speaker

Obama Summit May Give Democrats Chance to Jumpstart Health-Care Overhaul

February 24, 2010

By James Rowley and Kristin Jensen Feb. 24 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama may be creating the best chance to push through his stalled health- care plan by summoning his political foes to a summit tomorrow. Obama’s invitation to congressional leaders to convene at Blair House, across from the White House, challenges Republicans to provide ideas for overhauling a medical system that accounts for 17 percent of the U.S. economy. It also gives Obama a televised forum to focus on popular parts of a measure that is generally opposed by Americans. Republicans are pushing back against what they see as a political show designed to paint them as obstructionists so Democrats can score points with the public and move on alone. The Democrats’ likely last resort is to use a budget process called reconciliation, which would allow them to circumvent opposition in the Senate, though it may limit the bill’s scope. Democrats “want to make the Republicans look like partisan fools to give them the opportunity to do reconciliation,” said Republican strategist John Feehery . Obama raised the stakes Feb. 22 by releasing what White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer called an “opening bid,” a proposal that relies heavily on legislation the Senate passed in December. The plan, which the White House said would cover 31 million uninsured Americans and cost $950 billion over 10 years, includes a tax on unearned income such as capital gains to help fund the bill. The possibility of using reconciliation was “a factor” in drafting the measure, Pfeiffer said. Republicans balked. ‘Obamacare 2.0’ “House Republicans will continue to oppose any effort to use this so-called summit as a media preamble to forcing through Obamacare 2.0,” Indiana Representative Mike Pence , chairman of the House Republican Conference, said yesterday. Passage is far from assured through reconciliation, with a number of Senate Democrats opposing the maneuver, and some House Democrats lukewarm about the idea. Hanging in the balance is legislation that would give insurers such as WellPoint Inc. of Indianapolis and drugmakers including New York-based Pfizer Inc. millions of new customers while requiring them to make concessions. Insurers agreed to new rules; drugmakers would help Medicare patients afford medicines. Obama also supports eliminating an antitrust exemption for insurers, spokesman Robert Gibbs said yesterday. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will head a Democratic delegation to the meeting, which starts at 10 a.m. tomorrow; House Minority Leader John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell lead the Republicans. It’s His Party The two sides have wrangled over details as small as the shape of the table, originally planned as a U-shape and now set to be rectangular. Obama can’t appear dismissive of Republican ideas after inviting them to seek common ground, said Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. “He’s the man who called the party,” she said. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said Obama is “eager” to meet, yet would challenge Republicans. “He wants the Republicans to be honest about what they’re doing,” Sebelius told Bloomberg Television on Feb. 19. “You can’t cover everyone unless there’s some cost connected with that.” One House Republican plan would expand coverage to just 3 million uninsured Americans and cost $61 billion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Senate Republicans have offered no proposal. Massachusetts Vote Democrats were days away from a House-Senate compromise when they lost the 60th vote they needed in the Senate because of a Jan. 19 special election in Massachusetts. Reconciliation would allow passage with a simple majority; Democrats control 59 of the 100 Senate seats. Republicans say that election underscored public disapproval of the overhaul. A Feb. 3-9 Pew Research Center poll found 50 percent of Americans “generally oppose” the legislation, while 38 percent “generally favor” it. Democrats can win converts, said Scott Keeter , Pew’s director of survey research. After the House passed its bill in November, Pew found more support. The numbers also got closer in September after Obama spoke before Congress. “The making of the sausage is a troubling sight,” Keeter said. “Once it’s made, you then have for the people who voted for it at least a pretty strong incentive to unify around it.” Public Appeal Obama can also use the forum to emphasize changes people like. An ABC News/Washington Post poll this month found 80 percent of Americans support the proposal to force insurers to accept customers with pre-existing medical conditions; 72 percent favor a requirement that employers cover workers; and 56 percent back the individual mandate to buy insurance. “Most Americans like various parts of it but have a very negative view of its totality,” said Vic Fazio , a former Democratic congressman from California who’s now a Washington lobbyist with clients that support the health overhaul. With both sides standing fast, agreement at the meeting is unlikely, said David Rohde , a political scientist at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. Democrats want to avert blame for getting nothing done and Republicans don’t want to give Obama a victory, Rohde said. “That, more than anything else, probably makes the Republicans skittish about getting involved in this,” he said. To contact the reporters on this story: Kristin Jensen in Washington at kjensen@bloomberg.net ; James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Obama Summit May Give Democrats Chance to Jumpstart Health-Care Overhaul

February 24, 2010

By James Rowley and Kristin Jensen Feb. 24 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama may be creating the best chance to push through his stalled health- care plan by summoning his political foes to a summit tomorrow. Obama’s invitation to congressional leaders to convene at Blair House, across from the White House, challenges Republicans to provide ideas for overhauling a medical system that accounts for 17 percent of the U.S. economy. It also gives Obama a televised forum to focus on popular parts of a measure that is generally opposed by Americans. Republicans are pushing back against what they see as a political show designed to paint them as obstructionists so Democrats can score points with the public and move on alone. The Democrats’ likely last resort is to use a budget process called reconciliation, which would allow them to circumvent opposition in the Senate, though it may limit the bill’s scope. Democrats “want to make the Republicans look like partisan fools to give them the opportunity to do reconciliation,” said Republican strategist John Feehery . Obama raised the stakes Feb. 22 by releasing what White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer called an “opening bid,” a proposal that relies heavily on legislation the Senate passed in December. The plan, which the White House said would cover 31 million uninsured Americans and cost $950 billion over 10 years, includes a tax on unearned income such as capital gains to help fund the bill. The possibility of using reconciliation was “a factor” in drafting the measure, Pfeiffer said. Republicans balked. ‘Obamacare 2.0’ “House Republicans will continue to oppose any effort to use this so-called summit as a media preamble to forcing through Obamacare 2.0,” Indiana Representative Mike Pence , chairman of the House Republican Conference, said yesterday. Passage is far from assured through reconciliation, with a number of Senate Democrats opposing the maneuver, and some House Democrats lukewarm about the idea. Hanging in the balance is legislation that would give insurers such as WellPoint Inc. of Indianapolis and drugmakers including New York-based Pfizer Inc. millions of new customers while requiring them to make concessions. Insurers agreed to new rules; drugmakers would help Medicare patients afford medicines. Obama also supports eliminating an antitrust exemption for insurers, spokesman Robert Gibbs said yesterday. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will head a Democratic delegation to the meeting, which starts at 10 a.m. tomorrow; House Minority Leader John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell lead the Republicans. It’s His Party The two sides have wrangled over details as small as the shape of the table, originally planned as a U-shape and now set to be rectangular. Obama can’t appear dismissive of Republican ideas after inviting them to seek common ground, said Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. “He’s the man who called the party,” she said. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said Obama is “eager” to meet, yet would challenge Republicans. “He wants the Republicans to be honest about what they’re doing,” Sebelius told Bloomberg Television on Feb. 19. “You can’t cover everyone unless there’s some cost connected with that.” One House Republican plan would expand coverage to just 3 million uninsured Americans and cost $61 billion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Senate Republicans have offered no proposal. Massachusetts Vote Democrats were days away from a House-Senate compromise when they lost the 60th vote they needed in the Senate because of a Jan. 19 special election in Massachusetts. Reconciliation would allow passage with a simple majority; Democrats control 59 of the 100 Senate seats. Republicans say that election underscored public disapproval of the overhaul. A Feb. 3-9 Pew Research Center poll found 50 percent of Americans “generally oppose” the legislation, while 38 percent “generally favor” it. Democrats can win converts, said Scott Keeter , Pew’s director of survey research. After the House passed its bill in November, Pew found more support. The numbers also got closer in September after Obama spoke before Congress. “The making of the sausage is a troubling sight,” Keeter said. “Once it’s made, you then have for the people who voted for it at least a pretty strong incentive to unify around it.” Public Appeal Obama can also use the forum to emphasize changes people like. An ABC News/Washington Post poll this month found 80 percent of Americans support the proposal to force insurers to accept customers with pre-existing medical conditions; 72 percent favor a requirement that employers cover workers; and 56 percent back the individual mandate to buy insurance. “Most Americans like various parts of it but have a very negative view of its totality,” said Vic Fazio , a former Democratic congressman from California who’s now a Washington lobbyist with clients that support the health overhaul. With both sides standing fast, agreement at the meeting is unlikely, said David Rohde , a political scientist at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. Democrats want to avert blame for getting nothing done and Republicans don’t want to give Obama a victory, Rohde said. “That, more than anything else, probably makes the Republicans skittish about getting involved in this,” he said. To contact the reporters on this story: Kristin Jensen in Washington at kjensen@bloomberg.net ; James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Jobs Measure May Get Final Vote in U.S. Senate Today After Clearing Hurdle

February 23, 2010

By Brian Faler Feb. 23 (Bloomberg) — A $15 billion jobs bill cleared a procedural hurdle in the U.S. Senate yesterday after a handful of Republicans, including Scott Brown of Massachusetts, broke with their party leaders to help advance the Democratic measure. The vote that allows the measure to proceed was 62-30, with 60 needed to overcome Republican stalling tactics. Most Republicans opposed the bill after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid scaled back an $85 billion jobs-related measure that had been crafted in committee by a group of Democrats and Republicans. Reid said the Senate will take a final vote on the stripped-down bill “in a day or so.” Brown, in just his third vote since being seated earlier this month, said that while the bill was “not perfect” he “came to Washington to be an independent voice, to put politics aside and to do everything in my power to create jobs for Massachusetts families.” Also siding with Democrats were Republican Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, Christopher Bond of Missouri and George Voinovich of Ohio. Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska was the sole Democrat to vote against advancing the bill. Democrats, who lost their 60-vote supermajority with Brown’s surprise win in a special election last month, needed support from at least two Republicans in yesterday’s vote because New Jersey Democrat Frank Lautenberg is being treated for stomach cancer. Obama ‘Grateful’ President Barack Obama issued a statement saying he was “grateful to the Democratic and Republican senators who voted to support” the bill’s provisions. “The American people want to see Washington put aside partisan differences and make progress on jobs” and with yesterday’s vote “the Senate took one important step forward in doing that,” Obama said. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, said lawmakers there may pass the Senate plan without any changes. The measure’s centerpiece is a $13 billion plan to fight joblessness by offering companies a one-year holiday from paying a 6.2 percent Social Security payroll tax for each worker they hire who has been jobless for at least 60 days. The plan would save or create as many as 234,000 jobs, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The plan would spend $2 billion to aid state governments by expanding subsidies for bonds used to finance construction projects, give small businesses more power to write off expenses and transfer $19.5 billion in tax revenue into the government’s highway trust fund. Republican Demand Republican leaders had demanded a chance to restore provisions Reid dropped earlier this month, including a package of business-related tax cuts. Reid’s decision amounted to a bet that at least a few Republicans wouldn’t vote against his stripped-down bill in an election year when the economy is at the top of the list of voters’ concerns. The provisions eliminated by Reid included an extension in unemployment benefits, a package of individual and business tax cuts worth $31 billion, and provisions preventing looming cuts in Medicare reimbursements to doctors. Reid said lawmakers would take up those items later. The House approved a jobs bill in December costing more than $150 billion. It would spend $53 billion to extend unemployment benefits, $24 billion to help states to pay their Medicaid bills, $48 billion for infrastructure and $26 billion to shore up funding for public service jobs. —-With assistance from James Rowley in Washington. Editors: Don Frederick , Laurie Asseo . To contact the reporter on this story: Brian Faler  in Washington at   or bfaler@bloomberg.net .

Read the full article →

Jobs Legislation Clears Hurdle in U.S. Senate With Some Republican Support

February 23, 2010

By Brian Faler Feb. 23 (Bloomberg) — A $15 billion jobs bill cleared a procedural hurdle in the U.S. Senate yesterday after a handful of Republicans, including Scott Brown of Massachusetts, broke with their party leaders to help advance the Democratic measure. The vote that allows the measure to proceed was 62-30, with 60 needed to overcome Republican stalling tactics. Most Republicans opposed the bill after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid scaled back an $85 billion jobs-related measure that had been crafted in committee by a group of Democrats and Republicans. Reid said the Senate will take a final vote on the stripped-down bill “in a day or so.” Brown, in just his third vote since being seated earlier this month, said that while the bill was “not perfect” he “came to Washington to be an independent voice, to put politics aside and to do everything in my power to create jobs for Massachusetts families.” Also siding with Democrats were Republican Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, Christopher Bond of Missouri and George Voinovich of Ohio. Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska was the sole Democrat to vote against advancing the bill. Democrats, who lost their 60-vote supermajority with Brown’s surprise win in a special election last month, needed support from at least two Republicans in yesterday’s vote because New Jersey Democrat Frank Lautenberg is being treated for stomach cancer. Obama ‘Grateful’ President Barack Obama issued a statement saying he was “grateful to the Democratic and Republican senators who voted to support” the bill’s provisions. “The American people want to see Washington put aside partisan differences and make progress on jobs” and with yesterday’s vote “the Senate took one important step forward in doing that,” Obama said. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, said lawmakers there may pass the Senate plan without any changes. The measure’s centerpiece is a $13 billion plan to fight joblessness by offering companies a one-year holiday from paying a 6.2 percent Social Security payroll tax for each worker they hire who has been jobless for at least 60 days. The plan would save or create as many as 234,000 jobs, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The plan would spend $2 billion to aid state governments by expanding subsidies for bonds used to finance construction projects, give small businesses more power to write off expenses and transfer $19.5 billion in tax revenue into the government’s highway trust fund. Republican Demand Republican leaders had demanded a chance to restore provisions Reid dropped earlier this month, including a package of business-related tax cuts. Reid’s decision amounted to a bet that at least a few Republicans wouldn’t vote against his stripped-down bill in an election year when the economy is at the top of the list of voters’ concerns. The provisions eliminated by Reid included an extension in unemployment benefits, a package of individual and business tax cuts worth $31 billion, and provisions preventing looming cuts in Medicare reimbursements to doctors. Reid said lawmakers would take up those items later. The House approved a jobs bill in December costing more than $150 billion. It would spend $53 billion to extend unemployment benefits, $24 billion to help states to pay their Medicaid bills, $48 billion for infrastructure and $26 billion to shore up funding for public service jobs. —-With assistance from James Rowley in Washington. Editors: Don Frederick , Laurie Asseo . To contact the reporter on this story: Brian Faler  in Washington at   or bfaler@bloomberg.net .

Read the full article →

Job-Creation Measure Clears Hurdle in U.S. Senate With Republican Support

February 22, 2010

By Brian Faler Feb. 22 (Bloomberg) — A $15 billion jobs bill cleared a test vote in the U.S. Senate after a handful of Republicans, including Scott Brown of Massachusetts, broke with their party leaders to help advance the Democratic measure. The vote today was 62-30, with 60 needed to overcome Republican stalling tactics. Most Republicans opposed the bill after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid scaled back an $85 billion jobs-related measure that had been crafted in committee by a group of Democrats and Republicans. Reid said the Senate will take a final vote on the stripped-down bill “in a day or so.” Brown, in just his third vote since being seated earlier this month, said while the bill was “not perfect” he “came to Washington to be an independent voice, to put politics aside and to do everything in my power to create jobs for Massachusetts families.” Also siding with Democrats were Republican Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, Christopher Bond of Missouri and George Voinovich of Ohio. Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska was the sole Democrat to vote advancing the bill. Democrats, who lost their 60-vote supermajority with Brown’s surprise win in a special election last month, needed support from at least two Republicans because New Jersey Democrat Frank Lautenberg is being treated for stomach cancer. Obama ‘Grateful’ President Barack Obama issued a statement saying he was “grateful to the Democratic and Republican senators who voted to support these investments.” “The American people want to see Washington put aside partisan differences and make progress on jobs, and today the Senate took one important step forward in doing that,” Obama said. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, said lawmakers there may pass the Senate plan without any changes. The measure’s centerpiece is a $13 billion plan to fight joblessness by offering companies a one-year holiday from paying a 6.2 percent Social Security payroll tax for each worker they hire who has been jobless for at least 60 days. The plan would save or create as many as 234,000 jobs, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The plan would spend $2 billion to aid state governments by expanding subsidies for bonds used to finance construction projects, give small businesses more power to write off expenses and transfer $19.5 billion in tax revenue into the government’s highway trust fund. Republican Demand Republican leaders had demanded a chance to restore provisions Reid dropped earlier this month, including a package of business-related tax cuts. Reid’s decision amounted to a bet that at least a few Republicans wouldn’t vote against his stripped-down bill in an election year when the economy is at the top of the list of voters’ concerns. The provisions eliminated by Reid included an extension in unemployment benefits, a package of individual and business tax cuts worth $31 billion, and provisions preventing looming cuts in Medicare reimbursements to doctors. Reid said lawmakers would take up those items later. The House approved a jobs bill in December costing more than $150 billion. It would spend $53 billion to extend unemployment benefits, $24 billion to help states to pay their Medicaid bills, $48 billion for infrastructure and $26 billion to shore up funding for public service jobs. —-With assistance from James Rowley in Washington. Editors: Don Frederick , Laurie Asseo . To contact the reporter on this story: Brian Faler  in Washington at   or bfaler@bloomberg.net .

