allotted and Californians who’d run through their 99 weeks alike. But the bill would cost roughly $16 billion, which makes it a non-starter for Republicans. Lee and Camp at one point broke with Democratic doctrine and said they’d be willing to offset the cost with budget cuts, but they have not followed through with any proposed cuts. The White House has estimated that 4 million people will run out of jobless aid without finding work this year.

See the original post:
Bill To Help Long-Term Jobless Overshadowed By Bill That Could Cut Benefits

Find our Weekly Commercial Real Estate, Private Equity and Fund Newsletters at www.WeeklyBrief.net

{ 0 comments }

Huffington Post…

WASHINGTON — In the battle over the Republican budget plan that passed the House Friday, Democratic insiders have been left wondering why the American Association of Retired Persons, the powerful lobby for older Americans and the defender of all things Medicare, has been largely sitting on the sidelines. After all, the budget proposed by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), if signed into law, would slash Medicare and convert it to a system of government subsidies for private insurance. AARP has put out a statement raising concerns about that plan and fired up an email campaign to oppose it, but several Democratic operatives said they had hoped the lobby would do much more. For his part, AARP spokesman James Dau insisted the lobby was fully engaged, contacting every House member and generating 126,000 grassroots emails opposing the Ryan budget in just 48 hours. “AARP has been working at the national and grassroots levels fighting against threats to critical lifeline programs like Social Security and Medicare since the deficit debate began more than a year ago,” Dau said. But during the health reform debate, Democrats say, the AARP was a much more active participant, to the Democrats’ political benefit. Now, insiders speculate that recent probes mounted by House Republicans may have cowed the influential group. “It’s sort of like doing the bare minimum,” a Democratic aide said shortly before the vote on Ryan’s budget. “Considering the House is about to pass a bill ending Medicare, you’d think they’d be setting their hair on fire.” “It’s definitely surprising,” a Democratic-leaning lobbyist said of AARP’s minimal resistance. Or maybe not. Two House Ways and Means subcommittees recently put AARP in their crosshairs. First came a hearing on whether the lobby’s support of President Barack Obama’s signature health care law — which, in providing a new subsidized customer base to private insurers, bears some key similarities to Ryan’s plans for seniors — had benefited its insurance business . And last week, based on a report released at the hearing, the Health and Oversight subcommittees’ leadership followed up with a letter to the Internal Revenue Service demanding that the advocacy group’s tax-exempt status be investigated . The report “gave rise to a number of serious concerns regarding AARP’s organizational structure and activities, and it raised questions about whether AARP. Inc. continues to qualify as a tax-exempt organization,” the letter said. Frustrated Democrats who see AARP as a vital ally suspect a link. “It is really odd that AARP has been nowhere to be seen,” said one congressional staffer. “Maybe the threat to their not-for-profit status has had its effect.” The lobbyist, who works for a high-profile Democratic-aligned Beltway shop, concurred, even while suggesting the House GOP probe was not that strong on substance. “If the goal was to expose AARP, then maybe I’d give it a ‘B’,” the lobbyist said. “If was to chill AARP’s political activities, then I’d say they get an ‘A’.” One senior Democratic House staffer noted that even AARP’s mild efforts could be felt, with the organization’s email campaign generating hundreds of letters to House members’ inboxes. But that activity is a far cry from the health care debate, when AARP leaders were seen often on television, in press conferences and at the White House. Friday even offered a prime opportunity to step to the fore, with House Democrats holding a rally with older Americans to decry the GOP’s Medicare plans outside the Capitol. AARP was not a participant, though lawmakers on hand were not ready to conclude why. “I don’t really know, but we certainly have a lot of [people who are] members of AARP, and we certainly have a lot of activists working on this,” said Rep. Jean Schakowsky (D-Ill.), co-chair of the Democratic Caucus Seniors Task Force. “I don’t know if there’s an internal decision that was made at AARP, but it’s an interesting question.” One Democratic staffer who also thought it was a worthy question — and asked around in lobbying circles — said there was a temporary strategic pullback. “They’re just shutting up because they don’t want to be seen as sticking a thumb in the eye of Republicans right now,” the Democrat said. One AARP representative declined to be quoted, or confirm or deny AARP’s stance, and referred The Huffington Post to the organization’s website. Dau, the AARP spokesman, maintained that the lobby has been vocal, however. “We opposed the House budget proposal because it would upend vital programs for health and retirement security without addressing the underlying problem of skyrocketing health care costs,” he said. “No one has been more active in engaging older Americans and making sure lawmakers hear their voices, and we’ll continue to leverage the power of those voices as the debate continues.” Insiders did note that it might not even be that useful for AARP to open fire right now, because few observers think the House plan will survive the Senate. The powerful group could have more impact later. Rep. Doris Matsui (D-Calif.), another co-chair of the Seniors Task Force, told The Huffington Post she was working closely with AARP, at least in her California district. “We’re just now getting all this going, and I’m sure AARP is going to come out,” Matsui said. “They’ve been in my hometown meetings.”

Visit link:
Democrats Fear GOP Probes Are Muzzling AARP

Find our Weekly Commercial Real Estate, Private Equity and Fund Newsletters at www.WeeklyBrief.net

{ 0 comments }

Indiana Democrats Return After ‘Softening’ GOP Agenda

March 29, 2011

INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana House Democrats are back at work after a five-week boycott to protest a Republican agenda they consider an assault on labor unions and public education, but whether their efforts will ultimately change the outcome of the legislation they opposed is unclear. Republicans agreed to rejigger – but not completely overhaul – their plans as lawmakers resume work in the House. The Senate had already started working around the Democrats by holding separate hearings on bills stalled in the walkout. Still, Democrats insist concessions they’ve received on several issues, including school vouchers and labor legislation, made their boycott worthwhile. “We’re coming back after softening the radical agenda,” said House Minority Leader Patrick Bauer, D-South Bend, whose Statehouse return Monday was greeted by cheering union workers. “We won a battle, but we recognize the war goes on.” The victories Democrats claim are likely more than they would have gained had they not boycotted, but they won’t stop the agenda pushed by Republicans who won sweeping control of the House in last year’s elections. Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels said bills aimed at improving education and keeping spending low are mainstream Hoosier ideas. “The only thing ‘radical’ about this session has been the decision by one caucus to walk off the job for five weeks,” Daniels said. Republicans had vowed throughout the standoff that they wouldn’t remove items from their agenda – and by and large they won’t have to. The only bill killed by the boycott was a “right-to-work” proposal that would prohibit union representation fees from being a condition of employment. GOP legislators agreed to some changes on several other bills. For example, they will cap for two years the number of students who could participate in a voucher program using taxpayer money to attend private schools, but it would still be among the nation’s most expansive use of vouchers when the limits expire. Another bill that would exempt certain government projects from the state’s prevailing construction wage law was changed so that fewer projects would be exempt. The Democrats’ most significant achievement may be that people across the state are talking about these issues. Bauer said the public needed a “timeout” to learn about the agenda being pushed by Republicans. Thousands of people attended Statehouse rallies during the walkout, and hundreds attended local town hall meetings. Many teachers said they didn’t realize Republicans supported vouchers and other measures they think will erode public education, and some union members said they wished they had voted. Tom Case, a union worker from Fort Wayne who was at the Statehouse protesting Monday, said he was glad Democrats staged the boycott. “Republicans are going way out of bounds with what they’re doing right now,” he said. In one sense, Democrats “punched above their weight,” said Robert Dion, who teaches politics at the University of Evansville. “They got the attention of the state, and they were able to finagle some meaningful concessions that I don’t think were necessarily offered all that willingly,” Dion said. On the other hand, Dion said, Democrats have a bit of a black eye because the walkout lasted so long. House Democrats had fled to Illinois on Feb. 22 to protest 11 pieces of legislation, denying the House the two-thirds of members present needed to do business as required by the state constitution. The move had the potential to force a special session or even a government shutdown if a new budget wasn’t adopted before July 1. Indiana’s boycott began a week after Wisconsin’s Democratic senators left for Illinois in their three-week boycott against a law barring most public employees from collective bargaining. Wisconsin Republicans used a parliamentary maneuver to pass the law without them, and the matter is now headed to court. The Indiana standoff became one of the longest legislative walkouts in recent U.S. history. The impasse got a bit nasty at times – with name-calling, scathing political ads, rowdy rallies and fines totaling more than $3,000 for most absent Democrats. But Republicans and Democrats seemed to tone down the rhetoric last week as they discussed possible changes to bills. Lawmakers began making up for five weeks of lost time Monday. Republican House Speaker Brian Bosma gaveled in the chamber early Monday evening, and lawmakers began working on bills in earnest. Lawmakers worked their way through a large chunk of the House calendar, which was the same as the day Democrats left. Bosma predicted lawmakers would have plenty of late nights as they work toward the scheduled end of the regular legislative session April 29. “It’s long past time to get to the people’s business,” Bosma said. “Hopefully we can make this work in five short weeks.”