Read the full article →

Senate to Take Up Scaled-Back U.S. Job-Stimulus Legislation After Dispute

February 12, 2010

By Brian Faler and James Rowley Feb. 12 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. Senate will take up a scaled-back job-stimulus plan later this month offering companies a tax break for hiring unemployed workers after Democrats scuttled a more sweeping proposal. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced yesterday he was dropping scores of provisions from an $85 billion bipartisan compromise jobs plan unveiled only hours earlier by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus , a Montana Democrat, and the panel’s ranking Republican member, Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa. Reid said their proposal had been “watered down” with extraneous provisions and that he would instead proceed with a bill containing just four items: the hiring tax break, an increase in highway spending, an extension of the Build America Bonds program and tax breaks for small businesses. “This is a simplified, focused bill that addresses our core priority: putting millions of Americans back to work,” said Reid, a Nevada Democrat. “I look forward to swift action on this measure that will create and save dependable jobs.” The revised plan would cost about $15 billion, said Reid spokesman Jim Manley . The Senate is slated to begin debating the measure later this month, after Congress returns from its weeklong Presidents’ Day break. Reid’s announcement surprised Republicans who accused him of abruptly throwing out weeks of efforts to craft a bipartisan bill. ‘Go Partisan’ “The majority leader pulled the rug out from work to build broad-based support for tax relief and other efforts to help the private sector recover from the economic crisis,” said Grassley spokeswoman Jill Kozeny . “Senator Reid’s announcement sends a message that he wants to go partisan and blame Republicans when Senator Grassley and others were trying to find common ground.” White House spokesman Robert Gibbs today called the jobs tax credit “very akin to what the president had in mind.” He said, “There are a host of things that can and will garner bipartisan support.” Democrats are concerned that the nation’s 9.7 percent unemployment rate last month will translate into significant losses in November’s elections. The share of people out of work for at least six months reached 41 percent, the most since the government began keeping track in 1948, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. First in a Series Reid said the bill he detailed would be the first in a series of efforts this year to combat joblessness. “We don’t have a jobs bill — we have a jobs agenda,” he said. He said lawmakers would take up other elements of the measure Baucus and Grassley had offered, estimated to cost $85 billion, in subsequent legislation. Those elements include an extension of unemployment benefits costing $25 billion, a package of routine tax cuts worth $31 billion, about $10 billion to prevent scheduled cuts in Medicare reimbursements to doctors expiring parts of the USA Patriot Act, the anti-terrorism bill enacted after the Sept. 11 attacks. Asked whether Republicans would support the scaled-back package, Reid said: “Republicans are going to have to make a choice” and “I don’t know in logic what they could say to oppose this.” His announcement came after Democratic senators met behind closed doors to discuss the agreement worked out by Baucus and Grassley. Senator Byron Dorgan , a North Dakota Democrat, criticized the proposal, saying it had “morphed into something different from just a pure jobs bill.” House Legislation The new plan would have to be reconciled with House legislation approved by that chamber in December that costs more than $150 billion. “They, of course, would rather do a big one — it’s easier for them to do a big one than us,” said Reid. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , a California Democrat, signaled today she’d push for a much larger package. “We will work to ensure that critical pieces of the House- passed Jobs for Main Street Act are enacted into law, including investments in our roads, bridges and public transit systems, support for job training initiatives and funding to keep policy and firefighters on the street,” Pelosi said in a statement. The House-backed plan would spend $53 billion to extend unemployment benefits, $24 billion to help states to pay their Medicaid bills, $48 billion for infrastructure projects and $26 billion to shore up funding for public service jobs. New Hiring The House plan not only dwarfs the size of the Senate package, it omits the centerpiece of the Senate bill: the tax break for new hiring. That provision is designed to reduce the cost of adding workers by excusing employers from paying a 6.2 percent Social Security payroll tax for new hires who have been out of work for at least 60 days. In an attempt to keep those new workers on the rolls, the plan would offer businesses a $1,000 tax credit next year for every employer retained for at least 12 months. It would cost $13 billion. Other provisions would spend $2 billion to expand federal subsidies for bonds issued by state and local governments. It would also pump $20 billion into the government’s highway trust fund for infrastructure projects that for accounting reasons would not add to the total cost of the bill. To contact the reporter on this story: James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Robert Weissman: A Disadvantaged Class? The Corporate Speech Index

February 12, 2010

One of the most astounding passages in the Supreme Court’s mind-boggling decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission — the January decision holding that corporations have a First Amendment right to spend as much as they choose from their treasuries to support or oppose candidates for elected office — is this: [T]he Government may commit a constitutional wrong when by law it identifies certain preferred speakers. By taking the right to speak from some and giving it to others, the Government deprives the disadvantaged person or class of the right to use speech to strive to establish worth, standing, and respect for the speaker’s voice… The First Amendment protects speech and speaker, and the ideas that flow from each. This ode to the First Amendment is inspiring, until you recognize that the “disadvantaged class” reference is to corporations. When it comes to speech protections, there are surely many rational ways to distinguish corporations from real, live persons. One is that corporations are not real, live persons! Another is that for-profit corporations exist for the purpose of making money, and that this monomaniacal focus distinguishes them in very important ways from humans, who care not only about making money, but building community, expressing themselves, fairness, equality, justice, protecting future generations, stewarding the planet and much more. And other consequential difference, compounding these other points of difference, is that large and even not-so-large corporations have a lot more money, and can easily mobilize resources on a scale that vastly outdistances anything that real people can do. Thus the rather obvious conclusion that corporate money can distort elections and the political process. This is hardly speculative: large corporations dominated the political process even before Citizens United, a fact widely understood. Eighty-five percent of people in the United States believe big business has too much power in Washington. What may not be quite so obvious is how extraordinary are the resources that corporations can mobilize as against what is now spent on elections. Consider these juxtapositions — Total amount spent on federal elections in the 2008 election cycle: $5.285 billion Amount spent by Obama campaign in the 2008 election: $730 million Average amount raised by incumbent Members of the House of Representatives in the 2008 election: $1.356 million (challengers: $335,101) Average amount raised by incumbent Senators in the 2008 election: $8.741 million (challengers: $1,152,146) Exxon profits 2007 – 2008 : $85 billion Top-selling drug, Lipitor, revenues, 2007-2008: $27 billion Goldman Sachs bonus and compensation expense for 2009: $16.2 billion Value of Lockheed’s defense contracts in 2008: $15 billion The amount spent on cigarette advertising and promotion by the five largest cigarette companies in the United States in 2006: $12.49 billion Microsoft cash on hand: $33.4 billion And these comparisons, from the states — —- Amount spent on candidate races in California state elections, 2008: $225 million Revenues of the 97th largest corporation in California, Public Storage, 2008: $1.7 billion Amount spent on candidate races in Ohio state elections, 2008: $107 million Revenues of the 10th largest corporation in Ohio, Progressive Insurance, 2008: $12.8 billion Amount spent on candidate races in North Dakota state elections, 2008: $7.3 million Revenues of the largest corporation in North Dakota, 2008: $5 billion Amount spent on candidate races in Alabama state elections, 2008: $15.5 million Revenues of the second largest corporation in Alabama, Vulcan Materials, 2008: $3.6 billion Amount spent on candidate races in Nebraska state elections, 2008: $6.4 million Revenues of the 10th largest corporation in Nebraska, Public Storage, 2008: $1.9 billion Amount spent on candidate races in Rhode Island state elections, 2008: $7.2 million Revenues of the third largest corporation in Rhode Island, Hasbro, 2008: $4 billion —- These comparisons illustrate how easy it will be for one company, one industry, or the corporate class overall, to dominate the electoral discourse in the wake of Citizens United. We won’t know how this plays out, of course, until after it happens. Will Exxon alone decide to spend, say, $500 million to oppose or support candidates? Perhaps not — but the company might, and it certainly could. The mere fact an Exxon could spend that much, or more, will tilt the political process even more in favor of big business. And it is a virtual certainty that targeted corporate spending will escalate sharply in the wake of decision. Corporations do not establish their “worth” through political and expressive speech, as the Court suggests, but through a different kind of statement altogether — the financial statement. That fact, combined with their unparalleled treasuries, makes the Court’s decision in Citizens United a real and present danger to democracy. It must be overturned. Join the call for a constitutional amendment to undo Citizens United and restore the First Amendment and our democracy .

Read the full article →

Timoshenko’s Challenge to Ukraine Power Transition May Stall IMF Bailout

February 10, 2010

By Agnes Lovasz Feb. 10 (Bloomberg) — Ukraine’s prospects of a smooth power transfer that could help free up its bailout loan are fading as backers of Yulia Timoshenko , the loser in the Feb. 7 presidential election, said they were gathering evidence of electoral fraud and called for street protests. Timoshenko, the prime minister, has refused to concede defeat to opposition leader Viktor Yanukovych , 59. He won 48.96 percent of the vote to Timoshenko’s 45.47 percent with virtually all ballots counted, according to the Central Electoral Commission’s Web site. While Timoshenko, 49, likely won’t win a court battle over the alleged vote rigging, she retains a majority in Parliament and can leverage her support there to hold onto the premiership, said Nick Day , London-based chief executive officer of the security and intelligence research group Diligence Inc. Yanukovych ‘can’t kick her out” as prime minister, Day said in an interview yesterday. “There will be ongoing political infighting in Ukraine for a long time.” The resulting political stalemate is likely to jeopardize legislative steps needed to unlock the next payment of a $16.4 billion International Monetary Fund loan that has been suspended since November. The IMF wants a commitment to spending cuts that narrow the budget deficit by about a third from its 2009 level of about 13 percent of gross domestic product, a reduction of energy subsidies and a consolidated banking industry. Lawmakers have yet to approve a 2010 budget, leaving emergency funds in limbo and calling into question Ukraine’s ability to continue paying for Russian gas that is shipped on to Europe. ‘Horse-Trading’ “It will be a priority for Ukraine to put in place the reform that the IMF wants, but it will be used for horse-trading in the Parliament,” said Day, whose company counts the London Stock Exchange and the European Bank for Reconstruction & Development among its clients. “Timoshenko will block those changes until Yanukovych gives up on these issues to reaffirm her position. It will be a mess.” Ukraine’s markets are reacting to the prospect of ongoing political stalemate. Its government debt is the third-most expensive to insure in the world after Venezuela and Argentina, based on credit default swap prices. The cost to protect against a default by Ukraine increased 11 basis points yesterday, to 982.3 basis points, the highest in three weeks, Bloomberg data show. The hryvnia has lost 42 percent against the dollar since the beginning of September 2008. Ukraine’s dollar-denominated bonds due in 2016 declined for a fifth day, raising the yield to 10.474 percent yesterday, the highest in more than a month. Economy Contracted The former Soviet republic’s economy contracted 15 percent in 2009, the country’s worst recession since 1994, the office of outgoing President Viktor Yushchenko , 55, estimates. Unlike five years ago, when western nations supported challenges to an initial Yanukovych electoral victory that was later thrown out by the courts, international reaction to the latest election has been favorable. The Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe has called the vote democratic and urged political leaders “to listen to the people’s verdict.” The U.S. embassy in Kiev commended the country on the way the election was conducted and said it marked “another step in the consolidation of Ukraine’s democracy.” Russian President Dmitry Medvedev called Yanukovych to congratulate him on his win, news service RIA Novosti said yesterday. Russian leaders backed Yanukovych in 2004. “Timoshenko is going to find it difficult to find a legal way to object to the result of the vote,” said Day. Nonetheless, her supporters vowed to press a challenge. Violations Charged “I am sure that we will be able to prove and justify everything in court,” Andriy Shkil, a lawmaker in Timoshenko’s party, said yesterday at a press conference in Kiev. “There have been violations in vote counting and casting at over 1,000 polling stations across Ukraine.” The electoral commission will announce the official outcome of the vote by Feb. 17, Andriy Magera, its deputy head, told local television. Yanukovych’s Regions of Ukraine party has 172 lawmakers in the 450-seat parliament, while his communist allies number 27. Timoshenko is backed by 245 deputies, including 153 lawmakers in her bloc, as well as supporters of parliamentary Speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn and Yushchenko’s party. “Timoshenko will continue to maneuver politically,” said Day. Yanukovych will “have to organize prime ministerial elections and try to have her removed, but it’s not going to be easy. She still has a very strong block of support and he doesn’t have an overriding mandate.” To contact the reporter on this story: Agnes Lovasz in London at alovasz@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

House Democrat John Murtha Dies at Age 77 After Complications From Surgery

February 8, 2010

By Laurence Arnold Feb. 8 (Bloomberg) — John Murtha , a former Marine drill instructor turned congressman who unapologetically wielded his power to benefit his Pennsylvania district, died today. He was 77. Murtha, a Democrat, died of complications after undergoing gallbladder surgery in late January in a hospital in Arlington, Virginia. During 36 years in the House, the Vietnam veteran from Johnstown, Pennsylvania, rose to chairman of the subcommittee that approves defense spending. That perch gave him a platform to exert his knowledge and strong beliefs about the proper use of the U.S. military. In November 2005, citing increasing attacks on Americans, he called for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, a military engagement he had voted for in 2002. He was an ally of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California. “It’s the passing of a major political figure who was close to the speaker and always involved in Democratic legislation,” said Stuart Rothenberg , an independent political analyst based in Washington. Rothenberg called Murtha a major force in “forming American politics in jobs and spending.” Representative Norm Dicks , Democrat from Washington state, the senior most member of the Defense Appropriations subcommittee after Murtha, would be the “one most likely to succeed,” George Behan, a spokesman for Dicks, said in an interview. The House Appropriations committee headed by Representative Dave Obey , Democrat of Wisconsin, would make the final decision, Behan said. User of Earmarks Murtha’s seat on the Appropriations Committee enabled him to become one of Congress’s most adept users of the earmark process to send money to specific projects back home. The John Murtha Johnston-Cambria County Airport was among the more visible results of his taxpayer-funded largess. Murtha steered an estimated $150 million in federal funds to the airport, the Washington Post reported in 2009. Murtha’s town also became a popular place for defense contractors, which received millions in earmarks through the congressman. Some of those firms donated to Murtha’s campaign and gave jobs to his allies, the Post reported, creating a web of connections that drew the attention of federal prosecutors. Searches were carried out in January and February of 2009 at the offices of a Virginia lobbying firm and a Pennsylvania- based defense contractor that had benefited from Murtha’s earmarks. Abscam Investigation Earlier in his career, he was investigated — though not prosecuted — in the Abscam bribery scandal that led to the convictions of seven other lawmakers in the 1980s. Murtha’s use of earmarks and ties to lobbyists made him a top target of good-government groups. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington labeled him one of the “most corrupt” members of Congress. Murtha gave no ground. “If I’m corrupt, it’s because I take care of my district,” he told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in March 2009. “My job as a member of Congress is to make sure that we take care of what we see is necessary.” As his congressional Web site put it, Murtha “has worked hard to bring tens of thousands of family-sustaining jobs to western Pennsylvania,” which had suffered “the widespread loss of coal and steel jobs that were the lifeblood of the area.” After Democrats won a majority of seats in the House in November 2006, Murtha ran for the No. 2 leadership post, majority leader, and was supported by Pelosi, the incoming House speaker. Murtha, who may have lost votes due to the allegations about his ethics, was defeated by Steny Hoyer of Maryland. ‘Racist Area’ Murtha won his 18th full term in 2008 even after seeming to insult his district by calling it “a racist area” where some voters might be reluctant to vote for Barack Obama . He later apologized. His committee was preparing to take up the latest war spending bill, which would fund the Obama administration’s troop buildup in Afghanistan. Murtha had expressed skepticism, saying in December he was “not sure that there’s a threat to our national security” in Afghanistan because al-Qaeda “can go any place — they don’t have to be in Afghanistan.” Murtha’s death likely creates another competitive race as Republicans try to retake the House in November. His district gave 49 percent of its vote to Obama in 2008 and 49 percent to Republican presidential nominee John McCain . John Patrick Murtha was born on June 17, 1932, in New Martinsville, West Virginia, and graduated from high school in Mount Pleasant, Pennsylvania. Drill Instructor He left Washington and Jefferson College in Washington, Pennsylvania, in 1952 to join the U.S. Marine Corps during the Korean War, serving until 1955 and becoming a drill instructor at Parris Island. In his second tour of active duty, in 1966 and 1967, he served in Vietnam as a Marine intelligence officer. His honors included a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts. He was a reservist from 1952 to 1990 and retired from the Marine reserves as a colonel. He earned a degree in economics from the University of Pittsburgh in 1962. He began his political career as a member of Pennsylvania’s legislature from 1969 to 1974. The death of U.S. Representative John P. Saylor, a Republican, in 1973 forced a special election in February 1974 that was viewed as a referendum on the unpopular Republican president, Richard Nixon , then beset by problems including inflation and the emerging Watergate scandal. Backed by organized labor, Murtha won by just a few hundred votes. ‘Tip’ O’Neill House Speaker Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill took a liking to Murtha and named him to the powerful Appropriations Committee. He became chairman of the defense subcommittee in 1989. Murtha was often called upon by congressional leaders and presidents to travel overseas to assess security challenges or monitor elections. In 1982, O’Neill sent Murtha to Beirut to review President Ronald Reagan’s decision to deploy U.S. Marines there as part of a multinational peacekeeping force. Murtha concluded the American troops were too vulnerable. “I’d like to get them out of here as soon as possible,” he told reporters. In 1992, he was a leading congressional critic of President George H.W. Bush’s decision to send U.S. troops to Somalia on a humanitarian mission. “The danger is we won’t be able to get them out,” Murtha warned. Murtha’s congressional Web site said of his role in the Somalia debate: “Although his advice was not heeded, history would prove him right.” Murtha and his wife, Joyce, had three children. To contact the reporter on this story: Laurence Arnold in Washington at larnold4@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

House Democrat John Murtha Dies at Age 77 After Complications From Surgery

February 8, 2010

By Laurence Arnold Feb. 8 (Bloomberg) — John Murtha , a former Marine drill instructor turned congressman who unapologetically wielded his power to benefit his Pennsylvania district, died today. He was 77. Murtha, a Democrat, died of complications after undergoing gallbladder surgery in late January in a hospital in Arlington, Virginia. During 36 years in the House, the Vietnam veteran from Johnstown, Pennsylvania, rose to chairman of the subcommittee that approves defense spending. That perch gave him a platform to exert his knowledge and strong beliefs about the proper use of the U.S. military. In November 2005, citing increasing attacks on Americans, he called for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, a military engagement he had voted for in 2002. He was an ally of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California. “It’s the passing of a major political figure who was close to the speaker and always involved in Democratic legislation,” said Stuart Rothenberg , an independent political analyst based in Washington. Rothenberg called Murtha a major force in “forming American politics in jobs and spending.” Representative Norm Dicks , Democrat from Washington state, the senior most member of the Defense Appropriations subcommittee after Murtha, would be the “one most likely to succeed,” George Behan, a spokesman for Dicks, said in an interview. The House Appropriations committee headed by Representative Dave Obey , Democrat of Wisconsin, would make the final decision, Behan said. User of Earmarks Murtha’s seat on the Appropriations Committee enabled him to become one of Congress’s most adept users of the earmark process to send money to specific projects back home. The John Murtha Johnston-Cambria County Airport was among the more visible results of his taxpayer-funded largess. Murtha steered an estimated $150 million in federal funds to the airport, the Washington Post reported in 2009. Murtha’s town also became a popular place for defense contractors, which received millions in earmarks through the congressman. Some of those firms donated to Murtha’s campaign and gave jobs to his allies, the Post reported, creating a web of connections that drew the attention of federal prosecutors. Searches were carried out in January and February of 2009 at the offices of a Virginia lobbying firm and a Pennsylvania- based defense contractor that had benefited from Murtha’s earmarks. Abscam Investigation Earlier in his career, he was investigated — though not prosecuted — in the Abscam bribery scandal that led to the convictions of seven other lawmakers in the 1980s. Murtha’s use of earmarks and ties to lobbyists made him a top target of good-government groups. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington labeled him one of the “most corrupt” members of Congress. Murtha gave no ground. “If I’m corrupt, it’s because I take care of my district,” he told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in March 2009. “My job as a member of Congress is to make sure that we take care of what we see is necessary.” As his congressional Web site put it, Murtha “has worked hard to bring tens of thousands of family-sustaining jobs to western Pennsylvania,” which had suffered “the widespread loss of coal and steel jobs that were the lifeblood of the area.” After Democrats won a majority of seats in the House in November 2006, Murtha ran for the No. 2 leadership post, majority leader, and was supported by Pelosi, the incoming House speaker. Murtha, who may have lost votes due to the allegations about his ethics, was defeated by Steny Hoyer of Maryland. ‘Racist Area’ Murtha won his 18th full term in 2008 even after seeming to insult his district by calling it “a racist area” where some voters might be reluctant to vote for Barack Obama . He later apologized. His committee was preparing to take up the latest war spending bill, which would fund the Obama administration’s troop buildup in Afghanistan. Murtha had expressed skepticism, saying in December he was “not sure that there’s a threat to our national security” in Afghanistan because al-Qaeda “can go any place — they don’t have to be in Afghanistan.” Murtha’s death likely creates another competitive race as Republicans try to retake the House in November. His district gave 49 percent of its vote to Obama in 2008 and 49 percent to Republican presidential nominee John McCain . John Patrick Murtha was born on June 17, 1932, in New Martinsville, West Virginia, and graduated from high school in Mount Pleasant, Pennsylvania. Drill Instructor He left Washington and Jefferson College in Washington, Pennsylvania, in 1952 to join the U.S. Marine Corps during the Korean War, serving until 1955 and becoming a drill instructor at Parris Island. In his second tour of active duty, in 1966 and 1967, he served in Vietnam as a Marine intelligence officer. His honors included a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts. He was a reservist from 1952 to 1990 and retired from the Marine reserves as a colonel. He earned a degree in economics from the University of Pittsburgh in 1962. He began his political career as a member of Pennsylvania’s legislature from 1969 to 1974. The death of U.S. Representative John P. Saylor, a Republican, in 1973 forced a special election in February 1974 that was viewed as a referendum on the unpopular Republican president, Richard Nixon , then beset by problems including inflation and the emerging Watergate scandal. Backed by organized labor, Murtha won by just a few hundred votes. ‘Tip’ O’Neill House Speaker Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill took a liking to Murtha and named him to the powerful Appropriations Committee. He became chairman of the defense subcommittee in 1989. Murtha was often called upon by congressional leaders and presidents to travel overseas to assess security challenges or monitor elections. In 1982, O’Neill sent Murtha to Beirut to review President Ronald Reagan’s decision to deploy U.S. Marines there as part of a multinational peacekeeping force. Murtha concluded the American troops were too vulnerable. “I’d like to get them out of here as soon as possible,” he told reporters. In 1992, he was a leading congressional critic of President George H.W. Bush’s decision to send U.S. troops to Somalia on a humanitarian mission. “The danger is we won’t be able to get them out,” Murtha warned. Murtha’s congressional Web site said of his role in the Somalia debate: “Although his advice was not heeded, history would prove him right.” Murtha and his wife, Joyce, had three children. To contact the reporter on this story: Laurence Arnold in Washington at larnold4@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Obama Calls Republican Leaders to Feb. 25 Meeting on Health-Care Overhaul

February 8, 2010

By Kate Andersen Brower Feb. 8 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama invited Republican and Democratic lawmakers from the House and Senate to a Feb. 25 meeting to discuss ways to get an overhaul of the U.S. health-care system through Congress. Obama said he wants lawmakers “to put their ideas on the table.” The president spoke during a live televised interview with “CBS Evening News” anchor Katie Couric during the network’s Super Bowl pregame show yesterday. At the planned half-day meeting, Obama said he wants a “large meeting with Republicans and Democrats to go through, systematically, all the best ideas that are out there and move it forward.” Obama wants live television coverage of the meeting, said a White House official who asked not to be named. Asked about starting over on the health-care debate, Obama said he wants to look at “very specific” ideas that Republicans present. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, responding to Obama’s idea, said legislation should start from scratch if Obama wants a measure that can get support from both parties. “If we are to reach a bipartisan consensus, the White House can start by shelving the current health-spending bill,” McConnell said in an e-mailed statement. “There are a number of issues with bipartisan support that we can start with when the 2,700-page bill is put on the shelf.” Bill Stalled The House and Senate each passed versions of the overhaul, but the push to produce a final bill has stalled. During a speech at the Democratic National Committee ’s winter meeting in Washington yesterday Obama told about 450 Democratic Party leaders that he won’t “walk away” from his effort to overhaul the U.S. health-care system. House Republican Leader John Boehner echoed the top Senate Republican, saying that the “best way to start on real bipartisan reform would be to scrap those bills.” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Democrats “remain hopeful that the Republican leadership will work in a bipartisan fashion on the great challenges the American people face.” The House and Senate will keep working until Feb. 25 to reconcile differences in their respective health-care bills, Pelosi said in a statement. “We have promoted the pursuit of a bipartisan approach to health reform from day one,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said in a statement. “Senate Democrats will not relent on our commitment to protecting consumers from insurance company abuses, reducing health care costs, saving Medicare and cutting the deficit.” ‘Right Thing’ Obama told Couric that while jobs have always been a top priority for his administration, the push for health-care legislation “continues to be the right thing to do.” Since Republican Scott Brown won a Jan. 19 special election for the Senate seat held for almost 50 years by Democrat Edward Kennedy , Obama — in his State of the Union speech and elsewhere — has called on Republicans to seek bipartisan solutions to the country’s problems. Obama said the U.S. economy is moving toward recovery. “We are seeing the corner turn on the economy growing again,” Obama told Couric, saying that economic growth is “not happening as fast as we’d like.” Obama said he has proposed plans to help community banks and small businesses. The U.S. Labor Department reported Friday that the unemployment rate dropped to 9.7 percent in January, the lowest level since August. Revised figures show the U.S. has lost 8.4 million jobs since the recession began in December 2007. ‘Concrete Improvement’ “My hope is that for folks who are unemployed, they’re going to start seeing concrete improvement in their own lives in the next few months,” he said. The president said there has been “a lot of posturing” about the federal budget deficit , saying Democrats and Republicans need to “come together in a sensible way” to reduce debt. The “most important thing we can do” to hold down spending is to “get a health reform package passed.” Obama said the administration hasn’t decided whether to continue plans to hold the trial for alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in New York City. “If you’ve got a city that’s saying no, and a police department that’s saying no, and a mayor that’s saying no, that makes it difficult,” Obama said. Miranda Rights The Obama administration has come under fire from Republican lawmakers for trying terror suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab in civilian U.S. courts, where the 23-year-old Nigerian man was provided access to a lawyer, instead of trying him in the military-justice system. Obama said on CBS that Abdulmutallab was read his Miranda rights only after he provided Federal Bureau of Investigation agents with “actionable intelligence.” Obama said the practice of reading terrorism suspects their Miranda rights should be reviewed. John Brennan , Obama’s counterterrorism adviser, said in an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he told Republican congressional leaders on Christmas night about the interrogation of Abdulmutallab, and called subsequent criticism “a bit of an outcry after the fact.” Brennan said Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and House Republican Leader John Boehner were among senior members of Congress he briefed after Abdulmutallab was arrested on suspicion of trying to detonate explosives as Northwest Airlines Flight 253 approached Detroit carrying 279 passengers and 11 crew members. “None of those individuals raised any concerns with me at that point,” Brennan said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” program. To contact the reporter on this story: Kate Andersen Brower in Washington at kandersen7@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Sarah Palin Tells Tea Party Convention U.S. Ready for `Another Revolution’

February 6, 2010

By John McCormick Feb. 7 (Bloomberg) — Sarah Palin criticized President Barack Obama’s first year in office by saying “the list of broken promises is long” as she addressed the Tea Party movement’s inaugural national convention. The campaign-style speech at a dinner in Nashville, Tennessee, last night was a frontal assault on the administration’s handling of national security and terrorism, even though she stopped short of declaring ambitions for a 2012 presidential bid as her audience chanted “Run Sarah, Run!” “I am a big supporter of this movement,” she said. “America is ready for another revolution.” The former Alaska governor and 2008 Republican vice- presidential nominee questioned whether the suspect in the attempted Christmas Day bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight to Detroit was interrogated aggressively enough. “Treating this like a mere law-enforcement matter places our country at grave risk because that’s not how radical Islamic extremists are looking at this,” she said. “To win that war, we need a commander in chief, not a professor of law standing at the lectern.” The current Democratic administration can no longer blame the previous one for the nation’s ills, Palin said. “They own this now, and voters are going to hold them accountable,” she said in her speech. Palin accused the administration of proposing an “immoral” 2011 budget that is equivalent to “generational theft.” A hero of the leaderless Tea Party movement, she told her audience assembled in the U.S. country-music capital that their grassroots efforts will empower voters. Endorsements Palin, 45, said she planned to endorse specific 2010 candidates and that the Republican Party should not be “afraid of contested primaries” within its ranks. Her appearance — the first of several Tea Party events Palin plans to attend in the coming months — marks the end of the three-day National Tea Party Convention . The convention at the Gaylord Opryland Hotel is the first national meeting of a movement that emerged last year amid protests over the policies of Obama and the Democrats who control Congress. Palin’s supporters say the media has been overly critical of her and there is plenty of time for her to decide whether she will run for president. “If that’s where God puts her, that’s where she’ll go,” said Tammy Holmes, 36, a small-business owner from Farmington, Missouri, who attended the conference. Possible National Base Tea Party activists, drawn to Palin’s anti-Washington rhetoric and working-mother personality, would form a natural base for Palin should she decide to make a White House bid. There is little downside in closely associating herself with the movement, a Republican strategist said. “The more she can talk to them and talk to conservative evangelicals, the more she can have a passionate following and appeal to a fairly large swath of GOP voters and independent voters,” said John Feehery , who advised former Republican House Speaker Dennis Hastert . “She has attained rock star status,” he said. “That doesn’t necessarily mean she has a great voice, but she has attained celebrity. For a lot of folks she is off-key. But for her supporters, she’s the best thing since Elvis.” Feehery said he is skeptical Palin will run for president. “What she is doing, frankly, I think, is trying to make some money,” he said. “The media is fascinated by her and that’s a very big asset.” Fox Interview Palin also recorded an interview to air on “Fox News Sunday.” She has been employed as a contributor at the cable TV outlet, owned by New York-based News Corp., since January. After Nashville, Palin is scheduled to campaign today for Texas Governor Rick Perry , a Republican facing a primary challenge from Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison . Palin is planning to speak in March at a Tea Party rally in Searchlight, Nevada, the hometown of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid , a Democrat who is in a tight race for re-election this year. She is also scheduled to appear in Boston in April for an event marking the movement’s one-year anniversary. Tea Party activists could prove crucial to Republicans seeking gains in November, though organizing challenges remain for the mostly online community. Speaking Fee Palin was paid $100,000 for her speech, according to the Associated Press. She told her audience she would give her compensation “to the cause.” About 1,100 people attended the dinner, said Mark Skoda, a convention spokesman. That includes 600 people who paid $549 each to attend the full conference and 500 people who paid $349 to hear Palin speak. Palin burst onto the national scene 17 months ago when Senator John McCain picked her as a running mate for his Republican presidential campaign. She sold herself as a Washington outsider and “hockey mom,” and after losing the election capitalized on her exposure with a $1.25 million advance to write her memoir, “ Going Rogue: An American Life .” Americans are split on Palin, with 43 percent seeing her in a positive light and 46 percent holding an unfavorable view, according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Feb. 5. The poll was taken Jan. 22-24 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. To contact the reporter on this story: John McCormick in Nashville at jmccormick16@bloomberg.net .

Read the full article →

Giannoulias to Defend Obama’s Senate Seat After Winning Democratic Primary

February 3, 2010

By John McCormick Feb. 3 (Bloomberg) — Democrat Alexi Giannoulias will try to spare his party the embarrassment of losing President Barack Obama’s former U.S. Senate seat this fall in a race against Republican Mark Kirk . Giannoulias, the Illinois state treasurer, declared victory last night in the Democratic primary over former Chicago Inspector General David Hoffman , leading 39 percent to 34 percent, with 95 percent of the state’s precincts reporting, according to the Associated Press. Giannoulias sought to claim outsider status in the general election against Kirk, a five- term Republican representative from Chicago’s northern suburbs. “Come November, congressman, your days as a Washington insider are over,” Giannoulias said. Kirk made clear that he planned to use corruption surrounding Illinois Democrats as an issue. “Over the last year, a quiet despair has descended on the state of Illinois: a governor arrested, a senator’s seat disgraced, corruption rampant, unemployment rising and families struggling,” Kirk said in his victory speech. “The people of Illinois now see the arrogance of a one-party state.” Kirk was leading the closest of five rivals by almost a three-to-one margin with 95 percent of the state’s precincts reporting, according to the AP. Social Moderate A moderate on social issues and an intelligence officer in the U.S. Navy Reserve, Kirk, 50, is seeking to replace Senator Roland Burris , a Democrat who decided against running for the seat following his controversial appointment by former Governor Rod Blagojevich in December 2008. Federal prosecutors have charged Blagojevich with trying to sell the Senate seat to the highest bidder, among other charges. Illinois held the first primary of a midterm congressional election year that will prove critical to Obama’s political standing and agenda. In the battle for the Democratic nomination for governor, incumbent Patrick Quinn , who replaced Blagojevich, had a slim lead over state Comptroller Dan Hynes , according to the AP. Three of the Republican candidates for governor were bunched together: Andy McKenna , a former Illinois Republican chairman, and state senators Kirk Dillard and Bill Brady . The winner of this fall’s contest to be the state’s top executive will earn the right to deal with some of the nation’s worst fiscal problems. Illinois’ two-year budget deficit is at least $10 billion and unemployment is 10.8 percent, above the national average of 10 percent. Only California has a worse bond rating among U.S. states. Governor’s Race Hynes, 41, and Quinn, 61, who was previously lieutenant governor, took their debate during the closing days of the campaign to the state’s large black community. The charges and counter-charges involved Quinn’s dismissal from a city job about a quarter century ago by Chicago’s first black mayor, Harold Washington , and whether Hynes ignored criminal activity in a historically black cemetery where Emmett Till , the civil rights- era murder victim, is buried. Ethan Hastert, son of former U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert , lost to Randy Hultgren for the Republican nomination for the congressional seat west of Chicago that his father held, according to the AP. The seat is now occupied by Democrat Bill Foster . The Illinois balloting follows a Jan. 19 special election in Massachusetts where Republican Scott Brown invigorated his party by winning the U.S. Senate seat formerly held by the late Democrat Edward Kennedy . Embarrassment Factor A Democratic loss of the Senate seat once held by Obama would embarrass the party. Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele said Jan. 29 during his party’s winter meeting in Hawaii that the Senate seat in Illinois will be a top Republican target. “We began 2010 in the backyard of President Barack Obama, where he was born,” he said in Honolulu. “We will end the year, 2010, in Illinois taking his Senate seat.” The seat is one of five now held by Democrats that is rated as a “tossup” by the non-partisan Cook Political Report , based in Washington. Robert Gibbs , the White House press secretary, told reporters on Feb. 1 that the president and first lady Michelle Obama both voted by absentee ballot in Illinois. He didn’t reveal their candidate preferences. Giannoulias, 33, was forced to answer questions during the final weeks of the campaign about his role at Broadway Bank in Chicago and his handling of the Bright Start college savings program. Friend of Obama A presidential friend and basketball buddy, Giannoulias is a former senior loan officer and vice president at the bank his family opened in 1979. Hoffman, 42, sought to make the family bank a liability, and regulators provided fresh ammunition for those charges last week. Broadway agreed to boost reserves for bad loans and halt paying dividends without regulatory approval, according to an order from state and federal agencies signed Jan. 26. The bank’s board of directors also must establish “well defined and reasonable risk limits” and hire an outside party to assess qualifications of senior executive officers. The $1.2 billion community bank has been part of the public profile of Giannoulias since he won election in 2006 because it made loans to a bookmaker as well as convicted Illinois influence peddler Antoin “Tony” Rezko . The bank suffers from a commercial real estate delinquency rate of 21.7 percent, compared with a U.S. average of 8.3 percent, according to an analysis compiled for Bloomberg News by Foresight Analytics , an Oakland, California-based research firm. Giannoulias, who helped Obama tap Chicago’s Greek-American community for campaign contributions during his U.S. Senate and presidential bids, has said he now owns 3.6 percent of the bank and shouldn’t be held accountable for financial challenges it faces because of bad real estate loans. To contact the reporter on this story: John McCormick in Chicago at jmccormick16@bloomberg.net .