Read the full article →

Democrats Push New Foreclosure Rules

December 22, 2010

Several key House Democrats are circulating a letter urging support for new regulations that would crack down on what critics say are rampant foreclosure abuses in the nation’s banking system. The letter, authored by Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.) encourages federal banking regulators to rein in practices at bank divisions called “mortgage servicers.” Servicers are responsible for collecting and processing payments, charging late fees, negotiating with troubled borrowers and implementing the foreclosure process. Servicers have been criticized for committing widespread fraud in recent months, charging improper fees and incorrectly evicting borrowers. The three House Democrats have already signed the letter, including House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) and Rep. Laura Richardson (D-Calif.). The letter from lawmakers comes one day after more than fifty economists, consumer advocates and banking experts urged regulators to take action on mortgage servicers. Federal Regulators are currently divided over whether or not to use new powers to regulate mortgage securities granted by this year’s Wall Street reform bill to crack down on servicing abuses. The FDIC wants to take the opportunity to rein in servicers, but the Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency are resisting the new rules, although spokespeople for both agency say they support stronger standards for mortgage servicing. Miller’s letter explicitly references Tuesday’s letter from experts and activists, and urges any new rules require servicers to undergo foreclosure prevention efforts where they are economically feasible. “The . . . letter makes sensible recommendations regarding the treatment of payments by homeowners, ‘perverse incentives’ in servicer compensation, mortgage documentation, and foreclosure forbearance during mortgage modification efforts,” Miller’s letter reads. “We especially urge that any exception require that servicers modify mortgages pursuant to established criteria to avoid foreclosure where possible.” About half of all mortgages serviced in the United States are handled by just four companies: Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Citigroup. Some of the anti-foreclosure activists who sent the letter to regulators on Tuesday have also started a new website, www.stopservicerscams.com where individuals can sign a petition supporting new foreclosure regulations. The full text of the Miller letter is available here (.pdf). The letter from economists and activists is available here (.pdf).

Read the full article →

Democrats Push New Foreclosure Rules

December 22, 2010

Several key House Democrats are circulating a letter urging support for new regulations that would crack down on what critics say are rampant foreclosure abuses in the nation’s banking system. The letter, authored by Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.) encourages federal banking regulators to rein in practices at bank divisions called “mortgage servicers.” Servicers are responsible for collecting and processing payments, charging late fees, negotiating with troubled borrowers and implementing the foreclosure process. Servicers have been criticized for committing widespread fraud in recent months, charging improper fees and incorrectly evicting borrowers. The three House Democrats have already signed the letter, including House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) and Rep. Laura Richardson (D-Calif.). The letter from lawmakers comes one day after more than fifty economists, consumer advocates and banking experts urged regulators to take action on mortgage servicers. Federal Regulators are currently divided over whether or not to use new powers to regulate mortgage securities granted by this year’s Wall Street reform bill to crack down on servicing abuses. The FDIC wants to take the opportunity to rein in servicers, but the Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency are resisting the new rules, although spokespeople for both agency say they support stronger standards for mortgage servicing. Miller’s letter explicitly references Tuesday’s letter from experts and activists, and urges any new rules require servicers to undergo foreclosure prevention efforts where they are economically feasible. “The . . . letter makes sensible recommendations regarding the treatment of payments by homeowners, ‘perverse incentives’ in servicer compensation, mortgage documentation, and foreclosure forbearance during mortgage modification efforts,” Miller’s letter reads. “We especially urge that any exception require that servicers modify mortgages pursuant to established criteria to avoid foreclosure where possible.” About half of all mortgages serviced in the United States are handled by just four companies: Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Citigroup. Some of the anti-foreclosure activists who sent the letter to regulators on Tuesday have also started a new website, www.stopservicerscams.com where individuals can sign a petition supporting new foreclosure regulations. The full text of the Miller letter is available here (.pdf). The letter from economists and activists is available here (.pdf).

Read the full article →

Tax Cuts For Rich Move Forward In Senate

December 13, 2010

WASHINGTON — The Senate on Monday voted to move forward on a a two-year extension of the Bush tax cuts as well as a package of tax cuts and credits for the middle class, ethanol subsidies and a 13 month reauthorization of unemployment insurance. The vote follows months of insistent bipartisan concern about the size of the federal deficit. The vote is being held open to accommodate senators arriving in town, but the package already had 66 votes in favor of moving forward shortly after 4:15. Eight senators stood against the deal: Republican John Ensign (R-Nev.); Democrats Jeff Bingaman (N.M.), Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Russ Feingold (Wisc.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Pat Leahy (Vt.) and Mark Udall (Colo.); and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who spoke for hours against the bill on Friday. UPDATE: As of 7:30 p.m. ET, the final vote stands at 83-15 (2 not voting). Of the 15 votes against, nine came from Democrats, five from Republicans and one from Sanders. The bill, with the unusual name of Reid-McConnell, originated in negotiations between President Barack Obama and congressional Republicans. House Democrats last week resolved to urge their leadership not to bring the bill to the floor, but lower-chamber leaders have been signaling that the House will consider the Senate product — though there will be attempts to amend it. “It’s clear it’s the right thing to do for middle-income Americans,” said Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), chairman of the chamber’s finance committee. Baucus said he was confident the bill would make its way through the House. “It will pass,” he said. House Democrats are particularly offended by the estate-tax portion of the compromise, which funnels some $25 billion to some 6,600 families . The provision exempts the first $5 million in inheritance from taxation and reduces the rate on the rest. Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) said he objected to the unfairness of the package. It “gives $68 billion to the trust-fund babies with security, it’s going to last two years. To the unemployed, he gives $56 billion.” Extending tax cuts for two years, said McDermott, while giving unemployment insurance for one, shows a legislative chamber with its priorities far askew. When the deal was first announced, it was greeted with fury by some Democrats. “I’m going to argue forcefully for the nonsensicalness and the almost, you know, moral corruptness of that particular policy,” said Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), walking into a meeting with Vice President Joe Biden and Senate Democrats to discuss the deal on last Tuesday. “This is beyond politics. This is about justice and doing what’s right.” On Monday, though, Landrieu said she would “reluctantly” vote to support cloture and move forward with the bill. “I’ll be voting yes today, but I’m hoping there will be some amendments,” she said before the vote. Landrieu was the 66th “aye.” Landrieu is working with Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) to try to get a vote on an amendment that would end the tax cuts for the wealthy and apply the revenue to Social Security. But even if it’s considered, the amendment does not have enough votes to meet the filibuster-proof threshold of 60 that has become a standard requirement for legislation in the Senate. Asked what happened to her anger from last week, Landrieu said it remained — but it was only for the tax cuts for millionaires, not the entire package. “I’m still outraged about it,” she said.

Read the full article →

Video: Hassett Says House Democrats’ Tax-Plan Block No Surprise: Video

December 9, 2010

Dec. 9 (Bloomberg) — Kevin Hassett, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute and a Bloomberg News columnist, discusses the decision by House Democrats to vote against President Barack Obama’s tax proposal. House Democrats approved a non-binding resolution today to block a floor debate on Obama’s deal with Republicans. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Video: Hassett Says House Democrats’ Tax-Plan Block No Surprise: Video

December 9, 2010

Dec. 9 (Bloomberg) — Kevin Hassett, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute and a Bloomberg News columnist, discusses the decision by House Democrats to vote against President Barack Obama’s tax proposal. House Democrats approved a non-binding resolution today to block a floor debate on Obama’s deal with Republicans. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Mark Engler: Tax Cuts and Trade: Is Obama Triangulating?

November 13, 2010

It was about this far into his first term, back in late 1994 and early 1995, when President Bill Clinton truly fell under the spell of malevolent strategist Dick Morris. Stung by the heavy losses brought on by the “Republican Revolution” in the 1994 midterms, Clinton began to believe that his only route to reelection was to tack to the right and steal some of the conservatives’ thunder on issues like welfare reform and federal deficits. Morris, who was only forced out of the White House after a sex scandal and who has since exposed his true political stripes as a Fox News commentator , thought triangulation both a brilliant political strategy and a generator of fine public policy. The remaining liberals in the Clinton administration disagreed. As the Economist notes, George Stephanopoulos incisively labeled it “a fancy word for betrayal.” Not yet two weeks after the 2010 midterms, and just two years after Obama’s campaign of “hope” and “change,” there are troubling signs that the current president might be tempted to follow the same path as Clinton. Obama’s first move after the midterms, already much criticized by progressives, was to express his willingness to cave on Bush tax cuts for the rich. This one felt to me more like a gutless compromise than a calculated shift to the right. And, on the hopeful side, the White House is now backpedaling , indicating that the story was overblown and Obama’s pre-midterms position hasn’t changed. There’s no detectable silver lining, however, to the president’s drive to push forward the Bush-negotiated, NAFTA-style trade agreement with Korea. While it appears the deal has stalled for the time being, the denunciations of the neoliberal “free trade” program that Obama once used to attack rival candidate Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries are now long gone . Given the composition of the administration’s economics team, this flip-flop is not surprising. There were signs of it already back in 2008, when Obama quickly tried to moderate his earlier stances during the general election campaign. Nevertheless the maneuver is a sad one. While triangulation arguably worked for Clinton (he was reelected at any rate), rightward moves promise few benefits for Obama. A too-small stimulus meant that unemployment remained higher and anger about the economy greater than might otherwise have been the case going into the midterms. It also produced an uninspired Democratic base, resulting in a low-turnout election that favored Republicans. Likewise, the trade deals on deck with Korea, Colombia, and Panama are bad not only because they seek to expand a flawed economic model, but also because “free trade” is a political loser. The Democratic base is firmly in the “fair trade” camp, disenchanted with neoliberal policies, and an anti-NAFTA message also resonates with the wider electorate. As Public Citizen has documented , “House Democrats that ran on fair trade platforms in competitive and open-seat races were three times as likely to survive the GOP tidal wave than Democrats who ran against fair trade.” Global Trade Watch Research Director Todd Tucker has gone so far as to call compromising with the Republicans on pending trade deals a ” political death wish ” for a president who will soon be seeking reelection. After Obama’s first year in office, I gave the administration a “B” on trade policy, on the grounds that no news is good news. As long as unfinished “free trade” deals remained bogged down in negotiations and are not an administration priority, I am willing to judge the situation as no harm, no foul. But it’s a different story if the White House starts investing any real political capital in advancing these deals. Even worse would be if Obama keeps his backbone as well hidden from public view as it has been since the midterms and turns to triangulation, imagining that moving right on trade would be politically beneficial. Cross-posted from the “Arguing the World” blog at Dissent magazine.