Read the full article →

Republicans Say They Met Obama’s Challenge to Top Him on Health-Care Plan

January 29, 2010

By Laura Litvan and Catherine Dodge Jan. 29 (Bloomberg) — When President Barack Obama challenged lawmakers this week to “let me know” if they had a better idea how to overhaul U.S. health care, several Republicans shot up their hands. Obama asked his opponents during his Jan. 27 State of the Union address to come up with an “approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit , cover the uninsured” and bolster Medicare. Republicans, almost universally opposed to Obama’s plan, say they have less-costly ways of reaching many of those goals and have been advocating them for months. “That’s exactly what the Republican health-care proposal does, much more so than the proposal that he and Democrat leaders are trying to shove down the throats of the American people,” House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio told reporters yesterday. The Republican ideas, more limited in scope than the roughly $900 billion medical-system revamp the Democrats seek, may have a bigger role in defining party differences this election year than in crafting a compromise on the health bill. That’s because the gap between the two approaches is so wide. A plan Boehner pushed in November would expand coverage to just 3 million uninsured Americans, compared with more than 30 million in bills passed in the Democratic-controlled House and Senate, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. It would cost $61 billion over 10 years. It doesn’t require Americans to obtain insurance. And it spans 219 pages — compared with the House bill , which runs to about 2,000. Handful of Items Even with their legislation at an impasse, Democratic leaders would likely adopt only a handful of Republican proposals if they wanted to pick up support for a final bill, said John Fortier , a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. One possibility, he said, would be imposing limits on medical malpractice awards. “They don’t have as large a package or as comprehensive a set of reforms as the Democrats want,” Fortier said. “If there is any deal, it will be with a few things tacked on.” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , a California Democrat, is still seeking ways to pass legislation with largely Democratic support after the Jan. 19 special election loss in Massachusetts deprived her party of the 60th vote needed to defeat Republican delaying tactics in the Senate. While Republican leaders have no plans to offer anything beyond the bills they’ve introduced, Representative Mike Pence of Indiana said party lawmakers will get a chance to lay out their approach to Obama when the president addresses the annual retreat of congressional Republicans in Baltimore today. “I guarantee you, tomorrow House Republicans are going to take advantage of the president’s attendance” to explain their alternatives, Pence said yesterday on MSNBC television. WellPoint, Aetna The legislation passed by the House and Senate last year requires that all Americans have insurance, sets up new online purchasing exchanges, and expands government aid to low-income people to buy coverage. It also imposes new regulations on insurers including Indianapolis-based WellPoint Inc. and Hartford, Connecticut-based Aetna Inc. Republicans say they want an incremental approach, emphasizing preventive care, affordability and greater access to insurance. “Rather than creating a government-centered bureaucracy, what you want to do is drive down those costs,” said Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma. Tax Credits Legislation introduced in May by Coburn and Senator Richard Burr of North Carolina and Representatives Paul Ryan of Wisconsin and Devin Nunes of California, all Republicans, features tax credits to help people obtain insurance. The plan would end the current tax benefit for employer- sponsored plans and shift responsibility for coverage to individuals, who would get a tax credit of $2,300 to buy insurance. Families would get $5,700. It would encourage states to create exchanges where people would shop for coverage and let states band together to ease administrative costs and diversify pooling. It would limit medical-liability lawsuits by setting up state panels to review cases and make judgments. While there’s no requirement that individuals buy coverage or that companies provide it, states would set up “auto- enrollment” options at workplaces, medical centers and other sites. Boehner’s alternative, which would let business groups pool resources to purchase coverage and allow insurance to be bought across state lines, was rejected, 258-176, on Nov. 7 before the House approved the Democratic legislation. ‘Empty Rhetoric’ The preliminary estimate by the Congressional Budget Office said Boehner’s plan would likely reduce insurance premiums, though it would expand coverage to fewer than 10 percent of the uninsured that the House bill would. “What the Republicans offer is not cost containment nor is it better coverage,” said Senator Mary Landrieu , a Louisiana Democrat who yesterday acknowledged the Democratic legislation was on “life support” because lawmakers couldn’t agree how to move forward. “It’s just a lot of empty rhetoric.” Boehner spokesman Kevin Smith defended the limited numbers of people the Republican plan would cover, saying cost has emerged as a top issue among voters. “The Democrats can talk about how their plan covers more people, but it is wrapped up in a costly, big-government approach that the American people are overwhelmingly rejecting,” Smith said. To contact the reporters on this story: Laura Litvan in Washington at llitvan@bloomberg.net , Catherine Dodge in Washington at cdodge1@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Brown’s Senate Win Has Democrats Struggling to Save Obama’s Health Plans

January 20, 2010

By Catherine Dodge and Laura Litvan Jan. 20 (Bloomberg) — Scott Brown’s victory in the Massachusetts Senate race puts President Barack Obama’s health plan on life support. For Democrats, any cure may be perilous. The Republican takeover of the late Edward Kennedy ’s seat gives the party 41 votes in the Senate, enough to stall the legislation. It forces Democrats to devise contingency plans to salvage a bill after Senate leaders spent months assembling the 60-vote coalition needed for passage in that chamber. Among the Democrats’ options: press the House to pass the Senate bill without changes to avoid a second Senate vote; offer a scaled-back measure that would need a simple majority of 51 votes in the Senate; or reach out to Republicans like Senators Olympia Snowe of Maine and George Voinovich of Ohio. Those moves all present policy and political challenges and dangers, lawmakers and analysts say. “When it happens in Massachusetts, it really throws us a curve,” Representative Allen Boyd of Florida, a member of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition , said before House Democrats met to discuss the bill. “It certainly puts it in a different light,” he said of the health-care legislation. Investors agreed. Shares of health insurers and drugmakers rose yesterday on speculation Republicans may block an overhaul. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Managed Health Care Index gained 3.7 percent, and the S&P 500 Pharmaceuticals Index rose 2.2 percent. Brown, 50, a state senator who was leading Democrat Martha Coakley 52 percent to 47 percent with 99 percent of the state’s precincts reporting, vows to vote against the legislation. Cloudy Prospects His victory clouds the bill’s prospects because it will spark concern among Democratic lawmakers about the November midterm elections, said Charles Jones , professor emeritus of political science at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. “Here is dramatic evidence that it could have a negative effect on them,” Jones said. The House and Senate bills call for the most sweeping U.S. health-care changes since the 1965 creation of the Medicare program for the elderly. Both would extend coverage to tens of millions of uninsured Americans while attempting to curtail costs. They also expand the Medicaid program for the poor and place new restrictions on insurers. Still, getting House lawmakers to swallow the Senate bill wouldn’t be easy. The two chambers disagree over issues including taxes on the highest-value health benefits, federal funds for abortion and how best to cover the uninsured. Two Bills Representative Joe Courtney , a Connecticut Democrat who’s leading a group of more than 190 House Democrats opposed to the Senate’s proposal to tax employer-provided health benefits, said he’s open to options. He’d consider passing two bills, the Senate plan and then a second, stripped-down one under the so-called budget- reconciliation process, which would require just 51 Senate votes. It’s “critical” the second bill include compromises worked out with the House on taxes and other issues, he said. Democratic Representative Steve Lynch of Massachusetts discounted the possibility of passing the Senate bill and following it immediately with a second measure. “The Senate doesn’t do anything quickly,” he said. “If it comes down to the Senate bill or nothing, I think it’s going to be nothing,” Lynch said. “Most of the reform has been stripped out of that bill and it would be very hard for folks over here to support it.” ‘Better Than Nothing’ House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters before the Massachusetts vote, “we still have to resolve the difference between our two bills.” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said it was feasible for Congress to enact the legislation before Massachusetts certifies the election winner. Senator Jim Webb , a Virginia Democrat, rejected that idea. “It would only be fair and prudent that we suspend further votes on health-care legislation until Senator-elect Brown is seated,” Webb said in a statement. He said it was “vital that we restore the respect of the American people in our system of government and in our leaders.” Even budget reconciliation might be viewed as a power play, said James Horney , director of federal fiscal policy at Washington’s Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “The Republicans will say using reconciliation is ramming it through,” he said. Still, Republicans used the process to pass President George W. Bush ’s tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, he said. ‘Terrible Loss’ The reconciliation process is intended for legislation dealing with spending and tax issues, said Brian Riedl , a budget analyst at the Heritage Foundation in Washington. That means provisions such as taxes on insurance plans and subsidies to help low-income Americans afford coverage would pass the test, he said. New regulations on insurers, the creation of insurance-purchasing exchanges and a mandate that individuals buy coverage may be struck down by the Senate parliamentarian, he said. Whatever route they choose, Democrats need to show a list of accomplishments that includes health care before the elections, said Democratic consultant Peter Fenn . “The Draconian outcome is that the House doesn’t accept the Senate bill, they don’t get a vote before Brown comes in and Republicans filibuster with 41 votes and this doesn’t go anywhere,” he said. “That would be a terrible loss.” To contact the reporters on this story: Catherine Dodge in Washington at cdodge1@bloomberg.net ; Laura Litvan in Washington at llitvan@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Apollo Shares Suffering New York Snub Amid SEC Probe of For-Profit Phoenix

January 19, 2010

By Daniel Golden Jan. 19 (Bloomberg) — Apollo Group Inc. , whose for-profit University of Phoenix is among the largest colleges in the U.S. with campuses in 29 of the 30 most populous states, faces one long-standing obstacle to staking its claim as the future of higher education: New York. During Apollo’s 12-year quest to enter the third-biggest state, founder John Sperling raised money for Eliot Spitzer ’s 2006 gubernatorial campaign, and the company hired Mel Miller, former speaker of the New York Assembly, as a lobbyist. New York has blocked Phoenix’s bid for a Manhattan campus, questioning its academic quality, its dropout rate, how it compensates recruiters, and even its right to call itself a university, according to interviews and documents obtained under a state Freedom of Information Law request. One state review said introductory algebra was less demanding than a high school course. Phoenix has 455,600 undergraduate and graduate students, slightly less than the State University of New York’s 464,981 enrollment. “The last thing we need to do is open a college that’s not successful,” Joseph Frey, New York’s deputy commissioner for higher education, said in a Dec. 11 interview in his Albany office. “I’m not bringing anything in front of the Board of Regents until I’m confident the university is playing by the rules of the U.S. Education Department and complies with our requirements.” SEC Investigation Investors are beginning to share New York’s skepticism. While the benchmark Standard & Poor’s 500 Index of stocks has advanced 6.8 percent, Apollo shares have fallen 17 percent since Oct. 27, when the company said the Securities and Exchange Commission opened an informal probe into its accounting practices. Apollo said its accounting is appropriate, and it intends to cooperate with the inquiry. Apollo’s swoon partly reflects concern that federal authorities may follow New York’s lead and keep closer tabs on for-profit colleges, said Trace Urdan, an analyst at Signal Hill Capital Group in San Francisco. “In the Obama administration, the pendulum has swung back closer to where New York state has been the whole time,” Urdan said in a telephone interview. The absence of a New York campus hurts Phoenix’s efforts to boost enrollment and revenue. Phoenix described New York in a June 2004 planning document as having “the highest number of potential students” of any state. Growth ‘Deceleration’ A “deceleration of growth” in Phoenix’s two-year associate degree program, which accounts for 45 percent of enrollment, is worrying investors, said Ariel Sokol , an analyst at Wedbush Morgan Securities in New York. The slowing growth reflects the school’s shift to higher-quality bachelor’s degree candidates, he said. The U.S. Education Department also is prodding Phoenix to disclose more information about costs and course requirements to prospective students, which could deter some of them from enrolling, he said. While 39 for-profit colleges operate in the state, including ITT Educational Services Inc. and DeVry Inc ., New Yorkers have to attend Phoenix online or cross the Hudson River to the university’s Jersey City, New Jersey, campus. Phoenix, which generated 95 percent of Apollo’s $3.97 billion in revenue in the year ended Aug. 31, enrolls students in face-to-face and online classes. More than 15,000 New Yorkers are enrolled at Phoenix online “to take advantage of our innovative, accredited education to help their careers during these difficult economic times,” Sara Jones, an Apollo spokeswoman, wrote in an e-mail. No Vote Phoenix’s application has never reached a formal vote by the New York regents, who oversee education in the state, Frey said. Phoenix students don’t qualify for the state tuition assistance program, which provided $813 million of aid in the 2008-09 academic year, he said. New York officials’ questions are similar to those that the Obama administration is asking about the for-profit college industry generally. The U.S. Department of Education is considering restrictions on paying recruiters for enrollments and on giving misleading information to prospective students, and may require for-profit colleges to show how much their programs increase graduates’ earnings, according to department documents. The department is examining institutions that increasingly rely on federal financial aid, Robert Shireman, the U.S. deputy undersecretary of education, said in a Sept. 1 interview. Phoenix derived 86 percent of its $3.77 billion in revenue in fiscal 2009 from Education Department grants and loans to students, up from 48 percent in 2001, according to its Oct. 27 10-K filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Late Refunds Apollo was late in paying federal financial aid refunds for dropouts, according to a government report the company disclosed in its 10-Q on Jan. 7. The findings by the Education Department will cost about $1.5 million, Phoenix-based Apollo said. Apollo rose 13 cents, or less than 1 percent, to $60.37 in Nasdaq stock market composite trading on Jan. 15. Phoenix’s failure to gain approval in New York is one of its few defeats since Apollo went public in 1994. Founded in 1976 by John Sperling, a faculty-union organizer and former San Jose State University history professor, Phoenix pioneered a model that used part-time faculty with practical experience to teach five-week courses to working adults. The university has expanded nationwide, aided by well-connected board members, campaign contributions and extensive lobbying. Educational Access The quality of Phoenix’s educational offerings and its policy of admitting any applicant who has completed high school or earned an equivalency degree have driven the university’s growth, said Jones, the Apollo spokeswoman. Phoenix “provides access to those who otherwise might not have the opportunity to pursue higher education,” she said. In Pennsylvania, Phoenix managed to overturn a ban on for- profit colleges. In Texas, with the support of then-Governor George W. Bush and his education adviser, Margaret Spellings , later U.S. secretary of education, it outlasted the state higher education commissioner who tried to block its entry. For-profits are freer than most nonprofit colleges to form political action committees and donate to candidates for state office, said Miriam Galston, a law professor at George Washington University in Washington. “In all my time there, New York was the only state we didn’t win,” Charles Seigel, a former Apollo senior vice president for government affairs and now vice president for public policy at Cornell Companies Inc. in a telephone interview. Saga Begins The New York saga began in 1995, when Seigel got in touch with New York education officials. Phoenix applied for a license two years later, seeking to open a Manhattan campus for graduate and undergraduate students. Three years later, a state review team visited the university’s campuses in Phoenix and Tucson, Arizona. The university “really wanted New York very badly,” Miller , Apollo’s New York lobbyist from 1999 to 2006, said in a telephone interview. By 2001, Phoenix was growing impatient. “I am beginning to believe all of this is intentional delay,” Seigel wrote to Gerald Patton, then New York’s deputy commissioner for higher education. “It is becoming my view that this process will never end.” In a January 2002 letter to a university official, Frey proposed a compromise — licensing Phoenix only for graduate programs, which had received better reviews than its undergraduate offerings. Against Miller’s advice, Phoenix spurned the offer, Miller said. ‘Worst Enemy’ “The university was its own worst enemy,” he said. After a 2002 site visit to a Phoenix campus in Philadelphia, a state review team found fault with the college’s newly designed general-education courses for undergraduates. First-year algebra “is not a college-level mathematics course” and “does not demand as high a level of critical thinking as the high school curriculum” in New York, according to a 2003 draft report. Courses in human nutrition and in environmental issues and ethics lacked basic science, and instructors were unqualified, according to the report. “The reviewers continue to question that college-level content in the liberal arts and sciences, in particular in the math and science disciplines, can be covered in a five-week session,” the authors wrote. Phoenix’s general-education courses “are at the appropriate level and quality,” Manny Rivera, an Apollo spokesman, wrote in an e-mail. The school continually evaluates and updates its curriculum and has won Arizona awards for course development, he said. Graduate Program While New York criticized Phoenix’s undergraduate quality, the state’s graduate-only proposal remained on the table. “We are ready to move forward” with five proposed graduate programs in business, Frey wrote in April 2004 to Susan Mitchell, a Phoenix vice president who is now Apollo’s senior vice president for government affairs. This time, Phoenix acquiesced. The school, which didn’t offer enough doctoral programs in academic fields to describe itself as a university under state rules, would go by “Phoenix.edu” in New York, Mitchell wrote Frey in June 2004. The New York market had “astounding” potential, Phoenix said that month in a planning document submitted to state officials. “In the past year, the university has been contacted by 20,000 residents, many of them from the Manhattan area,” according to the document. “These numbers represent the highest number of potential students approaching the institution in any state.” Local Colleges The state then canvassed area colleges for their views on Phoenix opening a graduate campus. Fordham University in the Bronx, Pace University in Manhattan, Polytechnic University in Brooklyn, and the Association of Proprietary Colleges in Albany all opposed Phoenix and requested a public hearing. “The MBA program is just a foot in the door for the initiation of additional programs in direct competition,” wrote David Chang , then Polytechnic’s president and now chancellor of Polytechnic Institute of New York University. In response, Mitchell wrote to Frey in November 2004 that Phoenix “fully understands the limitations on registration and approval in New York.” New York has barred Phoenix to protect local colleges, said Thomas Triscari Jr., an associate professor at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, New York, who served on the six- member state review team that visited Phoenix campuses in 2000. Vision, Foresight Phoenix’s approach to education “is well-structured, well thought-out,” Triscari said in a telephone interview. “These guys have vision and foresight. Competition is in the fabric of our society. Why have we precluded that in academic circles?” Another member of that team also said the state should approve Phoenix. “They’re as good as any of those other for-profits operating in New York,” said David Breneman , a professor at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville and former dean of its school of education. “I don’t see any reason you’d single them out for retribution.” New York was about to schedule a hearing on the local colleges’ objections when the news broke in September 2004 that Apollo had agreed to pay $9.8 million to the Education Department to settle alleged violations of a 1992 law banning incentive compensation for recruiters. The company didn’t admit wrongdoing. State officials pulled back, complaining that Phoenix had failed to alert them to the federal probe. Hearing Delayed “We cannot proceed as planned to schedule a hearing,” Barbara Meinert, coordinator for the state education department’s Office of College and University Evaluation , wrote Mitchell in October 2004. Laura Palmer Noone , then Phoenix’s president, apologized in a September 2005 letter to a New York official “for any embarrassment or concern this delay in providing the information caused for the Board of Regents.” She defended the university’s compensation policies. “There is no correlation between the number of students recruited and the amount the enrollment counselors were paid,” she wrote. “We were set for the final hearing and then everything blew through the moon,” Miller said. The hearing on Phoenix’s application for a graduate campus was never scheduled, Frey said. Another Tack Stymied, Sperling took another tack. After meeting Spitzer, then state attorney general and the frontrunner in the governor’s race, through mutual friends at a dinner, Sperling suggested a fundraiser for him, said Kristie Stiles, the candidate’s national finance director. “I knew Phoenix wasn’t operating in New York,” she said in a telephone interview. At least 15 executives and board members of Phoenix and Apollo Group attended the 2006 fundraiser in Sperling’s Arizona home, according to campaign finance filings . The event reaped at least $50,000, Stiles said. Sperling and Phoenix were accustomed to politics. In his 2000 autobiography, “Rebel With a Cause,” Sperling described his skills as “primarily educational and political.” Before obtaining a license in Pennsylvania, Phoenix had to persuade the Legislature to overturn a century-old state law prohibiting a university from operating as a for-profit, according to Sperling’s autobiography. Phoenix officials met with each member of the state’s House and Senate education committees, and brought some of them to visit its campuses, Seigel said. The repeal was adopted in 1997 as an amendment to an elementary-school budget bill, he said. ‘Bitterly Opposed’ “The private colleges were bitterly opposed to us, but by the time they found out” about the maneuver, “it was too late,” Seigel said. When Phoenix sought entry into Texas in the mid-1990s, Kenneth Ashworth, then the state’s higher education commissioner, was skeptical of the school’s reliance on part- time faculty, he said in a phone interview. “I stood in the breach and tried to keep the University of Phoenix out of Texas,” Ashworth said. Phoenix hired Diane Allbaugh, wife of then-Governor Bush’s chief of staff, Joseph Allbaugh , as a lobbyist, according to records of the Texas Ethics Commission, a state agency based in Austin. Bush’s education adviser, Margaret La Montagne, later Margaret Spellings, prodded Ashworth to expedite the license, he said. ‘Unshirted Hell’ “She called and gave me unshirted hell,” Ashworth said. “Why wasn’t I letting Phoenix into Texas?’ I said they couldn’t meet our standards.” While Spellings doesn’t recall specific discussions about Phoenix with Ashworth, she talked to him all the time on educational policy, Holly Kuzmich, Spellings’s spokeswoman, said. Spellings and Bush supported “new and innovative developments in higher education,” including Phoenix, Kuzmich said. Diane Allbaugh declined to comment. Ashworth’s retirement in 1997 cleared the university’s path. Phoenix “was offering better-quality degree programs than those offered at some public institutions in Texas,” Ashworth’s successor, Don Brown, said in a telephone interview. Phoenix’s first Texas campus, in Dallas, was approved in February 2001. Apollo created a political action committee in 1994, and Sperling encouraged the company’s top seven executives to contribute the maximum $5,000, he wrote in his autobiography. He soon persuaded the next two levels of executives to donate, and Apollo formed three more PACs. Political Contributions “If we were to be in the ‘game,’ it required contributions to members of Congress and the Senate, not to mention presidential candidates — this, on top of a growing number of state legislators and governors,” Sperling wrote. Phoenix studded its board with political insiders such as Richard Bond , former Republican National Committee chairman; John Burton , chairman of the California Democratic Party and former president of the California Senate; Alan Wheat, a former U.S. House member from Missouri; and William Goodling , former chairman of the House education committee. Board members were unavailable for interviews, Apollo’s Rivera said. Sperling and Nancy Pelosi , speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, are longtime friends, as well as neighbors in San Francisco, where Sperling owns a home, Jorge Klor de Alva, Phoenix senior vice president for academic excellence, said in a Sept. 9 interview at the university’s Arizona headquarters. Pelosi’s Attendance Pelosi attended a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee fundraiser that Sperling hosted in Arizona last May, according to two people familiar with the event. In 2003, Pelosi went to a small gathering at Sperling’s home and discussed with him how to position the Democratic Party to retake the House and make her speaker, according to a Pelosi aide and to a person acquainted with both Pelosi and Sperling. Sperling co-wrote a 2004 book, “The Great Divide,” advising Democrats on how to win the “red” states and citing Pelosi’s views. Sperling hasn’t asked for the speaker’s help on any legislation affecting the university, the Pelosi aide said. Sperling declined to comment. Phoenix experienced success with Congress. In 2008, for example, the university helped pass a provision expanding federal financial aid to for-profit colleges beyond vocational programs to include liberal-arts students, House aides said. Phoenix plans to offer more liberal-arts courses for aspiring teachers who need degrees in academic fields, William Pepicello , the university’s president, said in a Sept. 9 interview at its Arizona headquarters. Spitzer Fundraiser In New York, Sperling thought the Spitzer fundraiser “would take care of everything. He thought he had positive signals from Eliot,” Miller said. “If I was Sperling, I would have been the same way. ‘We’ve done this the honorable way, we get no results, let me try another route.’” Miller said he warned the university that the fundraiser would be futile because the regents are appointed by the Legislature, not the governor, and because he thought Spitzer wouldn’t go out of his way to reward contributors. In July 2006, Spitzer returned $2,000 donations from Sperling and Hedy Govenar , the founder of Governmental Advocates Inc. , a Sacramento, California, lobbying firm that represents Apollo. Govenar has served on the boards of Phoenix and Apollo. The campaign refunded the money after learning about Apollo’s 2004 incentive compensation settlement, Stiles said. Apollo said in December 2009 that it paid $78.5 million to settle a lawsuit over the same issue of recruiter compensation. The company did not admit wrongdoing. ‘Nice House’ Spitzer remembers the fundraiser, not why it was held or why he gave back the money, he said in a telephone interview. “I recall being in a nice house, chatting for about 15 minutes,” he said. “I raised $40 million around the nation. People supported what we were doing.” Spitzer was elected governor in 2006 and served until his March 2008 resignation. The fundraiser was Sperling’s personal undertaking, “separate and distinct from Apollo Group’s political activism, which is expressed through the company’s nonpartisan PAC,” Apollo’s Jones said. Apollo has donated $10,150 to New York state legislators and to state Democratic Assembly and Senate campaign committees since 2001, according to campaign finance documents. The company gave $1,000 in 2006 to Ron Canestrari , then chairman of the Assembly’s higher education committee and now majority leader; $400 in 2007 to Kenneth LaValle , now ranking Republican on the Senate’s higher education committee; and $500 in 2007 to Kevin Parker, a member of that committee. The university currently doesn’t have a lobbyist in New York and isn’t engaging in political activity on behalf of its application, Rivera said. Dropout Rate State officials remain concerned that Phoenix’s dropout rate is too high, said Saul Cohen, a regent and a former president of Queens College in New York. Only 8.9 percent of first-time, full-time college students who enrolled at Phoenix in 2001 completed their degrees in six years, according to the National Center for Education Statistics , in Washington. Including transfer students, 26 percent of candidates for associate degrees finish in three years, and 36 percent of students pursuing bachelor’s degrees graduate in six years, according to Phoenix’s 2009 academic annual report. “You bring in bodies that may not have much of a chance of completion,” Cohen said in a telephone interview. “That certainly is part of the issue.” Apollo is introducing a three- week orientation course for unprepared students, the company said Jan. 7. Waterfront Campus Phoenix continues to seek approval in New York and is updating the information in its application at the state education department’s request, Jones said. At the same time, “we look forward to continuing to serve our New York students through our neighboring New Jersey campus,” Jones said. At the campus on the Jersey City waterfront, which New Jersey approved in 2003, about a fourth of the students come from New York, according to a December 2004 letter from Mitchell to Frey. Phoenix student Maurice Murphy, a 32-year-old Bronx resident, takes a subway under the Hudson six days a week to school. If all goes smoothly, his commute takes half an hour, Murphy said as he headed to class Dec. 17 in Jersey City. He is majoring in human services management and wants to become a social worker. “Now we’ve got a resource center with TVs and computers,” Murphy said. “This is like I’m really going away to college.” To contact the reporter on this story: Daniel Golden in Boston at dlgolden@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Democrats Face Loss of Kennedy’s Senate Seat, Threatening Health-Care Law

January 18, 2010

By Heidi Przybyla Jan. 18 (Bloomberg) — Democrats risk losing their most iconic U.S. Senate seat, held for almost 47 years by the late Edward Kennedy, to a once little-known Republican in a Massachusetts election tomorrow that could cost them their 60- vote Senate supermajority needed to help pass health-care overhaul. In just over a week, Democrat Martha Coakley , the state attorney general once considered a shoo-in for the Senate, has watched her lead evaporate. Some polls show her trailing state Senator Scott Brown , who was more than 30 points behind last November. The nonpartisan Rothenberg Political Report today moved its rating of the race to likely Republican takeover. Democrats are mobilized by the prospect of conceding a Senate seat in a state where they control all 10 House seats. President Barack Obama stumped for Coakley in a last-minute trip to Boston yesterday, following former President Bill Clinton on Jan. 15. Obama cut a new television ad, while his grassroots organizing group says it placed 93,000 calls across the state on Jan. 16 alone. “In some ways, Republicans have already won,” said Jennifer Duffy , the Senate analyst for the nonpartisan Cook Political Report in Washington. “Nobody ever imagined a special election in Massachusetts for Ted Kennedy’s seat would ever get remotely competitive,” she said. Research “strongly suggests” that Brown, 50, will defeat Coakley, 56, the Washington-based Rothenberg report said. That outcome or even a narrow Coakley win could discourage House or Senate Democrats in competitive districts and states from running in this November’s elections amid a sagging economy and declining poll numbers for Obama. The president’s party historically loses seats in midterm elections. On Jan. 15, Arkansas Representative Vic Snyder became the fifth House Democrat from a potential swing district to announce since late last November that he would retire rather than seek re-election. Supermajority at Stake Also at stake is the presidential party’s 60-vote majority that helps Democrats avoid Republican attempts to kill legislation, including Obama’s signature issue, a health-care bill before Congress that many Democrats also consider a tribute to Kennedy’s decades of work to expand health coverage. Special elections historically are difficult to predict because of weather and low turnout. Democrats want Obama’s visit to excite their party members and turn out enough of them to give Coakley a victory. Democrats ‘Awakened’ “Democrats have been awakened,” said Jeffrey Berry , a political science professor at Tufts University in Medford, Massachusetts. Still, “the key is what’s the turnout of independents,” who aren’t as likely as Democrats or Republicans to go vote, Berry said. “A big turnout of independents probably favors Brown.” While Democrats outnumber Republicans 3-to-1 in the state, 51 percent of voters aren’t registered with a party. Obama warned that much of his agenda in Congress, specifically his health-care overhaul and proposed fee on big banks, hinges on retaining Kennedy’s former seat. “We’ve begun to deliver on the change you voted for,” Obama told a crowd of about 1,500 people yesterday at Northeastern University in Boston.” Polls show the race tightening in the closing days of the campaign. One poll by Boston’s Suffolk University gave Brown a 4-percentage-point lead. Public Policy Polling , a Democrat- leaning group, gave Brown a 5-point lead in a Jan. 16-17 survey, while another poll released today by Survey USA, conducted Jan. 15-17, gave Brown a 7-point advantage. Coakley had led by 31 points in a Suffolk poll last November. The polls all have a margin of error of under 5 percentage points. ‘Wave of Discontent’ Brown has cast himself as a populist and political outsider in a state with abuse-of-power scandals involving Democratic lawmakers including a former Speaker of the House, Salvatore DiMasi , who was indicted on federal corruption charges . “ Scott Brown is riding this wave of discontent,” said Paul Cellucci , a former Republican governor of Massachusetts. “There is a history of this happening in Massachusetts,” said Cellucci. “Usually it’s happened in state elections.” An automated recording at Brown’s campaign headquarters said the campaign has run out of lawn signs and bumper stickers. The last Republican senator from Massachusetts was Edward Brooke, who served two terms before being defeated in 1978. Republicans occupied the governor’s mansion from 1991 to 2006. While Coakley campaigned with Clinton and Obama, Brown crisscrossed the state in a pickup truck and recruited celebrities with blue-collar appeal. Joining him yesterday were Red Sox legend Curt Schilling and John Ratzenberger , an actor who played the mail carrier on the “Cheers” television comedy. ‘Political Machine’ “I’m running in the name of every independent-thinking voter to take on the political machine and their candidate,” Brown says in a recent Web advertisement. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said yesterday that the Massachusetts race shows the extent of popular opposition to Obama’s health-care proposal. Some analysts say local issues such as taxes loom larger. In a Boston Globe poll conducted Jan. 2 to 6, Coakley was seen as the strongest on health care, with 51 percent saying they trusted her to best handle the issue, to only 29 percent choosing Brown. “People are just really angry” about the economy, tax increases and corruption, said Fred Bayles , director of Boston University’s Statehouse Program. “Coakley should have been aware of what the situation was.” Soul Searching “Even voters in reliably Democratic states are angry, and Democrats need to do some soul searching about why that is,” the Cook report’s Duffy said. Democrats took aim at Brown’s opposition to Obama’s plan to tax the largest financial firms, including Charlotte, North Carolina-based Bank of America Corp. , and New York-based JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Citigroup Inc. , to recoup losses from companies that got federal aid from the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program. “Bankers don’t need another vote in the United States Senate — they’ve got plenty,” Obama said yesterday, signaling a broader political strategy to tie Republicans in this year’s House and Senate races to Wall Street greed. “That’s a lot of what 2010 is going to be about,” White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters in Boston. Brown has said banks will pass on the cost of Obama’s proposed tax to consumers in the form of higher bank fees. Outside groups poured money into the race. The Tea Party Express, which opposes Obama’s health-care plan, said it has spent more than $200,000 supporting Brown and cut a television ad supporting him. The National Rifle Association put almost $20,000 behind Brown. Service Employees International Union groups reported spending almost $740,000 on Jan. 13 to back Coakley. “The whole nation’s watching what’s happening in Massachusetts,” Coakley told supporters in Boston on Jan. 15. The Massachusetts winner will replace Paul Kirk , a former Democratic National Committee chairman appointed to the Senate after Kennedy died last August at age 77. Kirk didn’t run to serve the remaining three years of Kennedy’s term. To contact the reporters on this story: Heidi Przybyla in Washington at hhprzybyla@bloomberg.net ;

Read the full article →

Mulally Turns Rock Star at Auto Show as Ford’s Comeback Takes Center Stage

January 14, 2010

By Keith Naughton Jan. 14 (Bloomberg) — Ford Motor Co. Chief Executive Officer Alan Mulally , whose company gained market share in the U.S. last year while his domestic rivals went bankrupt, is the toast of the North American International Auto Show this week. At the opening press conference Jan. 11, Mulally walked onto a stage in Detroit’s Cobo Arena, where the rock band Kiss recorded a live album in 1975. On a screen above him, a globe covered with positive Ford headlines from 2009 spun while Mulally spoke of Ford’s “ growth in every region around the world.” The audience filling the red vinyl seats roared. Ford swept the show’s awards for car and truck of the year and unveiled the Focus compact. The car, which Mulally plans to sell worldwide, attracted throngs of media and auto executives. At Ford’s 54,000-square-foot exhibit, which covers almost a quarter of the convention floor, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi huddled with Mulally amid red and silver Focus models, while a velvet rope kept reporters at bay. “We’re not talking about just surviving,” Mulally said during a Jan. 11 filet mignon dinner with reporters at the MGM Grand Detroit casino. “I came to Ford to help turn around a global and American icon.” Mulally’s star turn comes after a year of moves that set Ford apart from its domestic rivals — avoiding a bankruptcy and federal bailout. The company began the month by posting its first annual gain in U.S. market share since 1995 and the best sales growth in December among its peers. ‘Relentless’ Mulally, 64, came to Ford after a 37-year career at Boeing Co. , where he managed development of the 787 Dreamliner. When asked at the MGM Grand dinner about watching the wide-bodied jet’s televised maiden flight last month, Mulally couldn’t speak for a bit and his eyes filled with tears. “It’s like ingenuity at its finest,” he said, likening the 787 project to Ford’s redesign of the Taurus and Fusion sedans. “He’s making good progress on the products; there’s a lot of buzz about the Focus,” said Jeremy Anwyl , CEO of researcher Edmunds.com of Santa Monica, California. “Mulally is relentless. He’s got a laser-sharp focus on a simple vision that he just drills into the organization.” Investors and car buyers are responding to Mulally’s leadership, driving up Ford shares more than fourfold in the past year to the highest level since 2005. Shares fell 19 cents, or 1.6 percent, at 4 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. For December, the automaker reported a 33 percent sales rise, while GM’s deliveries fell 6 percent. ‘One Ford’ Three months after he arrived at the Dearborn, Michigan- based automaker in 2006, Mulally signed off on a plan by Executive Chairman Bill Ford Jr . and then-Chief Financial Officer Don Leclair to borrow $23 billion. They put up all major assets, including the Ford name, as collateral. Mulally called it “the world’s largest home-equity loan” and it enabled Ford to avoid the bankruptcies that befell the predecessors of General Motors Co. and Chrysler Group LLC last year. Mulally instituted a plan to focus Ford on fixing its namesake brand and take advantage of its global scale to build cars to be sold worldwide. He called the strategy “One Ford” and gave his executives laminated wallet cards to drive home his tenets of working together, accepting reality and developing new models that buyers really wanted. Surprise Profit The CEO must still grapple with an automaker that hasn’t earned an annual profit since 2005 and lost a record $30 billion from 2006 to 2008. Though Ford earned a surprise $997 million profit in the third quarter, Mulally has said the automaker won’t be “solidly profitable” until 2011. Ford’s bet on small cars, bringing the Fiesta subcompact and the Focus from Europe this year, is risky because U.S. consumers have yet to embrace diminutive models like buyers elsewhere who pay more for fuel. U.S. sales of compact and subcompact cars fell 20 percent in 2009. “There’s a tremendous amount of challenge in bringing small cars into this market,” said Rebecca Lindland , an analyst at IHS Global Insight in Lexington, Massachusetts. “You really have to push a lot of volume to make a profit.” Mulally’s biggest challenge now may be to keep his managers grounded as outsiders deify him, said Jeffrey Sonnenfeld , senior associate dean of the Yale University School of Management in New Haven, Connecticut. ‘Sugar-Free Environment’ “Mulally’s biggest risk is managing expectations as people create a messianic image of him,” Sonnenfeld said. “Others can create unrealistic expectations. And he can’t let his people get caught up in the idea of infallibility.” At meetings with direct reports every Thursday morning, Mulally demands attention to the auto market — it fell to the lowest in almost three decades last year — and to each other. He banned BlackBerrys and pounces on anyone caught texting, say Ford executives. “It’s a sugar-free environment,” President of the Americas Mark Fields said of the weekly meetings. “He has brought us all together and he has focused us.” The Thursday meetings “keep us humble,” said Jim Farley , global marketing chief. “Every week we’re reminded of what another competitor is doing in India and Oklahoma. It begs the question of what have you done for the company lately?” Mulally succeeded as an outsider in Detroit because “there was no grandiosity when he came in, there was just a sense of energy and enthusiasm,” said Sonnenfeld, who runs Yale’s Chief Executive Leadership Institute. “He’s not some swashbuckling Iacocca type. He’s the ultimate team builder, fortifying the institution.” ‘Defining Moment’ Under Mulally, Ford has slashed its North American workforce in half, closed factories and converted plants from making sport-utility vehicles to building smaller autos like the Focus. He sold Jaguar, Land Rover and Aston Martin and is near a sale of Volvo to China’s Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co. “I would like to be remembered for contributing to refocusing Ford on Ford,” Mulally said, adding he has no plans to retire. Mulally said he considers his “defining moment” at Ford his appearance before congressional committees in late 2008, where lawmakers derided him and his fellow U.S. auto chiefs for flying in private jets to Washington to beg for a bailout. “This is a very personal issue for me because I was the one there, doing it,” Mulally said. Americans “want companies to be successful. We don’t want to nationalize companies.” Flash of Ire Forgoing federal aid attracted new buyers and gave the company credibility with Wall Street, Mulally said. He became angry when a reporter at the Jan. 11 dinner asked if Ford avoided a government-backed bankruptcy simply to prevent negative “public relations.” “What kind of question is that?” he said, folding his arms across his chest and scowling. “We were not making a big PR play, we were running a business. I believe the American public appreciates we are running a healthy business.” It was a rare flash of ire from the CEO, who went on to cite Ford’s disadvantages against government-funded U.S. rivals that wiped obligations from their balance sheets in bankruptcy. “We’re paying a little bit more interest because we have more debt ,” Mulally said. “But when we get back to profitability, we’ll pay back that debt and get rid of that disadvantage.” Debt Load Standard & Poor’s rates Ford B- , six steps below investment grade, because of its high debt load and uncertainties about the execution of Mulally’s comeback plan, the New York-based rating agency said in a Dec. 23 note. “There are a number of risks that remain that are not in Ford’s direct control, such as the health of the U.S. and European economies,” said Gregg Lemos Stein , an S&P credit analyst. “We also question whether Ford’s share gains from 2009 are sustainable now that the crisis has passed and its competitors are out of bankruptcy.” The company’s 7.45 percent notes due July 2031 have more than tripled in the last year to 93 cents on the dollar, according to Trace, the bond-price reporting system of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. Mulally posted his first back-to-back quarterly profits at the automaker Nov. 2. Ford may earn $2.35 billion this year, based on the average of five analysts surveyed by Bloomberg. After a speech Jan. 12 at the Automotive News World Congress in Detroit, Mulally was asked for the biggest lesson he learned from the past year. “Have a plan before the s— hits,” he said as the audience laughed and applauded. To contact the reporters on this story: Keith Naughton in Detroit, at Knaughton3@bloomberg.net ;