Read the full article →

Dems Propose Bill That Would Gut FCC’s Ability To Protect Net Neutrality

September 27, 2010

The FCC will not have rulemaking authority under a network neutrality bill that key House Democrats plan to introduce soon, according to a recent draft obtained by Tech Daily Dose. Instead, the commission will deal with enforcement on a case-by-case basis. Broadband providers who violate the law will face a maximum penalty of $2 million by the FCC, under the bill. The absence of the rulemaking authority, along with other provisions of the bill, is consistent with information reported by Tech Daily Dose last week.

Read the full article →

Obama Tax Cuts Plan Has House Democrats Deeply Divided

September 15, 2010

WASHINGTON — Congressional Democrats are confronting deep divisions within their nervous ranks over whether to support President Barack Obama’s plan to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans – or just punt the entire matter until after voters go to the polls Nov. 2. Democratic leaders committed to Obama’s proposal were hearing Wednesday from endangered lawmakers who fear that raising taxes on anyone in a weak economy could be politically lethal. “Don’t raise taxes in a recession,” said Rep. Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D. Democratic leaders refused to say whether they were open to changing Obama’s plan, or even commit to a vote before the balloting seven weeks off. Instead, they called House Democrats together Tuesday night to discuss a poll showing that extending tax cuts for middle-income earners was a winning strategy for the party. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made the case that Obama’s plan was “good policy and good politics,” her spokesman said. Not everyone was convinced. A group of moderate and conservative House Democrats was collecting signatures on a letter calling for Democratic leaders to offer a bill extending tax cuts for all Americans. Broad tax cuts passed during the George W. Bush administration are due to expire at the end of the year. “We are in listening mode,” said Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, who heads the House Democrats’ campaign committee. A fuller discussion was expected at the House Democrats’ weekly meeting Wednesday, but it was canceled. This was not the debate Democrats wanted as the midterm election season opened. The plan was to make an extension of the middle-class tax cuts the party’s closing argument – against Republicans, not each other – as voters began to focus on whether they trust Democrats to improve the ailing economy enough to reward them with control of Congress for another two years. Instead, Democrats who already have cast tough votes on bills overhauling the nation’s health care and financial regulatory systems are questioning the wisdom of debating a pocketbook issue just when voters are starting to pay attention to the election. All 435 seats in the House, 37 in the Senate and the Democratic majorities in both are on the line. The rift among Democrats contrasts with strong unity among Republicans in supporting a full renewal of all tax cuts, regardless of income, despite a 10-year cost to the government of about $700 billion above Obama’s plan. Still, House Republican leader John Boehner said over the weekend he would vote to extend the relief only for middle-income Americans if that were the only option available. Some House Democrats, particularly moderates facing difficult re-election battles in districts carried by GOP presidential nominee John McCain two years ago, agree with a proposal offered by Republicans for a short-term renewal of all of the Bush-era tax cuts. “We look forward to working with you to extend all income tax rates,” a small group of conservative-to-moderate House Democrats wrote in a draft letter to party leaders as lawmakers trickled back into town Tuesday from their summer break. Democratic Reps. Jim Matheson of Utah, Melissa Bean of Illinois and Glenn Nye of Virginia were circulating the letter for more signatures and were picking up support. On the Senate side, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois said most Democrats support Obama’s plan to allow income tax rates on family income exceeding $250,000 to rise to as high as 39.6 percent. But he also said some want to raise the amount of income exempted from the higher rates above the $250,000 figure called for by Obama – while not advocating a full renewal for, say, millionaires. “Some people think it should go beyond $250,000, but how much and for what period of time is still being debated,” Durbin told reporters Tuesday. The cost of extending the tax cuts for everyone for the next 10 years would approach $4 trillion, according to congressional estimates. Eliminating the breaks for the top earners would reduce that bill by about $700 billion. A one-year extension of the lower rates for high-income earners would cost the government $39 billion. ___ Associated Press writer Andrew Taylor contributed to this report.

Read the full article →

Obama Tax Cuts Plan Has House Democrats Deeply Divided

September 15, 2010

WASHINGTON — Congressional Democrats are confronting deep divisions within their nervous ranks over whether to support President Barack Obama’s plan to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans – or just punt the entire matter until after voters go to the polls Nov. 2. Democratic leaders committed to Obama’s proposal were hearing Wednesday from endangered lawmakers who fear that raising taxes on anyone in a weak economy could be politically lethal. “Don’t raise taxes in a recession,” said Rep. Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D. Democratic leaders refused to say whether they were open to changing Obama’s plan, or even commit to a vote before the balloting seven weeks off. Instead, they called House Democrats together Tuesday night to discuss a poll showing that extending tax cuts for middle-income earners was a winning strategy for the party. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made the case that Obama’s plan was “good policy and good politics,” her spokesman said. Not everyone was convinced. A group of moderate and conservative House Democrats was collecting signatures on a letter calling for Democratic leaders to offer a bill extending tax cuts for all Americans. Broad tax cuts passed during the George W. Bush administration are due to expire at the end of the year. “We are in listening mode,” said Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, who heads the House Democrats’ campaign committee. A fuller discussion was expected at the House Democrats’ weekly meeting Wednesday, but it was canceled. This was not the debate Democrats wanted as the midterm election season opened. The plan was to make an extension of the middle-class tax cuts the party’s closing argument – against Republicans, not each other – as voters began to focus on whether they trust Democrats to improve the ailing economy enough to reward them with control of Congress for another two years. Instead, Democrats who already have cast tough votes on bills overhauling the nation’s health care and financial regulatory systems are questioning the wisdom of debating a pocketbook issue just when voters are starting to pay attention to the election. All 435 seats in the House, 37 in the Senate and the Democratic majorities in both are on the line. The rift among Democrats contrasts with strong unity among Republicans in supporting a full renewal of all tax cuts, regardless of income, despite a 10-year cost to the government of about $700 billion above Obama’s plan. Still, House Republican leader John Boehner said over the weekend he would vote to extend the relief only for middle-income Americans if that were the only option available. Some House Democrats, particularly moderates facing difficult re-election battles in districts carried by GOP presidential nominee John McCain two years ago, agree with a proposal offered by Republicans for a short-term renewal of all of the Bush-era tax cuts. “We look forward to working with you to extend all income tax rates,” a small group of conservative-to-moderate House Democrats wrote in a draft letter to party leaders as lawmakers trickled back into town Tuesday from their summer break. Democratic Reps. Jim Matheson of Utah, Melissa Bean of Illinois and Glenn Nye of Virginia were circulating the letter for more signatures and were picking up support. On the Senate side, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois said most Democrats support Obama’s plan to allow income tax rates on family income exceeding $250,000 to rise to as high as 39.6 percent. But he also said some want to raise the amount of income exempted from the higher rates above the $250,000 figure called for by Obama – while not advocating a full renewal for, say, millionaires. “Some people think it should go beyond $250,000, but how much and for what period of time is still being debated,” Durbin told reporters Tuesday. The cost of extending the tax cuts for everyone for the next 10 years would approach $4 trillion, according to congressional estimates. Eliminating the breaks for the top earners would reduce that bill by about $700 billion. A one-year extension of the lower rates for high-income earners would cost the government $39 billion. ___ Associated Press writer Andrew Taylor contributed to this report.