Read the full article →

Rangel Says U.S. House Considers Capital Gains Tax for Health-Care Plan

January 13, 2010

By Ryan J. Donmoyer and James Rowley Jan. 13 (Bloomberg) — House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel said lawmakers are considering paying for health-care legislation by imposing a new tax on unearned income such as capital gains, a measure aimed at wealthier Americans. The New York Democrat, whose panel writes tax law, said the idea of expanding the Medicare payroll tax to cover unearned income was preferable to a Senate proposal backed by President Barack Obama to tax the most-expensive health benefits, which labor leaders say will hurt many workers. “There’s a big problem in the way the administration wants to pay for this in terms of the tax on the higher premiums,” Rangel told reporters last night before a meeting of House Democrats on Capitol Hill. He said he would discuss how to pay for the legislation, which calls for the biggest overhaul of U.S. health care in more than four decades, during a meeting today with Obama at the White House. Rangel said applying the Medicare tax to unearned income for the first time would be “comparable to the surtax” that House Democrats want to impose on the highest-income people and which has drawn opposition in the Senate. The House health-care bill calls for a 5.4 percent income surtax on singles who earn more than $500,000 and couples who make more than $1 million. An expanded Medicare tax “covers the same people,” Rangel said. White House Meeting House and Senate Democratic leaders are trying to merge their versions of the legislation, which may cost $1 trillion over 10 years. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid are also meeting today at the White House with Obama to discuss the state of negotiations. How to pay for the bill looms as the biggest stumbling block, and the payroll tax that funds the Medicare program for the elderly is one focus. Negotiators have been talking about expanding the tax, which is currently 2.9 percent on salaries, split evenly between employers and workers. There’s no cap on wages subject to the tax. The Senate adopted a proposal to add 0.9 percentage points to the individual portion of the tax for those who earn more than $200,000 and married couples who earn more than $250,000. The new proposal would also apply the tax to unearned income, including capital gains, rents, royalties and dividends. That would add as much as 2.35 percentage points to tax rates on capital gains. Most people pay a 15 percent tax on long-term capital gains, and that percentage is already scheduled to increase to 20 percent next year. Millionaire Tax The House’s so-called millionaire tax is also getting attention. While some Senate Democrats oppose the levy, Pelosi told reporters last night she hasn’t given up on it because “it’s the best pay-for we’ve had so far.” The proposal to impose an excise tax on the most-expensive employer-provided health benefits has drawn fire from Democratic-leaning labor unions, who say it would bring financial burdens to middle-class Americans, including workers who traded wage increases for greater health-care coverage. Representative Eliot Engel of New York said one idea is to “move up the threshold” at which the tax starts so it would hit fewer people. The Senate legislation calls for a 40 percent levy on health-insurance premiums that exceed $8,500 for individuals or $23,000 for families. Nationwide Exchange A Democratic leadership aide said Obama also favors a House plan to set up a nationwide exchange on which people could buy insurance at lower prices. And the president backs the repeal of the insurance industry’s antitrust exemption, said the House aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Dan Pfeiffer , Obama’s communications director, said those were “at best educated guesses.” Pfeiffer said in a statement that work on merging the House and Senate bills is continuing and “there simply isn’t anything final to discuss yet.” During his 2008 presidential campaign, Obama endorsed the concept of a nationwide insurance exchange. The Senate bill calls for each state to set up its own exchange, which House lawmakers say wouldn’t be as effective. “We feel very strongly about the national exchange,” House Democratic Leader Steny Hoyer said. Pelosi met yesterday with labor leaders, including AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and Andrew Stern , president of the Service Employees International Union, to discuss unions’ concerns about the proposed excise tax on the costliest health- benefit plans. Backing the Speaker Asked afterward if Pelosi had indicated how hard she would fight against the so-called Cadillac tax, Stern said labor “made very clear we appreciate everything the speaker has done.” On the antitrust issue, the House-passed legislation would repeal the limited exemption the insurance industry received when Congress passed the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945. The law shields insurance companies from federal antitrust laws as long as they are subject to state regulations. Among those opposed to a repeal of the exemption is Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson , a Democrat who provided the 60th vote that cleared the way for the Senate’s Dec. 24 passage of its health bill. Nelson, a former insurance company executive and state insurance regulator, says a repeal would hurt small insurers. ‘No Earthly Reason’ House Rules Committee Chairman Louise Slaughter told reporters that Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy is negotiating with Nelson on the exemption to try to get his support. “There is no earthly reason for the insurance companies to be exempt from the antitrust laws,” she said. To contact the reporters on this story: James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net ; and Ryan Donmoyer in Washington at rdonmoyer@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Obama Backs Plan for National Health Insurance Exchange, House Aide Says

January 12, 2010

By James Rowley Jan. 12 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama , weighing in on congressional health-care negotiations, favors a U.S. House plan to set up a nationwide exchange on which people could buy insurance at lower prices, a House leadership aide said. Obama also backs a House proposal to repeal the insurance industry’s antitrust exemption, said the Democratic aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity. During his 2008 presidential campaign, Obama endorsed the concept of a nationwide insurance exchange. Reid Cherlin , a White House spokesman, declined to comment. A bill passed by the Senate calls for each state to set up its own exchange, which House lawmakers say wouldn’t be as effective. “We feel very strongly about the national exchange,” House Democratic Leader Steny Hoyer told reporters. Asked if Obama had commented on the issue, Hoyer said “the president is trying to weigh in and get a bill.” House and Senate Democratic leaders are seeking to merge their versions of the legislation, which calls for the most- sweeping overhaul of U.S. health care in more than four decades. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid are scheduled to meet tomorrow at the White House with Obama to discuss the state of negotiations. Capital Gains Tax How to pay for the bill looms as the biggest stumbling block. Among other measures, the leaders are discussing whether to apply a Medicare payroll tax to capital gains income to capture more revenue from high wage earners, said Maryland Representative Chris Van Hollen , a Pelosi adviser. Negotiators are considering expanding a 0.9 percent increase in the Medicare payroll tax contained in the Senate legislation. The Senate measure would apply the tax increase to individuals earning at least $200,000 a year and couples earning $250,000 and more. The Medicare payroll tax increase may be an alternative source of revenue to a surtax on high incomes contained in the House legislation. The so-called millionaire tax on incomes of more than $500,000 for individuals and $1 million for couples is opposed by some Senate Democrats. Pelosi told reporters tonight she hasn’t given up on the millionaire tax because “it’s the best pay-for we’ve had so far.” The Senate bill also contains an excise tax on the most- expensive employer-provided health benefits. That levy is opposed by labor unions, who say it would impose financial burdens on middle-class Americans, including workers who traded wage increases for greater health-care coverage. Meeting With Unions Pelosi met today with labor leaders, including AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka , to discuss unions’ concerns about the proposed excise tax. Obama backs the tax, which would impose a 40 percent levy on health-insurance plans worth more than $8,500 for individuals or $23,000 for families. House Democrats have signaled a willingness to raise the minimum value on the plans that would be subject to taxation. After the meeting with Pelosi, Andrew Stern , president of the Service Employees International Union, told reporters “the House has the right bill.” Asked if Pelosi had indicated how hard she would fight against the so-called Cadillac tax on costly health plans, Stern said labor “made very clear we appreciate everything the speaker has done.” Repealing Antitrust Exemption On the antitrust issue, the House-passed legislation would repeal the limited exemption the insurance industry received when Congress passed the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945. The law shields insurance companies from federal antitrust laws as long as they are subject to state regulations. Among those opposed to a repeal of the exemption is Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson , a Democrat who provided the 60th vote that cleared the way for the Senate’s Dec. 24 passage of its health bill. Nelson, a former insurance company executive and state insurance regulator, says a repeal would hurt small insurers. House Rules Committee Chairman Louise Slaughter told reporters that Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy is negotiating with Nelson on the exemption to try to get his support. “There is no earthly reason for the insurance companies to be exempt from the antitrust laws,” she said. To contact the reporter on this story: James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

House May Raise Medicare Tax, Drop Wealth Levy to Finance Health-Care Plan

January 8, 2010

By James Rowley and Ryan Donmoyer Jan. 8 (Bloomberg) — U.S. House lawmakers may agree to pay for the nation’s health-care overhaul by adopting versions of Senate proposals to raise Medicare payroll taxes and tax health benefits for the first time, Democratic aides said. House leaders may also discard a plan to impose a surtax on the wealthiest Americans, which has come under fire from some Senate Democrats, aides said. Financing the expansion of insurance coverage to more than 90 percent of Americans looms as the largest issue facing Congress. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , seeking to merge her bill with Senate legislation, yesterday briefed the Democratic caucus on party leaders’ discussions during a conference call. The talks are at a preliminary stage until the Senate returns later this month, and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel predicted “tough” negotiations. Some House members are vowing to put up a fight over the legislation, which is estimated to cost about $1 trillion over 10 years. “There’s a gap between us and the Senate and, I guess, the White House on how to pay for health-care reform,” said Representative Joe Courtney of Connecticut, who leads a group of 190 House Democrats opposed to the Senate proposal to levy an excise tax on the most-expensive insurance plans. President Barack Obama this week urged House leaders to drop their opposition to that tax, a Democratic aide said. The tax has drawn protests from labor unions, which are among the Democratic Party’s biggest backers. Scale It Back At the least, the tax on health benefits would have to be revamped by raising the value of the plans to which it would apply and adjusting how it’s indexed for inflation, Courtney said. The Senate measure would impose a 40 percent excise tax on employer-provided insurance plans worth more than $8,500 for individuals and $23,000 for families. That would raise $149 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Changes may include raising the minimum value of plans subject to taxation and lowering the rate, aides said. The excise tax “is obviously on the list of issues for continued discussion” among House Democrats, Connecticut Democrat Rosa DeLauro , a member of Pelosi’s leadership circle, told reporters after the teleconference. Lawmakers are “hearing from their constituents about that issue,” she said. Nationwide Exchange During the call, Pelosi and fellow Democrats said they would press for the House proposal for a nationwide insurance exchange, on which eligible Americans could buy coverage from private companies at lower costs, Colorado Democrat Diana DeGette said in a telephone interview. The Senate measure would set up exchanges in each of the 50 states, which could choose instead to buy insurance coverage for low-income residents. “We just don’t see how you can get cost-containment if you have a patchwork state-by-state system that states can opt out of,” DeGette said. House leaders “are not giving in to this idea that we’re going to just have to accept” the Senate version, she said. Should House members agree to drop their proposed surtax on high-income Americans, that would leave a funding gap. The measure, which would impose an additional 5.4 percent levy on people with incomes of at least $500,000 and couples earning more than $1 million, would raise $460.5 billion over 10 years. To make up the lost revenue, negotiators are considering boosting the Medicare payroll tax increase beyond the 0.9 percent contained in the Senate legislation. The Senate tax would apply to individuals earning at least $200,000 and joint filers earning at least $250,000. Negotiators are considering applying any expansion of the increase to a higher income group, the aides said. As proposed in the Senate legislation, the Medicare payroll tax would raise $88 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. To contact the reporters on this story: James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net and Ryan Donmoyer in Washington at +1- rdonmoyer@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Iranian Crackdown Leaves At Least Eight People Dead, State Television Says

December 28, 2009

By Ali Sheikholeslami and Nicholas Johnston Dec. 28 (Bloomberg) — The Obama administration “strongly” condemned a crackdown by Iranian security forces on protesters in Tehran that left at least eight people dead. The eight fatalities in yesterday’s protests were reported by the state-run English-language Press TV on its Web site today, citing the Supreme National Security Council. One of the people killed was a 35-year-old nephew of Mir Hossein Mousavi , a former prime minister and the main challenger in the disputed June 12 presidential election, Mousavi’s Kaleme.org Web site said. The New York Times reported at least five more deaths in other cities; Iranian state television said that more than 15 people were killed in Tehran, according to Agence France-Presse. “We strongly condemn the violent and unjust suppression of civilians in Iran seeking to exercise their universal rights,” National Security Council spokesman Mike Hammer said in a statement issued in Hawaii yesterday. “Governing through fear and violence is never just.” Mousavi, and the other main presidential election challenger, ex-parliament Speaker Mehdi Karrubi , said the June balloting was rigged to ensure a second term for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad . Mousavi’s supporters organized the latest protests to coincide with a religious observance. More than 300 arrests were reported in a police statement carried by the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Ahmadinejad reject the allegations of vote fraud. Uranium Enrichment Iran is also under international pressure to suspend uranium enrichment. Obama has set a Dec. 31 deadline for progress on diplomatic talks on Iran’s nuclear program and has threatened tougher sanctions. Enriched uranium can be used in nuclear weapons, though Iran says its program is intended for peaceful energy generation only. Some 4,000 protesters were arrested following the election and more than 140 of them have been tried on charges of attempting to topple the government. Before yesterday’s violence, Iranian officials said 36 people had been killed in street clashes, while the opposition put the toll at 72. The British Broadcasting Corp.’s Persian television service showed footage obtained from the Internet depicting clashes in Tehran today. The pictures included demonstrators setting fire to a police station in the central Vali-ye-Asr Square and of bleeding protesters being helped by others. Tear Gas, Shots Thousands took to the streets shouting “Death to the dictator,” AP said. Security forces tried to disperse the protesters with tear gas and warning shots, then opened fire, AP said, citing witnesses. Opposition Web site Rahesabz.net reported that clashes occurred in other cities, including Tabriz, Babol, Mashhad and Najafabad. Four people may have been killed in Tabriz, Rahesabz.net said, citing unverified reports. The police statement cited by IRNA said the five victims were “killed suspiciously.” “One has fallen off a bridge, two have been killed by a car and another one has been shot,” Iran’s Deputy Police Chief General Ahmadreza Radan was cited as saying by IRNA. Police officers didn’t fire their guns, according to the statement. — With assistance from Henry Meyer in Dubai. Editors: Mark Rohner , Julian Nundy To contact the reporters on this story: Ali Sheikholeslami in London at alis2@bloomberg.net ; Nicholas Johnston in Honolulu at njohnston3@bloomberg.net .