Read the full article →

Obama Tax Cuts Plan Has House Democrats Deeply Divided

September 15, 2010

WASHINGTON — Congressional Democrats are confronting deep divisions within their nervous ranks over whether to support President Barack Obama’s plan to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans – or just punt the entire matter until after voters go to the polls Nov. 2. Democratic leaders committed to Obama’s proposal were hearing Wednesday from endangered lawmakers who fear that raising taxes on anyone in a weak economy could be politically lethal. “Don’t raise taxes in a recession,” said Rep. Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D. Democratic leaders refused to say whether they were open to changing Obama’s plan, or even commit to a vote before the balloting seven weeks off. Instead, they called House Democrats together Tuesday night to discuss a poll showing that extending tax cuts for middle-income earners was a winning strategy for the party. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made the case that Obama’s plan was “good policy and good politics,” her spokesman said. Not everyone was convinced. A group of moderate and conservative House Democrats was collecting signatures on a letter calling for Democratic leaders to offer a bill extending tax cuts for all Americans. Broad tax cuts passed during the George W. Bush administration are due to expire at the end of the year. “We are in listening mode,” said Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, who heads the House Democrats’ campaign committee. A fuller discussion was expected at the House Democrats’ weekly meeting Wednesday, but it was canceled. This was not the debate Democrats wanted as the midterm election season opened. The plan was to make an extension of the middle-class tax cuts the party’s closing argument – against Republicans, not each other – as voters began to focus on whether they trust Democrats to improve the ailing economy enough to reward them with control of Congress for another two years. Instead, Democrats who already have cast tough votes on bills overhauling the nation’s health care and financial regulatory systems are questioning the wisdom of debating a pocketbook issue just when voters are starting to pay attention to the election. All 435 seats in the House, 37 in the Senate and the Democratic majorities in both are on the line. The rift among Democrats contrasts with strong unity among Republicans in supporting a full renewal of all tax cuts, regardless of income, despite a 10-year cost to the government of about $700 billion above Obama’s plan. Still, House Republican leader John Boehner said over the weekend he would vote to extend the relief only for middle-income Americans if that were the only option available. Some House Democrats, particularly moderates facing difficult re-election battles in districts carried by GOP presidential nominee John McCain two years ago, agree with a proposal offered by Republicans for a short-term renewal of all of the Bush-era tax cuts. “We look forward to working with you to extend all income tax rates,” a small group of conservative-to-moderate House Democrats wrote in a draft letter to party leaders as lawmakers trickled back into town Tuesday from their summer break. Democratic Reps. Jim Matheson of Utah, Melissa Bean of Illinois and Glenn Nye of Virginia were circulating the letter for more signatures and were picking up support. On the Senate side, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois said most Democrats support Obama’s plan to allow income tax rates on family income exceeding $250,000 to rise to as high as 39.6 percent. But he also said some want to raise the amount of income exempted from the higher rates above the $250,000 figure called for by Obama – while not advocating a full renewal for, say, millionaires. “Some people think it should go beyond $250,000, but how much and for what period of time is still being debated,” Durbin told reporters Tuesday. The cost of extending the tax cuts for everyone for the next 10 years would approach $4 trillion, according to congressional estimates. Eliminating the breaks for the top earners would reduce that bill by about $700 billion. A one-year extension of the lower rates for high-income earners would cost the government $39 billion. ___ Associated Press writer Andrew Taylor contributed to this report.

Read the full article →

Buyout Managers Tax Increase Scaled Back Under Senate Democrats’ Proposal

June 8, 2010

By Brian Faler and Ryan J. Donmoyer June 8 (Bloomberg) — Senate Democrats said they will scale back a House-approved tax increase on investment-fund managers as part of their jobs legislation. The plan would tax an increasing amount of the profit share paid to fund executives, known as carried interest, at higher ordinary income tax rates rather than at the lower capital gains rate. The measure also would reinstate a provision dropped by House Democrats that would send state governments $24 billion to help pay for Medicaid health care for the poor. It would pay for that in part by increasing to 41 cents the current 8-cent tax oil companies pay on each barrel of oil they produce. “We have to get more Americans back to work,” said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus , a Montana Democrat. Baucus’s proposal, starting next year, would tax half of the carried interest that doesn’t reflect a return on invested capital at ordinary tax rates, while the rest would be taxed at the lower capital gains rate. The share taxed as ordinary income would grow to 65 percent beginning in 2013. Carried interest that is attributed to the sale of assets held for at least seven years would be subject to lower rates. The tax increase on carried interest would raise $14.5 billion over 10 years, down from the $17.7 billion the House plan is projected to generate. Democratic Senator Charles Schumer of New York said the Senate aims to pass the legislation by early next week. To contact the reporters on this story: Brian Faler in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net ; Ryan J. Donmoyer in Washington at rdonmoyer@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Josh Silver: Harold Ford’s Corporate Crusade Against Net Neutrality

May 26, 2010

This week, Harold Ford, Chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council, showed how completely the DLC is captured by industry money, why the US congress is mired in gridlock, and why the government continues to protect the American public: from oil spills to banking crises to mining disasters, and now to the Internet. Big money lobbyists and their puppet politicians’ blind abandonment of reasonable government oversight. Harold Ford is one of those puppets. In his piece , “FCC Re-Designation of Broadband Will Bring Unwanted Market Uncertainty” Ford calls on the FCC to halt their efforts to reestablish the agency’s authority over Internet service providers (ISP’s) like Comcast and AT&T. As I have described in previous posts , the courts recently ruled that changes made by the Bush-era FCC has left the agency in charge of the nation’s communications without authority to oversee the 21st century’s dominant communications platform. This would be funny if it weren’t reality. Phone and cable companies are flooding Capitol Hill with cash and an army of lobbyists, including proxies like Ford, who failed to mention in his Huffington Post piece that he is the honorary co-Chair of ” Broadband for America “, an industry front group that pays him to spin on their behalf. If the FCC heeds Ford’s advice, you can say goodbye to candidate Obama’s promises of universal, affordable Internet access and Net Neutrality. You can say goodbye to the level playing field that the Internet has always been: where all content moves at the same speed, no matter who is sending it. With a broken political system awash in special interest money, Harold Ford is not alone. On Monday, 74 House Democrats signed an industry-written letter that echoes Mr. Ford’s line, calling on the FCC to stand down. The letter is so full of misleading information that it’s hard to know where to begin. And nearly every Republican in congress is toeing the phone and cable line. So tell it like it is, Harold Ford. You’re choosing the big money from the cable and telco juggernaut over the right of the American people to fast, affordable, universal Internet access. You’re ignoring how the US has slipped from 4th to 22nd in broadband speed and adoption. You’re ignoring Harvard Berkman Center’s findings that regulation promoting competition would serve US consumers well. Mr. Ford, you said that “Legal and Agency experts are not carefully examining the economic impact will have on investment decision”? But FCC Chairman Genachowski repeatedly stated his intent to ensure investment continued… just read his speech . Over the past few weeks we saw broadband providers themselves telling investors that they had no plans to slow investment in response to the FCC. Harold, I am looking for the consumers you claim have prospered under the current “light regulatory touch.” You mean all of the Americans who are paying more and getting less than in 21 other nations? Prospering more than in France, where you can get broadband, phone and 300 TV channels for $37 a month? By my estimate, Americans are paying about three times more here thanks to your “light regulatory touch” that abandons competition and other key oversight. Be warned, Mr. Ford, millions of Americans have called for Net Neutrality and universal Internet, and are not content to let shills like you lie to the American people any longer.

Read the full article →

Democrats Have Ample Support to Pass Health Overhaul in House, Leaders Say

March 21, 2010

By Nicole Gaouette and Sandrine Rastello March 21 (Bloomberg) — House Democratic leaders say they will pass the most far-reaching health legislation in four decades today, with ample support from their party and an agreement on abortion close. House Democrats have more than enough votes to pass health- care overhaul legislation, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer , a Maryland Democrat, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “We think 216 plus votes when we call the roll,” Hoyer said. Republicans said Democrats don’t have the votes and vowed to use “any means at our disposal to oppose this government takeover,” said Indiana Representative Mike Pence on CNN’s “State of the Union” program. “Stay tuned. It’s going to be an interesting day.” The legislation will restructure an industry that makes up 18 percent of the economy, a step that President Barack Obama Barack Obama urged lawmakers to take in a visit to Capitol Hill yesterday. Republican lawmakers universally oppose the legislation, arguing that Democrats are underestimating the cost and pushing though changes that polls show Americans don’t like. House Minority Whip Eric Cantor , speaking on ABC’s “This Week,” said no Republicans will vote for the legislation. “The people of this country don’t like this bill” and are scared of it, he said. Making History “We’re going to make history today,” Representative John Larson , the House Democratic Caucus chairman, said on the ABC program. “Barack Obama will pass health-care reform, demonstrating whose side we’re on,” the Connecticut Democrat said. Objections by anti-abortion Democrats led by Representative Bart Stupak of Michigan will soon be cleared, a Democratic official familiar with the matter said. Obama is set to sign an executive order stating that federal funds cannot be used for abortion. The order reaffirms current law. “They are close to reaching an agreement, but they are not there yet,” Michelle Begnoche, Stupak’s spokeswoman said in an e-mailed statement. “The congressman hopes they will be able to get an agreement this morning and health care wrapped up today. But right now he is still a no vote.” House Minority Leader John Boehner promised a Republican “effort to repeal the bill” on NBC’s “Meet the Press” and insisted Democrats do not have the votes. “We’ll do the very best we can to keep this bill from passing,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” Prepared for Challenges Illinois Senator Richard Durbin , a member of the Democratic leadership, said his party was prepared for challenges and any amendments Republicans might file. “I certainly think we’re ready to tackle that if that’s what they want to do,” Durbin said on CBS. “We’re ready to deal with honest amendments. There will come a time when the American people say enough, this is about politics.” House Democrats are confident enough of support that they have abandoned plans to bypass a direct up-or-down ballot on the legislation and simply “deem” it approved. Republicans had accused them of trying to duck a difficult vote. Hoyer said “we determined we could do this, and it was a better process.” The House will vote on both the Senate bill and compromise legislation called a reconciliation bill that amends parts of the Senate measure that House Democrats don’t like. If the House approves the Senate bill, the overhaul becomes law after it’s signed by Obama, who canceled a trip to Asia to be present. The compromise package goes back to the Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid said yesterday he had the “commitment of a significant majority” of Democrats to approve it. Switching Sides Leading up to today’s House vote, at least seven Democrats who voted “no” on a House version of the bill in November have switched sides to support the measure, and a number of undecided lawmakers have come out in favor of it. At least three others have switched to oppose the measure. The president urged the members to back the legislation, which he called “the toughest insurance reforms in history,” during a visit to the U.S. Capitol yesterday. He said many Americans are living a “quiet crisis” because of health-care concerns. “Now, we’re on the threshold of doing something about it,” said Obama, who has made the issue the centerpiece of his domestic legislative agenda. “Is this the single most important step that we have taken on health care since Medicare ? Absolutely,” Obama said of the 10-year, $940 billion measure. Complex Process On CNN, Utah Republican Senator Orrin Hatch said he didn’t think the Senate would pass the reconciliation bill that House lawmakers have written. If Senators make changes to the reconciliation bill, it would have to go back to the House for passage. That could potentially complicate passage as House Democrats would have to muster support all over again to pass a bill altered by the Senate. It’s not going to be “a one-time deal,” Hatch said. California’s Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein disagreed and said Senate debate will start Tuesday and continue for several days. “I believe there are at least 51 votes there,” Feinstein told CNN. The vote “comes down to whose side are you on?” said Larson. “Are you siding with the insurance industry or are you siding on behalf of the people who have been waiting decades for this passage?” Asked about the loss of Democratic seats in the November elections, Larson said there’s always a chance of losing members in mid-term elections. “It isn’t about how many members are going to lose their seats,” he said. “It’s about this moment, it’s about the truth.” To contact the reporter on this story: Sandrine Rastello in Washington at srastello@bloomberg.net Nicole Gaouette in Washington at ngaouette@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Video: Democrats Gain Support as They Move Toward Health Vote: Video