Read the full article →

Reid’s Christmas Deadline for Health Bill Threatened by Republican Tactics

December 17, 2009

By Kristin Jensen and Laura Litvan Dec. 17 (Bloomberg) — Senate Democrats, trying to round up 60 votes for health-care legislation, face new challenges to their goal of passing a bill by Christmas as they confront both Republican stalling tactics and other pressing business. The Senate took up a $636 billion defense-spending measure that includes $128 billion for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. That and Republican delays — such as insisting that each amendment be read word for word — mean work may not resume on health care until the weekend. And the votes needed for passage aren’t yet assured, said Illinois Senator Dick Durbin . “Members have expressed concern, indecision,” said Durbin, the No. 2 Senate Democrat, adding that talks with the chief party holdout, Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, continue. “We won’t move forward without knowing we have” the 60 votes that will be needed for passage, he said. Durbin expressed confidence that Democrats would pass the health bill by Christmas, a goal set by Majority Leader Harry Reid . On the Senate floor, he urged Republicans to work with Democrats for quick approval of the military bill, already passed by the House, so lawmakers could return to health care. The 10-year, $848 billion Senate health plan is designed to cover 31 million uninsured Americans and curb medical expenses . Like a measure passed Nov. 7 by the U.S. House, it would require Americans to get health coverage, offering expanded aid for the poor and creating online insurance- purchasing exchanges to help the uninsured buy policies. Read Aloud Partisan clashes over the legislation broke out on the floor yesterday. Oklahoma Republican Tom Coburn demanded that a Senate clerk read aloud every word of a 767-page amendment by Senator Bernie Sanders , a Vermont independent, that would have opened up government insurance to all Americans. After almost three hours of reading, and as Durbin convened a news conference to complain about the Republican tactic, Sanders withdrew the amendment. Coburn’s attempt to object was overruled, and Sanders proceeded to give a fiery speech in favor of a single-payer, fully government-run insurance system. Later, Reid and other Democrats took to the Senate floor, to show their support as Sanders demanded that the full Senate vote immediately to table a pending Republican amendment by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas that was designed to delay tax increases in the measure. Her proposal was defeated, 56-41, and signaled the potential for other Republican proposals to be shunted aside. McConnell Protests Republicans, who say the bill might crowd out private insurers, raise taxes and widen the federal budget deficit , left little doubt of their intentions to try to stop it. Republican Leader Mitch McConnell took the floor to defend his party’s right to force a reading of amendments. He protested allowing Sanders to withdraw his amendment, saying “the plain language of Senate precedent” requires that all 100 senators agree before a lawmaker can withdraw a measure. The Kentucky Republican said public opinion is moving in the opponents’ favor. “The American people are saying, ‘Please don’t pass this bill,’” McConnell said at a news conference. He said the public is aware of the potential risks of higher insurance premiums and cuts to Medicare spending, which would finance half the legislation. Public Opinion McConnell pointed to a Washington Post-ABC News poll that found the public’s disapproval of President Barack Obama’s handling of health care is at a new high of 53 percent. The Dec. 10-13 poll was based on a survey of 1,003 adults and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. If the Senate passes its bill, the measure would have to be reconciled with a version approved by the House on Nov. 7. Senator Joe Lieberman , a Connecticut Independent whose support is crucial because Republicans are united in opposition to the measure, said he’s ready to back it after Democrats signaled they’re poised to drop a proposed new government-run insurance program, as well as a plan to expand the Medicare program for the elderly to people as young as 55. Nelson, who last week tried unsuccessfully to amend the bill to include tough restrictions on abortion funding, said he’s examining proposed abortion language that would apply to insurance policies purchased in the proposed online exchange. Waiting for Feedback Asked if the language would work, Nelson said, “I don’t know at this point in time. Constituency groups haven’t responded back.” Sanders said he’s still not behind the measure because the public option was dropped. Still, a pivotal Senate Democrat who has expressed reservations in recent weeks — Mary Landrieu of Louisiana — said yesterday she will vote with Democrats “barring any significant changes” to the legislation. The bill is “in the best shape it could be,” Landrieu told reporters. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi signaled that her caucus may be ready to accept legislation that doesn’t contain the public option. “It depends on what else is in the bill,” Pelosi told reporters yesterday. “We will see what they have on the table.” 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 →

Obama Says Some of TARP Money Surplus Can Be Devoted to Deficit Reduction

December 7, 2009

By Kate Andersen Brower and Nicholas Johnston Dec. 7 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama said he is considering “selective” use of money from the Troubled Asset Relief Program to boost U.S. job growth and that some of the fund can be devoted to deficit reduction. Obama is set to give an address tomorrow on measures to help create jobs, and momentum is building among Democrats in Congress to tap the $700 billion TARP program, which was created last year to shore up financially troubled banks. The Treasury Department expects the program to cost about $200 billion less than predicted. “Some of that money can be devoted to deficit reduction,” Obama said in response to a question from reporters at the White House. “The question is are there selective approaches that are consistent with the original goals of TARP, for example making sure that small businesses are still getting lending, that would be appropriate in accelerating job growth.” The proposals the administration is examining to spur job growth may include incentives to make buildings more energy efficient, more spending on infrastructure projects, incentives to encourage small business hiring and direct aid to state and local governments to prevent layoffs. The administration is constrained by a budget deficit that hit $1.4 trillion in fiscal 2009 and is forecast to be about the same in the current fiscal year. Job Losses The U.S. unemployment rate declined to 10 percent in November from 10.2 percent the month before, the Labor Department reported. The U.S. has shed about 7.2 million jobs since the recession began in December 2007. “We have had a very tough year and we’ve lost millions of jobs,” Obama said after meeting at the White House with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey. “At least now we are moving in the right direction.” Obama said the financial bailout “has turned out to be much cheaper than we had expected, although not cheap.” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said last week that some TARP funds can be used to create jobs and help small businesses. That idea is opposed by some Republicans. “TARP was never intended to be used as a revolving slush fund to pay for the majority’s political, economic or social agenda,” Representative Jeb Hensarling , a Texas Republican, wrote in a letter to Pelosi. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said “no final determinations have been made” regarding using the TARP funds. He repeated that the administration won’t seek another stimulus like the $787 billion package of tax cuts and spending passed by Congress earlier this year. To contact the reporters on this story: Kate Andersen Brower in Washington at kandersen7@bloomberg.net ; Nicholas Johnston in Washington at Or njohnston3@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Geithner Dismisses Pelosi-Backed Financial Transactions Tax as Unworkable

December 5, 2009

By Robert Schmidt Dec. 5 (Bloomberg) — Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner , throwing cold water on a plan by congressional Democrats to tax financial transactions, said banks and other market participants would find ways to circumvent the expense. “I have not seen the version of that that I think works,” Geithner said in an interview on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt” that airs throughout the weekend. Firms are “going to move in a heartbeat to get around any tax like that.” The Treasury chief also predicted a “quite high” chance that the U.S. unemployment rate will be lower than 10 percent in a year, and he called yesterday’s Labor Department report showing the smallest monthly job loss in two years “progress but not good enough.” Geithner also continued to push Congress to pass legislation that would rewrite financial rules and said that the Obama administration was close to announcing a new tack for the $700 billion bailout. Geithner said he expects the Troubled Asset Relief Program to get as much as $175 billion in repayments from banks by the end of next year. The prospect of a so-called Tobin tax, floated last month by U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown , is already provoking nervous U.S. financial companies to lobby for its defeat. Democrats, including Oregon Representative Pete DeFazio and Iowa Senator Tom Harkin , this week proposed taxing large transactions in stocks and derivatives. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the idea has a “great deal of merit.” Tobin Tax In yesterday’s interview, Geithner, echoing some of the banking industry’s reasons for opposing a Tobin tax, said he was concerned it wouldn’t be able to be adopted globally, making it harder to impose. He also noted that the tax may hit less sophisticated investors, instead of the big firms. “There’s a real risk that retail investors, who’ve got fewer choices, they end up bearing the cost of the tax,” he said. On another tax issue, Geithner questioned the effectiveness of providing businesses with a $5,000 credit for each new net job they create. Some have predicted the measure could help the economy add as many as 1.5 million new jobs. “Just to be frank about it, there’s a lot of people in the business community and the academic community who are not confident that that particular proposal would be that powerful,” Geithner said. “But we’re going to keep looking at it.” TARP Changes On the TARP, Geithner said the administration was in the process of putting the final touches on a major refinement of the effort. “We’re going to have very substantial resources we can make available to support not just the immediate priorities the country faces in spurring investment in job creation , but also to meet our long term fiscal challenges,” he said. He didn’t say whether he will seek to extend the program for another nine months, as the law allows, when it expires on Dec. 31. Geithner also said he was confident that loopholes concerning derivatives, inserted into legislation Congress is crafting to overhaul financial regulation, would be tightened before a law is passed. Airlines, energy companies and other firms that rely on derivatives to protect their businesses against swings in oil and commodities prices would be exempt from most new requirements in House of Representatives bills designed to rein in more speculative trading. The House legislation is slated for votes next week. A Senate version has fewer exceptions. ‘Evade’ Protections “There is support for trying to make sure that we tighten up those exceptions and, again, they don’t provide a way for firms to evade those basic protections,” Geithner said. “We have a very good chance of getting a very strong bill.” Overall on the economy, Geithner said a “key test” will be when companies begin to add to their payrolls. “The economy is now growing and growth seems to be gradually strengthening,” he said. “You see pockets of real strength now in technology and exports and I think they are hopeful signs of progress.” Geithner and other Obama administration officials this week held a forum at the White House to brainstorm about ways to bolster job creation in an economy that lost 7.2 million jobs since the recession began in December 2007. To contact the reporter on this story: Robert Schmidt in Washington at rschmidt5@bloomberg.net .

Read the full article →

Financial Transactions Tax Would Hurt U.S. Retail Investors, Geithner Says

December 4, 2009

By Ryan J. Donmoyer Dec. 4 (Bloomberg) — Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said any tax on financial transactions would have to be designed to ensure taxpayers don’t ultimately bear the burden, criteria he said no current plan meets. “I have not seen the version of that that I think works,” Geithner said in an interview on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt ,” airing this weekend. “Otherwise people would have done this a long time ago.” Geithner said he’s “open” to fees that ensure that financial institutions pay fees if the government loses money while intervening in a crisis. A group of congressional Democrats including Oregon Representative Pete DeFazio and Iowa Senator Tom Harkin yesterday proposed taxing large transactions in stocks and derivatives. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said yesterday the idea has “great deal of merit” as long as other major nations do it as well. “It’s unlikely that’s going to be possible,” Geithner said today. “Even then there’s a real risk that retail investors who’ve got fewer choices, they end up bearing the cost of the tax.” To contact the reporter on this story: Ryan Donmoyer at rdonmoyer@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

IPhone Plus Eos Solves a Music-Moving Mystery: Tech by Rich Jaroslovsky

December 4, 2009

Commentary by Rich Jaroslovsky Dec. 4 (Bloomberg) — It’s one of the simplest yet most vexing home-technology scenarios. The music is over there, on your computer. You want to play it over here — in the living room for a party, or on the patio, or in the kitchen. So how do you get it from point A to point B, and control it once you do? True, you could install a system from Sonos or Bose feeding remote speakers in every room where you might want audio — at a cost equivalent to a modest Wall Street bonus. Apple Inc. ’s Airport Express device is cheaper but must be tethered to your stereo, sacrificing portability. A boom box with an integrated music-player dock can be moved from place to place, but requires you to part with your device for the duration. A neater solution is available from IntelliTouch , a San Diego-based maker of wireless communications devices that sells consumer audio products under the Eos name. It’s called the Eos Converge system, and when used with Apple’s free Remote application for the iPhone and iPod Touch, it provides a handy, cost-efficient answer to the music-moving conundrum. And the sound isn’t bad, either. The Converge family includes a variety of transmitters, receivers, docks and speakers that can be mixed, matched and expanded as needed. The simplest configuration requires just two pieces of gear: the $99.95 Converge Transmitter, and the $129.95 Eos Portable Wireless Speaker/Receiver. Setting Up Installation isn’t much more complicated than setting up a cordless telephone. There’s a reason for that, as you’ll see. To test the system, I first plugged the palm-sized transmitter into the USB port of the computer that houses my music library — a Mac in my case, though Converge works just as well with Windows PCs. Next, I plugged my external computer speakers into the transmitter. Finally, I changed the computer’s settings to make the transmitter the primary audio source, and plugged the speaker/receiver into an electrical outlet on the wall of the room where I wanted music. A moment or two later, the speaker’s antenna glowed solid blue, indicating it had established a link to the transmitter. From then on, anything selected on the computer played through the speaker. Unlike some other systems, Converge doesn’t stream the audio over your wireless network. Instead, it uses the same technology, and 2.4 Ghz frequency, found in many cordless phones. That was an initial yellow flag: Wi-Fi networks and cordless phones don’t always work and play well together. In this case, though, my concerns proved unfounded. The Converge makes use of spectrum-hopping technology to avert such clashes, and I saw no discernible impact on my network. Remote Control That was a good thing, because I needed the network for the final piece of the puzzle: remotely controlling the music. With the Remote app, I used my iPhone to select songs, albums or playlists, skip or shuffle tracks and adjust the volume from any room in the house. The app, which works with both the Mac and Windows versions of Apple’s ubiquitous iTunes software, also lets you play podcasts and access your favorite Internet radio stations if you’ve organized them into an iTunes playlist. While Remote works from anywhere you can pick up your Wi-Fi network, the Converge signal is limited to a maximum indoor range of about 150 feet (46 meters) between transmitter and receiver, and walls and floors may diminish the distance. With the transmitter on the second floor of my house, I was able to pick up the signal in most rooms, except when I mounted the speaker on the far wall of the kitchen; moving it just a few feet, to a closer outlet, solved the problem. Easily Transportable At about three pounds, the speaker is easily transportable, and its AC power supply can be detached if you need to position it to pick up a signal or aim the sound. An on-off knob controls the volume, independent of the remote-control app. With its rugged plastic housing, it can be used outdoors, though you won’t want to leave it out when not in use. While I’m no audiophile, I found the speaker’s sound quality clean and straightforward, and more than adequate for the kind of casual use for which it’s intended. More demanding listeners will want to check out the rest of the Converge line, which includes a $99 receiver that works with an existing stereo system and a $149 amplified receiver for connecting to a pair of your own or Eos’s $99 bookshelf speakers. Eos says the transmitter will support up to four receivers, though I stopped at two. I did find myself wishing the gear looked a little nicer; black plastic and glowing blue antennas just aren’t my taste, I guess. And there are surely more elaborate and sophisticated audio solutions available. Still, for simplicity, functionality and affordability, Converge is hard to beat. ( Rich Jaroslovsky is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.) Click on “Send Comment” in the sidebar display to send a letter to the editor. To contact the writer of this column: Rich Jaroslovsky in New York at rjaroslovsky@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

IPhone Plus Eos Solves a Music-Moving Mystery: Rich Jaroslovsky

December 4, 2009

Commentary by Rich Jaroslovsky Dec. 4 (Bloomberg) — It’s one of the simplest yet most vexing home-technology scenarios. The music is over there, on your computer. You want to play it over here — in the living room for a party, or on the patio, or in the kitchen. So how do you get it from point A to point B, and control it once you do? True, you could install a system from Sonos or Bose feeding remote speakers in every room where you might want audio — at a cost equivalent to a modest Wall Street bonus. Apple Inc. ’s Airport Express device is cheaper but must be tethered to your stereo, sacrificing portability. A boom box with an integrated music-player dock can be moved from place to place, but requires you to part with your device for the duration. A neater solution is available from IntelliTouch , a San Diego-based maker of wireless communications devices that sells consumer audio products under the Eos name. It’s called the Eos Converge system, and when used with Apple’s free Remote application for the iPhone and iPod Touch, it provides a handy, cost-efficient answer to the music-moving conundrum. And the sound isn’t bad, either. The Converge family includes a variety of transmitters, receivers, docks and speakers that can be mixed, matched and expanded as needed. The simplest configuration requires just two pieces of gear: the $99.95 Converge Transmitter, and the $129.95 Eos Portable Wireless Speaker/Receiver. Setting Up Installation isn’t much more complicated than setting up a cordless telephone. There’s a reason for that, as you’ll see. To test the system, I first plugged the palm-sized transmitter into the USB port of the computer that houses my music library — a Mac in my case, though Converge works just as well with Windows PCs. Next, I plugged my external computer speakers into the transmitter. Finally, I changed the computer’s settings to make the transmitter the primary audio source, and plugged the speaker/receiver into an electrical outlet on the wall of the room where I wanted music. A moment or two later, the speaker’s antenna glowed solid blue, indicating it had established a link to the transmitter. From then on, anything selected on the computer played through the speaker. Unlike some other systems, Converge doesn’t stream the audio over your wireless network. Instead, it uses the same technology, and 2.4 Ghz frequency, found in many cordless phones. That was an initial yellow flag: Wi-Fi networks and cordless phones don’t always work and play well together. In this case, though, my concerns proved unfounded. The Converge makes use of spectrum-hopping technology to avert such clashes, and I saw no discernible impact on my network. Remote Control That was a good thing, because I needed the network for the final piece of the puzzle: remotely controlling the music. With the Remote app, I used my iPhone to select songs, albums or playlists, skip or shuffle tracks and adjust the volume from any room in the house. The app, which works with both the Mac and Windows versions of Apple’s ubiquitous iTunes software, also lets you play podcasts and access your favorite Internet radio stations if you’ve organized them into an iTunes playlist. While Remote works from anywhere you can pick up your Wi-Fi network, the Converge signal is limited to a maximum indoor range of about 150 feet (46 meters) between transmitter and receiver, and walls and floors may diminish the distance. With the transmitter on the second floor of my house, I was able to pick up the signal in most rooms, except when I mounted the speaker on the far wall of the kitchen; moving it just a few feet, to a closer outlet, solved the problem. Easily Transportable At about three pounds, the speaker is easily transportable, and its AC power supply can be detached if you need to position it to pick up a signal or aim the sound. An on-off knob controls the volume, independent of the remote-control app. With its rugged plastic housing, it can be used outdoors, though you won’t want to leave it out when not in use. While I’m no audiophile, I found the speaker’s sound quality clean and straightforward, and more than adequate for the kind of casual use for which it’s intended. More demanding listeners will want to check out the rest of the Converge line, which includes a $99 receiver that works with an existing stereo system and a $149 amplified receiver for connecting to a pair of your own or Eos’s $99 bookshelf speakers. Eos says the transmitter will support up to four receivers, though I stopped at two. I did find myself wishing the gear looked a little nicer; black plastic and glowing blue antennas just aren’t my taste, I guess. And there are surely more elaborate and sophisticated audio solutions available. Still, for simplicity, functionality and affordability, Converge is hard to beat. ( Rich Jaroslovsky is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.) Click on “Send Comment” in the sidebar display to send a letter to the editor. To contact the writer of this column: Rich Jaroslovsky in New York at rjaroslovsky@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Wall Street Transaction Tax Proposed by U.S. Democrats to Fund Jobs Bill