March 19, 2010

March 19 (Bloomberg) — U.S. House Democrats, who cleared a big hurdle in their effort to overhaul the health-care system by producing compromise legislation, picked up fresh support for a likely showdown vote this weekend. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Republicans Fan Distrust of Senate to Thwart Health-Care Measure in House

March 12, 2010

By James Rowley March 12 (Bloomberg) — Senate Republicans are sending a self-deprecating message to House Democrats to persuade them to vote against health-care legislation: Don’t trust senators. House Democratic leaders are planning to pass legislation approved in December by the Senate. Then both chambers would approve another bill that would change parts of the Senate bill that House Democrats find objectionable. Republicans are telling House Democrats they can’t rely on the Senate to approve the changes, which congressional leaders are trying to navigate through a process called budget reconciliation. That warning was underlined yesterday, when the Senate parliamentarian said President Barack Obama has to sign a health bill into law before Congress could alter it. Republicans say once Obama signs the Senate bill, Senate Democrats will have little incentive to amend it. “House Democrats will have to decide whether they want to trust the Senate to fix their political problems,” Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters March 9. He recalled a story about onetime House Speaker Tom Foley explaining to a young member: “The opposition, that’s the Republicans. But now the enemy, that’s the Senate.” House and Senate Democratic leaders are putting the finishing touches on the reconciliation bill. The revisions will likely include House priorities such as more generous subsidies for low-income people to purchase insurance and eliminating a gap in Medicare coverage of prescription drugs for elderly Americans. No Special Deals The bill would also scrap deals that Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid cut with lawmakers to win votes for the Dec. 24 vote by the Senate on the health-care overhaul. A month later, Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown won a special election to fill a vacant Senate seat, denying Reid the 60-vote supermajority needed to pass final legislation that was being worked out with the House amid solid Republican opposition. So Democrats are resorting to budget reconciliation, which allows passage of legislation by simple majorities as long as it’s focused on spending and taxation. Because the tactic requires the House to act first, Republicans are trying to capitalize on the traditional distrust of the Senate by House members to persuade wavering Democrats to vote against the legislation. With the complexity and uncertainty of reconciliation, “I can see why House members might not trust the Senate to go along with this charade,” Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl of Arizona told reporters on March 10. ‘Right to Be Skeptical’ Democrats have sought to build trust between the two chambers in a series of meetings of House and Senate leaders to discuss the final push for the legislation. “The House has a right to be skeptical” of the Senate’s ability to act on reconciliation because “they have almost 300 bills they’ve passed sitting over somewhere lost in the Senate,” Illinois Senator Dick Durbin , the No. 2 Democrat, told reporters on March 9 after a meeting in the office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi . To assure House members the Senate will pass reconciliation, Senator Jay Rockefeller , a West Virginia Democrat, said he’d be willing to sign a letter with 50 other senators pledging to do so. “Whatever it takes,” he told reporters last night. ‘Trust Each Other’ A simple promise should suffice because “those of us who are relatively senior in health care trust each other,” Rockefeller said. If the Senate failed to pass reconciliation, then the House “would never cooperate with us again, ever,” he said. “Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid probably wouldn’t speak for 25 years.” Republicans say rank-and-file Democrats shouldn’t trust their leaders. “What the president is doing is asking House Democrats to hold hands, jump off a cliff, and hope Harry Reid catches them,” Senator Lamar Alexander , a Tennessee Republican, told reporters. “Senator Reid’s not going to have any incentive to catch them because by the time the reconciliation bill gets to the Senate the president will have already signed the health- care bill.” The Republican strategy demonstrates “real desperation,” said Connecticut Representative Rosa DeLauro , chairman of the House Democratic Steering Committee. It won’t work because “there is going to be a bill” that she says will solidify Democratic support. New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez , chairman of the Senate Democrats’ campaign effort, said he tells Democrats not to believe that Republicans “are giving you strategic advice to save you.” He added, “The most successful thing that we can do is pass a bill” so voters will “begin to see benefits” of health-care reform. Otherwise, Republicans “win all around.” To contact the reporter on this story: James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Health-Care Bill Faces New Hurdle After Ruling Hinders Quick Passage Plan

March 11, 2010

By Laura Litvan and Kristin Jensen March 11 (Bloomberg) — Republicans said the Senate parliamentarian threw up a hurdle to congressional Democrats’ plans to pass changes to U.S. health-care legislation through a process called reconciliation. Republicans said guidance they received from the parliamentarian means that President Barack Obama has to sign a Senate health-care bill into law before the House and Senate can approve changes to it. “The Senate Parliamentarian’s office has informed Senate Republicans that reconciliation instructions require the measure to make changes in law,” said Don Stewart , a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. U.S. stocks rose on the news, reversing earlier losses. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index advanced 0.2 percent to 1,147.36 at 3:27 p.m. in New York. It fell as much as 0.6 percent earlier after inflation in China accelerated more than economists estimated, spurring speculation the nation will boost interest rates. Obama is asking House Democrats to approve a Senate bill passed in December and pass another measure to make changes to it under reconciliation. The procedure would allow the Democratic-controlled Senate to approve the agreed-upon changes with a simple majority instead of the 60 votes that are generally needed to push through legislation. Because House Democrats object to some provisions in the Senate bill, they are seeking assurance that the changes become law. Lawmakers in the chamber originally sought to have the Senate act first on reconciliation; then they wanted Obama to hold off signing the Senate bill until reconciliation passed. Jim Manley , a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, declined to comment. To contact the reporters on this story: Laura Litvan in Washington at llitvan@bloomberg.net ; Kristin Jensen in Washington at kjensen@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

House Republicans Eschew Election-Year Earmarks in Bid to Outdo Democrats

March 11, 2010

By Brian Faler March 11 (Bloomberg) — House Republicans announced they will not request any so-called earmarks in an election-year attempt to outdo Democrats in clamping down on the practice of adding money for pet projects to legislation. Republicans agreed to a moratorium in a closed-door meeting today, said Representative Jerry Lewis of California, the top Republican on the Appropriations Committee. Yesterday, House Democrats said they wouldn’t fund earmarks for defense contractors, energy firms and other companies. Critics say earmarks for companies amount to no-bid contracts for groups that contribute to lawmakers’ re-election campaigns. Both parties are attempting to turn what has been bipartisan support for the earmarking process into a partisan issue they can take to voters, who polls show are concerned about rising federal spending and deficits. Republican leaders issued a joint statement yesterday urging their colleagues to give up projects they called “a symbol of broken Washington.” Lewis, a prominent defender of the earmarking practice, told reporters earlier today he was supporting the moratorium because “you guys paint the picture one way — we’ve got to be responsive.” To contact the reporter on this story: Brian Faler  in Washington at   or bfaler@bloomberg.net .

Read the full article →

House Democrats Will Ban Earmarks for Companies in Election-Year Crackdown

March 10, 2010

By Brian Faler March 10 (Bloomberg) — House Democrats announced they are banning so-called earmarks for defense contractors, energy firms and other private companies in an election-year attempt to crack down on the much-criticized funding process. Lawmakers will also direct federal auditors to inspect five percent of projects awarded to nonprofit groups to guard against companies masquerading as such entities, said House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey and Defense Spending Subcommittee Chairman Norm Dicks in a joint statement. The two lawmakers estimated that companies received about 1,000 earmarks from Congress last year. Critics have singled out for attack the funding of such projects for companies, saying they amount to no-bid contracts to firms that often return the favor with contributions to lawmakers’ re-election campaigns. President Barack Obama echoed such criticism last year, calling such earmarks “the single most corrupting element in this practice.” Steve Ellis , vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense , a Washington group that tracks projects, called today’s House announcement “a significant positive step forward” because “earmarks to for-profit entities are certainly ground zero for pay-to-play.” Deficit Issue The plan may help Democrats deal with concern among voters about rising federal spending and deficits , as well as a series of ethics-related inquiries involving Democratic lawmakers. Most earmarks benefit public or nonprofit organizations such as hospitals, police departments, universities and arts centers. Projects for profit-making entities tend to go to either defense contractors or energy companies. Obama’s proposals to crack down on earmarks ran into opposition on Capitol Hill, especially in the Senate, where lawmakers balked at more modest restrictions than announced by Obey, a Wisconsin Democrat, and Dicks, a Washington state Democrat. The announcement was praised by Representative Jeff Flake , an Arizona Republican who is a persistent critic of the earmarking practice. He called it a “good first step,” and said he hoped “Republicans take these restrictions a step further and impose a moratorium on all earmarks this year.” House Republicans are considering such a moratorium, said Majority Leader John Boehner , an Ohio Republican. A spokesman for Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye , a Hawaii Democrat, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. To contact the reporter on this story: Brian Faler  in Washington at   or bfaler@bloomberg.net .