December 3, 2009

By Ryan J. Donmoyer Dec. 3 (Bloomberg) — A group of congressional Democrats proposed taxing large transactions in stocks and derivatives, an idea that has received a cool reception from the Obama administration. Iowa Senator Tom Harkin , Oregon Representative Peter DeFazio and five other House Democrats proposed the measure, designed to raise $150 billion a year to fund a new jobs bill and help close the federal budget deficit . “Let me be blunt: We need new revenue,” Harkin said at a news conference today in Washington. He called a tax the “most painless way” to raise revenue and stop risky market speculation. “Ask not what America can do for Wall Street, but what Wall Street can do for America,” Harkin said. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said there’s a “great deal of merit” in imposing a tax on large stock transactions as long as other major nations do it as well. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said during a Nov. 7 meeting of Group of 20 finance ministers in St. Andrews, Scotland, that a “day-by-day” tax on speculation is “not something we’re prepared to support.” Harkin said he will introduce the bill in the Senate next week with Senator Bernard Sanders , a Vermont independent who caucuses with Democrats. 0.25 Percent for Stocks The measure would be based on legislation DeFazio proposed in the House that would apply a tax of 0.25 percent or 25 basis points to stock transactions in excess of $100,000, and a levy of 0.02 percent or 2 basis points on derivatives including futures, options, swaps and credit default swaps. Harkin and DeFazio said the proposed new levy is backed by more than 200 economists, the AFL-CIO labor union federation and business leaders including Warren Buffett and Vanguard Group Inc. founder John C. Bogle , now president of Bogle Financial Markets Research. “I endorse the Harkin-DeFazio bill in principle,” Bogle said in an e-mail released by the lawmakers. He urged “careful study” to find appropriate tax rates. His office confirmed the authenticity of the e-mail. Business groups including the Business Roundtable and the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association oppose the bill. “Nearly every American would be impacted by a new transaction tax, no matter how small it is,” said Steve Bartlett , president and chief executive officer of the Business Roundtable. ‘Wrong Policy’ Kenneth Bentsen , executive vice president for the securities industry group, called the bill “the wrong policy at the wrong time.” He said it would make capital more expensive, hurt U.S. companies’ ability to compete globally and increase compliance burdens. Christopher Bergin , president and publisher of Tax Analysts, a Falls Church, Virginia publisher of tax information, predicted the lobby groups will successfully fend off the proposal. “Willie Sutton robbed banks because that’s were the money is,” Bergin said. “There’s certainly money” in taxing stock and derivative trades, “but this bank is just too well guarded” by lobbyists who oppose the idea, he said. Clint Stretch , a tax policy specialist at the Deloitte Tax LLC consulting firm, also said lawmakers will be reluctant to do anything that would be perceived as affecting liquidity. “The current state of the economy and market does not suggest that Congress will want to risk having an adverse impact on markets,” he said. Theodore Seto , a tax law professor at the Loyola Law School of Los Angeles, said supporters of the tax believe it will make markets more efficient by reducing risks created by the rise of computer-oriented trading. ‘More Information’ The tax “reduces the pressure to operate with less information,” Seto said. “Markets that operate on the basis of more information are much less likely to produce the kinds of self-reinforcing bubbles that led to this past crash.” The tax would be refunded for tax-favored retirement accounts, mutual funds, education savings accounts and health savings accounts. DeFazio told reporters he thinks the idea will gain traction even though the Obama administration is resisting it because it will appeal to ordinary Americans in an era of government bailouts of investment banks. “Mr. Geithner is just protecting the interest of Wall Street,” DeFazio said. He also said he thought the proposal would catch on around the globe. “There’s pretty much consensus around the world that derivatives are not a good thing” when used to speculate, he said. To contact the reporter on this story: Ryan Donmoyer at rdonmoyer@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Obama Divides Lawmakers With 2011 Target for Afghanistan Troop Withdrawal

December 1, 2009

By Viola Gienger and James Rowley Dec. 2 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama’s decision to set a target date for starting U.S. troop withdrawals from Afghanistan divided lawmakers just as he is seeking to consolidate support for his war plan. Obama, outlining his strategy to increase the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan by 30,000 to almost 100,000 next year, said yesterday he would then begin a drawdown in July 2011, depending on security conditions. The reductions would start about 18 months after the first reinforcements arrive. Republicans in Congress, while supportive of a troop increase, expressed concern the schedule wouldn’t give the NATO coalition the time needed to accomplish the mission, which Obama described as halting the momentum of Taliban rebels. Most Democrats embraced the date as a possible way out of the war. “With that timeline, I think that puts them at a real disadvantage,” said Representative Buck McKeon of California, the most senior Republican on the House Armed Services Committee . “That threatens to undercut the whole mission.” Obama said the extra troops would help accelerate the withdrawal from Afghanistan. The president is aiming for a balance between a concerted effort to win the war against the Taliban, which harbored al-Qaeda before the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, and assurances for skeptics that the U.S. won’t become mired in the conflict. ‘Encourage Our Enemies’ Senator John McCain of Arizona, Obama’s Republican rival for president last year, said the date was “arbitrary” and might “dispirit our friends and encourage our enemies.” At least one Democrat, Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, said the 2011 target was unrealistic given the goal of transferring authority to the Afghans. U.S. military commanders overseeing the war said they could execute the plan Obama laid out. “I am very satisfied with the results,” said General David Petraeus , who oversees U.S. forces in a region that includes Afghanistan and Pakistan, as he deplaned from Air Force One after accompanying Obama to the speech at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, New York. Army General Stanley McChrystal , the U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, said Obama’s review gave him a “clear military mission and the resources to accomplish our task.” David Sedney , the deputy assistant secretary of defense for Afghanistan, told reporters the U.S. has “a very good expectation” that Afghan troops will be ready for more responsibility by July 2011. Overshadowing the war debate is division among Americans on the commitment to Afghanistan. A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll conducted Nov. 13-15 showed that 50 percent of Americans would support sending an additional 34,000 troops to Afghanistan and 49 percent would be opposed. Unity Appeal Obama appealed in his speech for a return to the national unity of purpose he said emerged from the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks. Afghanistan’s ambassador to Washington, Said Jawad , said Obama made clear the U.S. commitment isn’t open-ended. “It’s logical to expect an exit strategy considering the political and economic constraints here in the U.S.,” Jawad said in an interview. Democrats embraced the exit path. “By laying out a strategy that will begin to bring our mission to a close within the next 18 months, the president drew an essential distinction between his approach to the war and that of the previous administration,” Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said. Pelosi Position House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , who told reporters in September there wasn’t “a great deal of support for sending more troops to Afghanistan,” was noncommittal after Obama’s speech. Obama “articulated a way out of this war with the mission of defeating al-Qaeda and preventing terrorists from using Afghanistan and Pakistan as safe havens” to launch attacks on the U.S., Pelosi said. “The American people and the Congress will now have an opportunity to fully examine this strategy.” The potential for continuing divisions over the war illustrate how Obama will need to mount a sustained campaign to win public support, said Bruce Riedel , an analyst at the Brookings Institution . “He’s going to have to sell it,” said Riedel, who led a review of policy on Afghanistan and Pakistan for Obama earlier this year. “He’s going to have to persuade people that it’s working.” Deficit Concerns The struggling U.S. economy weighs on the war issue, as Obama noted in his speech. With the federal budget deficit forecast to be more than $1 trillion over the next two years, lawmakers from both parties have questioned how Obama will pay for the expanded commitment. Obama cautioned against a congressional debate specifically on the added costs of the surge — about $30 billion — and urged that it be included in a broader discussion of how to deal with the U.S. deficit , Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana said after the president met with lawmakers before his speech. “The president has made a strong case for his course of action,” said Lugar, a Republican, adding that he will seek more details during congressional hearings this week. About 12 hours after Obama finished his West Point remarks, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton , Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen were due on Capitol Hill to answer to lawmakers. To contact the reporters on this story: Viola Gienger in Washington at vgienger@bloomberg.net ; James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net .

Read the full article →

Taxing Wall Street Transactions Today Wins Support for Keynes Idea of 1936

November 30, 2009

By Yalman Onaran Nov. 30 (Bloomberg) — John Maynard Keynes proposed a tax on financial transactions in the middle of the Great Depression, and another economist, James Tobin , revived the idea in the 1970s as a way to counter currency market speculation. Neither effort gained much acceptance. Now, a growing number of economists and politicians argue that it’s time for a levy on trading stocks, bonds, currencies and derivatives. U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown said on Nov. 7 that a transaction tax might compensate for the billions of dollars that the public has spent on bank bailouts. Government officials in France, Germany and Austria have voiced their backing. U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner answered Brown a day later, saying the tax was not something the U.S. would support. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , on the other hand, says the idea has “substantial currency” among congressional Democrats. Even if political consensus on a transaction tax is lacking — and Brown and Pelosi both say it would need to be implemented everywhere or not at all — the idea is attracting supporters worldwide. “It’s akin to a gambling tax on socially negative activities,” says Andrew Sheng , a former chairman of the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission who now advises Chinese bank regulators. Trades that created big risks to the financial system, with the fewest benefits to the economy, might be taxed out of existence, Sheng says. That’s because the tax would boost the cost of complex financial products, such as collateralized-debt obligations, that have several layers of transactions — and slim profit margins, he says. $76 Billion The funds raised would be substantial: With stock and currency markets ringing up about $900 trillion in turnover each year and derivatives another $625 trillion, a tax of 0.005 percent might raise $76 billion annually, Sheng estimates. Allan Meltzer , a professor of political economy at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, says such a tax would harm markets. Traders who provide liquidity might be pushed out. “Most trading is for efficiency,” says Meltzer, author of a comprehensive history of the U.S. Federal Reserve. “Why reduce the trading and make the markets less accessible?” Proponents offer the transaction tax as a next step in crafting an appropriate policy response to the financial meltdown , complementing efforts such as boosting bank capital and increasing transparency. Adair Turner , chairman of the U.K.’s Financial Services Authority, put the transaction tax back into the public eye. He dismayed London bankers by arguing in a Sept. 22 speech that they should focus more on socially useful services and less on speculation, profit and fat paychecks. Strauss-Kahn While Turner had few backers initially, support for the idea has been building. An opinion poll, published by the Guardian newspaper last week, said 53 percent of voters in the U.K. back the idea, with only 28 percent opposing it. Also last week, the head of the International Monetary Fund , who was initially skeptical of the concept, said his organization would study the feasibility of it in curbing financial excess. “This is an interesting issue,” IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn said in a conference in London. “The financial sector should contribute to the cost of the rescue and to limiting recourse to public financing in the event of a future crisis.” A month earlier he had dismissed it as a “very simplistic” idea that would be difficult to implement. Keynes’s Proposal Although the idea now in circulation is sometimes called a Tobin tax, it actually goes beyond the levy on currency transactions that the late American economist proposed. Keynes’s suggestion in his 1936 magnum opus, “The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money,” might be closer to the current concept. “The introduction of a substantial government transfer tax on all transactions might prove the most serviceable reform available, with a view to mitigating the predominance of speculation over enterprise in the United States,” Keynes wrote in his book. Vincent Reinhart , a former U.S. Federal Reserve economist, says the collapse of the financial system in 2008 left the public so angry that a proposal as radical as a transaction tax just might get done. “Politically, such a tax sounds very attractive right now,” says Reinhart, who is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank. “Especially in Europe, there’s support for it.” Practical Problems Some practical challenges may stand in the way. Reinhart questions whether a tax would do what it’s supposed to. Raising the cost of a transaction in the stock market, for example, might shift trading to options, he says, while imposing taxes on options might not garner as much revenue, because derivatives cost a fraction of the underlying security. Meltzer at Carnegie Mellon reasons that the best way to discourage excessive risk taking by large banks is to force them to hold more capital and to eliminate the government’s implicit too-big-to-fail guarantee. Requiring banks to carry a new type of insurance might be a better way of making them pay, says Viral Acharya , a finance professor at New York University and a co-author of “Restoring Financial Stability: How to Repair a Failed System” (John Wiley & Sons, 2009). He says that insurance pegged to the threat a bank poses to the financial system would both discourage risky behavior and create a pool of money to pay for a bank rescue. The success of deposit insurance, created in the U.S. in response to bank failures during the Depression, gives this idea weight, he says. Banking Insurance Even though most of this insurance would need to be provided by governments, a portion might come from private companies — helping to set an appropriate price. In some ways this insurance would be similar to credit-default swaps. The key difference, Acharya says, is that payouts would go to cover a bank’s mistakes rather than reward speculators. The credit crisis has shown that governments must protect the banking system, and such insurance would simply make the guarantee explicit and make banks pay for it, Acharya says. “Governments should say upfront the insurance comes from them,” he says. When Keynes broached the idea of a transaction tax, he did so because he said that the financial world had become one big casino and had lost sight of the role it should play in society. Three-quarters of a century later, the U.K.’s Turner makes the same complaint. “We need radical change,” he said in his September speech . His prescription? Keynes’s tax. To contact the reporter on this story: Yalman Onaran in New York at yonaran@bloomberg.net .

Read the full article →

U.S. Treasury Confident Congress Will Increase $12.1 Trillion Debt Ceiling

November 13, 2009

By Rebecca Christie Nov. 13 (Bloomberg) — The Obama administration is confident Congress will raise the country’s debt limit by year end to avert a showdown similar to the one that shuttered parts of the government in 1995, administration officials said. The White House wants an increase of at least $1 trillion to $1.5 trillion, according to a person familiar with the deliberations between lawmakers and the administration. Record budget deficits are pushing the national debt closer to the $12.1 trillion statutory limit. The administration’s request, higher than a proposed increase already passed in the House of Representatives, would get the government through the November 2010 midterm congressional elections without needing another increase. Earlier this month, Treasury officials acknowledged they’ll need more borrowing room by year-end to avoid market disruptions. “Market participants still remain on edge, especially since many have concerns over the rising debt loads that were kicked off this year,” said George Goncalves , chief fixed- income rates strategist in New York at primary dealer Cantor Fitzgerald LP. The administration officials said the White House is open to any legislative vehicle that will raise the debt limit, by any amount. Although the Obama administration has pledged to bring deficits down to “sustainable” levels in the longer term, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has focused recently on the need to keep up spending on economic assistance programs until the unemployment rate, which reached a 26-year high of 10.2 percent in October, comes down. TARP Savings To rein in the 2010 deficit, the administration will save as much as it can from unused portions of the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, another administration official said. Treasury data show that the administration has more than $200 billion in uncommitted TARP funds. One Treasury official said the memory of the 1995 budget standoff should be motivation to avoid another showdown. In that confrontation, then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich battled with the White House over federal budget bills, forcing President Bill Clinton to shut the government down temporarily. With the economy still in the early recovery stage, Congress understands the stakes and doesn’t want to fuel investor concern, the official said. Republicans in Congress are seeking to link the debt limit to the debate over health-care spending, while Democrats prefer to keep the two issues separate. The Senate Budget Committee has proposed a commission to look into the nation’s fiscal health, which backers say should be a condition of any debt limit increase. ‘Not Right’ “We’re seeing deficits projected for the next 10 years of over a trillion dollars a year,” said Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, the ranking Republican on the Budget Committee, in congressional comments last week. “It’s not sustainable. It’s not fair, and it’s not right.” Treasury debt-management director Karthik Ramanathan told bond market participants in Washington last week to expect another year of government debt sales of $1.5 trillion to $2 trillion in fiscal year 2010, which began Oct. 1, according to minutes of the meeting. For fiscal year 2009, which ended Sept. 30, the U.S. racked up a $1.4 trillion deficit, and the Congressional Budget Office in August predicted a deficit this year of about the same size. Treasury officials also have said they have less maneuvering room than in the past. Tactics such as tapping federal retirement funds would free up roughly $150 billion – about the same amount as the interest payments that come due on Dec. 31. Temporary Measures “Depending on the date that we hit the debt limit, they could last days or at most weeks,” compared with five or six months in previous debt-limit impasses, said Matthew Rutherford , deputy assistant Treasury secretary for federal finance, in a press conference last week. Forecasting a precise date for a debt-ceiling collision is difficult because the government’s cash flows are “volatile,” the Treasury said last week, adding that it would keep markets and lawmakers notified of developments. The department said it could need extra immediate cash because there’s so much uncertainty surrounding incoming taxes and outgoing spending on fiscal stimulus and financial market stabilization programs. “Debt ceiling showdowns used to be long, drawn-out affairs,” said Louis Crandall , chief economist at Wrightson ICAP in Jersey City, New Jersey. “Things come to a head much faster when your cash burn rate averages more than $100 billion a month.” To contact the reporter on this story: Rebecca Christie in Washington at rchristie4@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Clinton Warns Senate on Failure as Timeline for Health-Care Overhaul Slips

November 11, 2009

By James Rowley and Kristin Jensen Nov. 11 (Bloomberg) — Former President Bill Clinton warned senators against repeating history and failing to act quickly on an overhaul of the U.S. health system even as top lawmakers suggested that Congress won’t finish work this year. “It’s not important to be perfect here, it’s important to act, to move, to start the ball rolling,” Clinton told reporters after speaking to Senate Democrats on Capitol Hill yesterday. “The worst thing to do is nothing.” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is trying to bridge differences over whether the plan should include a new government-run insurance program, whether it should require employers to cover workers and how to pay for covering tens of millions of uninsured Americans. Related issues including abortion are also slowing down work in the chamber. Reid yesterday said he plans to bring legislation to the floor next week. Several weeks of debate would follow before a vote and then the House and Senate would have to work together on a compromise, a process that might take months. The Senate adjourned last night until Nov. 16. “Our goal is to make sure we get it out of the Senate this year,” Illinois Senator Dick Durbin , the chamber’s No. 2 Democrat, told reporters yesterday. That wouldn’t meet a target set by President Barack Obama for his signature domestic effort. Pressed on the goal by reporters on Nov. 9, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said nothing had changed. End of Year “The president wants to sign health care before the end of the year,” Gibbs said. Lawmakers are trying to craft a bill to cover uninsured Americans while curbing medical costs. Their proposals for new purchasing exchanges, subsidies and a requirement that all Americans have coverage would cost more than $800 billion over 10 years and represent the biggest changes to U.S. health care in more than four decades. Reid is unlikely to bring a measure to the floor until Senate leaders get an estimate of the measure’s price tag from the Congressional Budget Office, Durbin said. “He doesn’t know” when that will happen, Durbin said. ‘And neither do I.” Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, said proper consideration of the bill would push action into 2010. “Surely, we can spend a couple of months letting the American people weigh in,” Alexander said. ‘Get It Done’ Clinton, 63, warned senators that critics will have an easier time distorting their health-care plans if they fail to get something to Obama’s desk in a timely manner, said Senator Ben Cardin , a Maryland Democrat. Clinton said his own efforts in the 1990s were distorted after the fact, Cardin said. “If you don’t get it done, people will claim that it is what it is not,” Cardin said of Clinton’s remarks. “If you get it done, it will prove that what they said was wrong.” Clinton’s attempt to pass health-care legislation collapsed in 1994, contributing to the Democratic Party’s loss of control of Congress and setting back his domestic agenda. With the prospect of support from just one Republican so far, Maine Senator Olympia Snowe , Reid needs consensus in a caucus of 58 Democrats and two independents. They control 60 of the Senate’s 100 votes, the number needed to shut off