Read the full article →

Democrats May Not Have Health-Care Plan Before Obama Meeting Next Week

February 18, 2010

By James Rowley Feb. 18 (Bloomberg) — U.S. House Democrats said their party may not be able to offer a single health-care proposal at the Feb. 25 meeting President Barack Obama has called with a challenge to Republicans to present their alternative. Obama has promised to “post online the text of a proposed health-insurance package” in advance of the televised meeting. Democrats in Congress are still reconciling differences between versions of health legislation passed last year by the House and Senate. House Democrats, during a conference call with reporters yesterday, said that though the two chambers are close to an agreement, they may not have a united plan by next week. “I don’t know whether the president is going to put one particular piece of legislation on the table,” Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland told reporters. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs , asked by reporters on Feb. 16 whether the president would present his own plan if Democrats in Congress failed to agree, said, “stay tuned.” In addition to pledging to post an overhaul plan online, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius challenged Republican leaders in a Feb. 12 letter to “put forward their own comprehensive bill.” Forum’s Purpose Van Hollen, a member of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s leadership team, said Obama would use next week’s forum “to get a sense of what our Republican colleagues’ objectives are” and “work to try to include those ideas, if they are not already included in the legislation.” Jim Manley , a spokesman for Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid , also declined to say whether there would be an agreement among Democrats before the meeting. “We are continuing to make progress on winnowing the differences between the House and Senate proposals,” Manley said in a telephone interview. Representative Rosa DeLauro , a Connecticut Democrat who also is part of Pelosi’s leadership team, said that in holding the summit, Obama is addressing Republicans’ complaints that they were left out of congressional deliberations. “Much of what they were interested in is part of the bill already,” she said, adding that the meeting will help determine “if there is a genuineness” among Republicans “about moving forward.” To contact the reporter on this story: James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Republican Brown Wins Massachusetts Senate Race, Imperiling Health Reform

January 19, 2010

By Heidi Przybyla and John McCormick Jan. 19 (Bloomberg) — Republican Scott Brown won the Massachusetts Senate seat of the late Democrat Edward Kennedy, a political upset that imperils health-care legislation in Congress and sends a warning shot to Democrats ahead of November’s elections. Brown was running ahead of Democratic state Attorney General Martha Coakley by about 5 percentage points with roughly 80 percent of the state’s precincts reporting. Independent candidate Joseph Kennedy, no relation to the late senator, was running a distant third. Brown, 50, a previously little-known state senator, cast himself as an independent voice who would help thwart President Barack Obama’s health-care plan and keep a check on Democrats in Congress, particularly on tax-increase proposals. Brown’s victory increases his party’s Senate numbers to 41, which would enable Republicans to stall votes in the chamber on an overhaul of the U.S. health-care system, Obama’s top legislative goal. His victory, in a state Obama won by 26 percentage points in the 2008 election, is the third recent high-profile Democratic loss. In November, the president’s party lost the governor’s mansions in New Jersey and Virginia. It follows decisions by five House Democrats since November to retire instead of face potentially tough races later this year. To contact the reporters on this story: Heidi Przybyla in Washington at hprzybyla@blooomberg.net ; Brian K. Sullivan in Boston at bsullivan10@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Obama Backs Cadillac Tax as Pelosi Faces Democratic Discord on Health Bill

January 7, 2010

By Laura Litvan and Kristin Jensen Jan. 7 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama is pushing U.S. House Democrats to drop their opposition to a tax on high- end insurance plans as lawmakers try to craft a final health- care measure by early next month, a Democratic aide said. The president expressed a preference for a Senate proposal to tax so-called Cadillac plans in a meeting yesterday with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and top party lawmakers, the aide said. The White House meeting came on the eve of a conference call Pelosi plans for noon today with her chamber’s Democrats. Pelosi is facing resistance as she tries to resolve differences in House and Senate bills that would mark the biggest changes to U.S. health policy in 45 years. The Cadillac tax is opposed by labor unions, which are among the party’s strongest backers, and 190 House Democrats. “I realize the White House has a timeline they want to meet here, but particularly on the tax issue, there is great potential for blowback,” said Representative Joe Courtney , a Connecticut Democrat who’s helping lead opposition to the tax. How to pay for the 10-year legislation, whose price tag topped $1 trillion in the House, may be the biggest fight in coming days. The Senate would impose a 40 percent tax on the high-end, employer-provided insurance plans; the House wants a 5.4 percent surtax on couples earning at least $1 million. ‘Stand Tough’ House Democrats say they will also push for a new government insurance program and greater subsidies to help millions of lower-income Americans buy policies. That may mean missing Obama’s push for completion before his State of the Union address, they said. “If we rush, the Senate will get most of its bad work implemented into law, and I don’t think we should allow that to happen,” said Oregon Representative Peter DeFazio . “We should stand tough on some of these issues.” With virtually no Republican support for the bill, Pelosi is depending on Democrats to stick together. Both the House and Senate would create online insurance-purchasing exchanges, expand the Medicaid program for the poor and attempt to curb medical costs . The Senate approved its bill on Dec. 24 with the support of all 58 Democrats and two independents, the exact number needed to overcome Republican delaying tactics. Senate Democrats said that razor-thin vote gives them the upper hand. Pelosi’s Margin “It’s going to have to be very close to the Senate package or you can see we won’t get 60 votes,” North Dakota Senator Kent Conrad said in a Bloomberg Television interview. Still, Pelosi won her Nov. 7 vote with just 220 of the House’s 435 votes, so she can’t afford to lose many members. Virginia Representative Eric Cantor , the No. 2 House Republican, said in a memo that he’s identified 37 House Democrats who might be persuaded to vote against the bill. Top Democrats may ask House members to give up the most if the Senate legislation dominates. Among other things, the Congressional Progressive Caucus, a group of more than 80 lawmakers, would probably lose its fight for the so-called public option to compete with private insurers such as Indianapolis-based WellPoint Inc. “There are components of the House version that must not be dismissed,” Arizona Democrat Raul Grijalva , a caucus leader, said in a Dec. 22 statement . Grijalva said he’d also push for a mandate that employers offer insurance. Antitrust Exemption DeFazio wants a House-approved repeal of the insurance industry’s antitrust exemption. Senate leaders kept the exemption to win over Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. House leaders said they may accept a Senate plan to increase Medicare payroll taxes on high earners. The Senate bill would impose an additional 0.9 percent Medicare tax on individuals who make more than $200,000 a year and on couples earning more than $250,000. Abortion is also a major issue, as Nelson and other lawmakers seek to ensure federal subsidies to help buy insurance don’t pay for the procedure. In the House, dozens of abortion-rights supporters voted for the bill after an amendment from Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak while saying they wouldn’t support final legislation with the same language because it might discourage insurers from covering abortions. Some are concerned about a Senate compromise Nelson worked out. Meeting With Obama Democratic negotiators have to find a way to appease both liberals and Stupak, who got 63 other Democrats to support his plan and said the Senate language won’t work. Obama also pushed congressional leaders to come up with stronger subsidy provisions than those in the Senate bill, a House Democratic aide said after a Jan. 5 White House meeting. The House bill includes $602 billion in affordability credits, compared with $436 billion in tax credits in the Senate plan, according to a comparison provided by House staff. Lawmakers seeking more changes got ammunition from California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger , who previously supported an overhaul of the health system. “It is not reform to push more costs onto states that are already struggling,” Schwarzenegger said yesterday. “Health- care reform, which started as noble and needed legislation, has become a trough of bribes, deals and loopholes.” To contact the reporters on this story: Laura Litvan in Washington at llitvan@bloomberg.net ; Kristin Jensen in Washington at kjensen@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Senate Bill Would Boost Medicare Taxes, Drop Proposed Plastic Surgery Levy

December 19, 2009

By Ryan J. Donmoyer Dec. 19 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. Senate’s health-care overhaul plan would almost double a proposed increase in Medicare payroll taxes for high-earners and impose a new tax on indoor tanning, replacing an earlier levy on plastic surgery. The new version of the bill announced today by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid contains a 0.9 percentage-point increase in the Medicare tax for individuals who earn more than $200,000 and couples earning more than $250,000, according to an estimate by the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation. The increase would start in 2013. That would generate $86.8 billion over six years, up from about $50 billion that would have been generated by an earlier proposed increase of 0.5 percentage point. Those affected would pay a Medicare tax rate of 2.35 percent, while their employers would continue to pay 1.45 percent. Reid’s proposed 10 percent excise tax on indoor tanning would be in place of an earlier proposal to tax breast enhancements and other elective cosmetic procedures, which was dropped from the bill. The main tax component of the bill remains a 40 percent excise tax on the portion of employer-provided health-insurance plans that’s worth more than $8,500 for individual coverage and $23,000 for families in 2013. That proposal would raise an estimated $148.9 billion through 2019, and it faces opposition from House Democrats led by Representative Joe Courtney of Connecticut. House Democrats passed a 5.4 percent income surtax on individuals earning more than $500,000 and couples earning more than $1 million to help pay for their health-care measure. To contact the reporter on this story: Ryan J. Donmoyer in Washington at rdonmoyer@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Rangel Says House Democrats Will Seek to Renew Expiring U.S. Tax Breaks

November 20, 2009

By Ryan J. Donmoyer Nov. 20 (Bloomberg) — New York Representative Charles Rangel said House Democrats will move next month to renew dozens of tax breaks before they expire at year’s end, including a research credit promoted by companies such as Dow Chemical Co. Rangel, the Democratic chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, said yesterday the panel will send a measure containing most of the extensions directly to the House floor for consideration, bypassing a committee debate. As many as 73 tax laws are due to expire Dec. 31. They include deductions for college tuition and for state and local sales tax payments, benefits for films and television shows produced in the U.S., and an incentive for producing rum in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. A research credit for businesses is one of the biggest. The R&D Credit Coalition, a Washington-based trade group, estimates the credit is equal to a federal subsidy of 6 cents for every dollar a company spends on research in the U.S. The group has more than 500 members including Dow, the largest U.S. chemical maker, CA Inc. , the second-largest maker of software for mainframe computers, and Microsoft Corp. , the world’s biggest software maker. Massachusetts Representative Richard Neal , a Democrat, said the tax break extensions are likely to be funded, in part, by legislation introduced Oct. 27 by Rangel and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus that’s designed to help the Internal Revenue Service fight offshore tax evasion. Alternative-Minimum Tax Neal said the Ways and Means panel likely will defer extending a so-called “patch” of the alternative minimum tax that spares about 30 million households from paying about $70 billion in higher income taxes this year. Congress would have to extend the patch in 2010 to keep the higher taxes from taking effect then. Committee member Chris Van Hollen of Maryland said the panel also is leaning toward passing a new, permanent estate tax instead of a one-year measure to keep the current levy from expiring next year. “That would be the prevailing view,” Van Hollen said. Another option, he said, would be to enact a multiyear extension of current law to ensure there is consistent tax treatment of large estates over the next several years. The current tax imposes a top levy of 45 percent on couples’ estates valued at more than $7 million. In 2010 the tax is scheduled to vanish under a phase-out Congress approved in 2001. It is due to return in 2011 with a top rate of 55 percent on estates worth more than $1 million. To contact the reporter on this story: Ryan J. Donmoyer in Washington at rdonmoyer@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

White House Rebuke: Angry Dems Shut Down Vote

November 19, 2009

A bloc of African American House Democrats, angry and worried that not enough is being done about high unemployment by the administration, forced the postponement of a much-anticipated vote Thursday on comprehensive financial regulation reform. The Financial Services Committee had finished hearing amendments around 3 p.m. and recessed, planning to return at 4 for a final vote on the package. But during the break, some of the Democrats on the committee pigeonholed Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and told him they wouldn’t vote for the bill because of the deepening problem of unemployment in their districts. The refusal to vote for the package, a key priority of the administration, and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner in particular, was portrayed as a direct rebuke of the White House’s “lack of response to the economic situation.” “We will not be proceeding to passage today,” Frank began. “I have been meeting with members of the committee, particularly the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who have informed me that they are troubled by what they believe is the lack of response to the economic situation that is confronting them on the part of the administration, and therefore do not feel that they could — in deference to the various constituencies that they represent — vote for passage.” The CBC met earlier this week with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and expressed dissatisfaction with the administration’s response to the unemployment situation, an aide familiar with the meeting said. There are ten CBC members on the Financial Services Committee. “The recession has created a unique systemic risk that threatens all parts of the African-American community, including the poor and the middle class,” said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), a subcommittee chair, in a statement after shutting down the vote. “I have always been committed to addressing that risk and will continue to do so. This is a critical issue for my constituents.” The bill was scheduled to be considered on the House floor during the second week of December. Today’s vote was postponed until the Tuesday after the Thanksgiving break. In the meantime, the Democratic leadership is working on job-creating legislation they want to pass before Christmas. “Nothing is lost by waiting ten days,” said Frank. That’s assuming, he added, that he can put the bill’s coalition back together. “Obviously, if there are not the votes for the bill, it will not come up.” WATCH:

Read the full article →

Obama Says Third-Quarter Growth Report Shows `Right Direction’ for Economy

October 31, 2009

By Nicholas Johnston Oct. 31 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama said figures on economic growth and the number of jobs created by government spending show that the economy is “moving in the right direction.” In his weekly radio and Internet address , Obama highlighted the Commerce Department report that the U.S. economy grew at a 3.5 percent annual rate the third quarter and separate data showing spending from the $787 billion economic stimulus is directly responsible for 640,329 jobs so far. “I am pleased to offer some better news that, while not cause for celebration, is certainly reason to believe that we are moving in the right direction,” Obama said. Economic growth and higher government spending hasn’t reduced the unemployment rate, which rose to a 26-year high of 9.8 percent in September. Obama has said he expects the rate to exceed 10 percent, and the jobless rate has been seized on by the administration’s critics. “Economic growth is no substitute for job growth,” Obama said today. “And we will likely see further job losses in the coming days, a fact that is both troubling for our economy and heartbreaking for the men and women who suddenly find themselves out of work.” Obama said the expanding economy is the first step to job creation and the gross domestic product report this week that showed the first quarter of growth in a year, is a “good sign.” “We have made progress,” Obama said. “At the same time, I want to emphasize that there’s still plenty of progress to be made.” Republican Address In the Republican address , House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio criticized the proposed $894 billion health- care legislation unveiled by House Democrats this week. It would create a government-run insurance program, require employers to cover workers and impose a surtax on the wealthiest Americans. “This 1,990 pages of bureaucracy will centralize health care decision-making in Washington,” he said . Boehner said the legislation would require thousands of new government employees, put bureaucrats in charge of medical treatment and will raise health insurance premiums. Boehner called on Democrats to work with Republicans to create a “fiscally responsible” overhaul of the health-care system. Republicans favor proposals to let people buy health insurance across state lines, give states tools to overhaul health-care systems, curb medical malpractice lawsuits and expand health-insurance purchasing pools, Boehner said. “We now have a choice: We can come together to implement smart, fiscally responsible reforms to improve Americans’ health care or we can recklessly pursue this government takeover that creates far more problems than it solves,” Boehner said. To contact the reporter on this story: Nicholas Johnston in Washington at njohnston3@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Democrats Plan Push to Raise Taxes on Buyout, Venture-Capital Executives

October 14, 2009

By Ryan J. Donmoyer Oct. 14 (Bloomberg) — House Democrats plan a renewed push to raise taxes on executives at private-equity and venture- capital firms to help pay for year-end economic recovery legislation, a top congressional aide said. Matthew Beck , a spokesman for the House Ways and Means Committee , said the panel will revive an effort to raise the 15 percent tax rate on “carried interest,” a term for the share of a fund’s profit that is paid as compensation to executives. That portion of an executive’s pay, now taxed at lower capital gains rates, would be subject to income tax at rates of as much as 35 percent. The top tax rate is scheduled to rise to 39.6 percent in 2011. “There is strong support for taxing carried interest as ordinary income and I expect this issue to move forward in the coming months,” Beck said. The move would reignite a battle last fought in June 2008 when the House passed the tax increase for executives at firms such as Blackstone Group LP and Carlyle Group as a way of funding middle-class tax cuts. The plan failed in the face of opposition in the Senate and from the Republican administration of then-President George W. Bush . The political dynamics have changed. Democrat Barack Obama campaigned in favor of the tax change, and his first budget proposal as president said it would generate $24 billion of revenue over nine years. Senate Democrats now control the 60 votes needed to thwart a filibuster, and New York Democratic Senator Charles Schumer , who criticized earlier proposals, now says he backs the change. ‘Wrong Time’ Douglas Lowenstein , president of the Private Equity Council , a Washington trade group, said that as the economy begins to recover a “tax increase on growth investors with a demonstrated record of building stronger companies and creating new jobs would be exactly the wrong policy at the wrong time.” A manager’s share of fund returns is “properly characterized as a long-term capital gain,” Lowenstein said. The issue involves taxation of the “two-and-twenty” pay structure commonly used for general partners at buyout firms, hedge funds, venture capital firms and other partnerships including real estate and oil and gas investments. Under that model, an executive typically is paid 2 percent of fund assets as an annual management fee, and 20 percent of the profit earned for investors above certain levels. While a management fee is taxed as income, the 20 percent incentive fee, or carried interest, is treated as a capital gain. More Like Wages Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel , a New York Democrat, and other Democrats including Michigan Representative Sander Levin say the fees are more like wages than capital gains because executives usually haven’t risked their own capital. “This is a fundamental issue of fairness and equity in the tax code,” said Beck, the Ways and Means spokesman. Revenue from the tax proposal may be earmarked by House Democrats to help pay for renewal of tax subsidies designed to help economic recovery. For example, Rangel said lawmakers should extend an $8,000 tax credit for first-time homebuyers, and the White House is pushing renewal of an incentive that lets companies use current losses to get refunds for past taxes. Congressional budget rules say those tax subsidies have to be offset with tax increases or spending cuts so they don’t add to a federal budget deficit that totaled $1.4 trillion for the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30. Reviving Business The push for the tax coincides with efforts by private equity firms to resuscitate their business after the global credit crisis. Firms have announced $58 billion of takeovers this year, less than one-third of the amount in the same period in 2008, and one-tenth of the figure for 2007, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. New York-based Blackstone , the world’s biggest buyout firm, agreed Oct. 7 to buy Anheuser-Busch InBev NV’s amusement park business for as much as $2.7 billion in the largest private-equity deal this year. David Rubenstein , co-founder of Washington-based Carlyle Group, said yesterday that the private-equity industry may find a way to expand and attract more capital than managers did during the leveraged-buyout boom of 2006 and 2007. “It could transform and grow itself again to the point where it is bigger than it was before the bubble burst,” Rubenstein said in a speech at the Super Return Middle East conference in Dubai. “The industry is very good at reinventing itself.” Obama’s budget proposed increasing the tax on carried interest at all partnerships that use the “two and twenty” structure, without exempting any industries. Industry Exclusions Venture-capital firms have sought to be excluded from any tax increase. The policy would also affect executives of real estate and oil and gas partnerships. Hedge-fund executives typically get carried interest, though little of it may qualify for capital gains treatment under current law because the funds usually take short-term positions in the market. Those executives would face higher taxes on profit from “side-pocket” funds for hard-to-sell investments held for longer periods. To contact the reporter on this story: Ryan J. Donmoyer in Washington at rdonmoyer@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Senate Has `Miles to Go’ on Health-Care Plan After Finance Committee Vote

October 14, 2009

By Kristin Jensen and Laura Litvan Oct. 14 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. Senate Finance Committee’s approval of health-care legislation after months of struggling to reach an agreement sets the stage for an even bigger battle. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid now has to meld the $829 billion legislation with a measure passed by the Senate health committee in July. While both proposals aim to curb medical costs and cover tens of millions of uninsured Americans, their different paths to the goal have divided Democrats and unsettled some of the party’s main supporters. Lawmakers are grappling with a host of issues — whether to create a government-run insurance program, whether to require that employers cover workers and how to pay for all the changes. Even as Democrats stuck together in yesterday’s 14-9 panel vote and won the support of Republican Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine, they hardened their stances. “The bill before us still falls short of what people need and what people expect,” said Senator Jay Rockefeller , a West Virginia Democrat who supports a government insurance entity, or public option, to compete with private insurers such as Indianapolis-based WellPoint Inc. The public option is a fault line, with a majority of House Democrats and senators including Rockefeller and New York’s Chuck Schumer lined up on one side and Democrats from Republican-leaning states, such as Senators Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Kent Conrad of North Dakota, on the other. Schumer yesterday said the option must be in final legislation, after the finance committee voted against it. Conrad said at least one version of the plan is a “nonstarter” because his state’s hospitals would go bankrupt. Unions Weigh In The United Auto Workers and 26 other unions will publish a newspaper advertisement today saying labor will oppose the legislation unless lawmakers include a public option, among other changes, before a vote by the full Senate. House Democrats and Senate Democrats led by John Kerry of Massachusetts, are lining up to support another proposal that Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus knocked down: a requirement that employers cover workers. While Reid tries to navigate the conflicting demands from his party, he may not have much room to change the finance panel proposal. Lincoln warned that her support wouldn’t extend to a final bill that “strays too far.” And Snowe was measured in backing the legislation, President Barack Obama’s top domestic priority. “There are many miles to go in this legislative journey,” Snowe said. “My vote today is my vote today. It doesn’t forecast what my vote will be tomorrow.” 60 Votes Senate Democrats control 60 votes, the number needed to avoid Republican stalling tactics and pass major legislation. Some, such as Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson , say they won’t back a bill unless it has Republican votes. That means Reid has to combine the two measures to keep his party on board while retaining Snowe and wooing other Republicans such as Susan Collins of Maine and George Voinovich of Ohio. Reid, a Nevada Democrat, will face a similar challenge if his chamber passes the legislation: working with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to craft a compromise. “Every step in this process you see the degree of difficulty notched up,” said Jennifer Duffy , senior editor at the Cook Political Report in Washington. Like measures passed by other committees, the Senate finance proposal requires that Americans get insurance, creating purchasing exchanges and tax credits to help. Instead of a public option, it offers $6 billion in seed money for nonprofit insurance cooperatives. ‘Tug-of-War’ The Senate health committee left the work of paying for the legislation to the finance panel, which opted for $13 billion in annual fees on health-care industries as well as a tax on insurers that offer the most generous benefit plans, which the Congressional Budget Office says would raise $201 billion over 10 years. Democrats expressed concern that the tax on so-called Cadillac plans would affect people such as coal miners who need high-end benefits because of dangerous work. The House plan instead imposes surtaxes on the wealthiest Americans, and leaders are considering levies on insurers’ profits. “We see a five-party tug-of-war” among labor unions, senior citizens, lawmakers, employers and health industries, said Anne Kim , economic program director for Third Way, a Washington research institution. “The right compromise is going to be one that requires each of these groups to hurt just a little.” Not Enough Customers Industry groups will seek other changes. Insurers , counting on acquiring millions of new customers, are upset that the finance panel scaled back penalties for not buying coverage. Hospitals, which agreed to contribute $155 billion in savings toward the effort, say not enough people are covered. There is common ground. Besides the insurance requirement, all the plans restrict insurers’ ability to deny people coverage and encourage preventive care, electronic records and research on the effectiveness of treatments. And there are possible compromises. Nelson and others have expressed approval of a proposal by Senator Thomas Carper , a Delaware Democrat, to allow states to create their own public options if insurance competition is lacking. “Let’s get this merger right,” Baucus said yesterday of the process ahead. “Let’s not botch it.” To contact the reporters on this story: Kristin Jensen in Washington at kjensen@bloomberg.net ; Laura Litvan in Washington at llitvan@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Obama Says Overhaul of Health-Care System Is Essential for Economic Growth

August 8, 2009

By Nicholas Johnston Aug. 8 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama said that as the worst recession since the Great Depression shows signs of nearing an end, an overhaul of the U.S. health-care system is essential for economic growth. The president, in his weekly address on the radio and the Internet , called yesterday’s government figures on jobs a sign that “the worst may be behind us” as the economy begins to recover, and said that now is the time to “rebuild it stronger than before.” “We must lay a new foundation for future growth and prosperity, and a key pillar of a new foundation is health insurance reform,” Obama said. The Labor Department yesterday said the pace of job losses is slowing and the unemployment rate dipped to 9.4 percent in July from 9.5 percent in June. For more than a week, Obama has been focusing on indicators showing the nation’s economy may have hit bottom and is recovering. At the same time, he has continued to tie economic prosperity to enactment of a health-care overhaul bill. Legislative action on that front has been delayed until after the monthlong congressional August recess. The legislation being drafted would extend health- insurance coverage to as many as 47 million uninsured people and is designed to cut spiraling medical costs. Lawmakers also are considering setting up a public insurance plan to compete with private insurers as part of an effort to lower premiums. “There are still details to be hammered out. There are still differences to be reconciled,” Obama said. “But we are moving toward a broad consensus on reform.” Obama criticized “defenders of the status quo and political-point scorers” for spreading what he said was misleading information about health-care proposals in an attempt to defeat them. ‘Outlandish Rumors’ “Let me start by dispelling the outlandish rumors that reform will promote euthanasia, cut Medicaid, or bring about a government takeover of health care,” Obama said. “That’s simply not true. This isn’t about putting government in charge of your health insurance.” Some House Democrats have run into vocal opposition at town-hall meetings and other events across the country where lawmakers have tried to sell the health-care proposals. The Democratic National Committee has accused Republicans of orchestrating disruptions at the public forums. In today’s remarks Obama said the current health-care system works well for the insurance companies but not for Americans. Consumer Protections He said a health-care overhaul would include consumer protections to prevent insurers from denying coverage because of a person’s medical history and require them to cover preventative care and routine checkups. Insurance companies would also face limits on what patients could be charged for out-of-pocket expenses, Obama said. “Your health insurance ought to be there for you when it counts,” he said. “Reform will make sure it is.” The Republican address was given by Virginia gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell , who said Obama’s climate-change and health-care proposals are threats to job growth. McDonnell, Virginia’s former attorney general, said the climate measure pending in Congress, which aims to regulate emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases, would amount to a “huge new national energy tax.” “It’s the wrong policy for a nation struggling with the worst economy in generations,” he said. Market Incentives McDonnell said Republicans support “free-market incentives” to improve the nation’s health-care system and programs to help small businesses buy insurance for their employees. McDonnell also said the federal government needs to do a better job controlling its finances to lower the budget deficit, which is projected to be a record $1.84 trillion this year. “Government must be more efficient, and more accountable, which is why we are calling for an end to new government spending that is leading to an exploding deficit and burdening our children with new debt that they will have to repay,” McDonnell said. To contact the reporter on this story: Nicholas Johnston in Washington at Njohnston3@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Health-Care Bill Talks Are Back On in House Energy Panel, Waxman, Ross Say

July 24, 2009

By Laura Litvan and Brian Faler July 24 (Bloomberg) — The leader of the House Energy and Commerce Committee said members are working toward an agreement on health-care legislation that would enable the panel to approve a draft of the plan next week after talks earlier broke down. “Talks are back on,” said Representative Mike Ross, a leader of a group of self-described fiscally conservative House Democrats who had balked at the cost of the bill. Ross appeared with Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman after a closed- door meeting to announce the resumption of the talks. To contact the reporter on this story: Laura Litvan in Washington at llitvan@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →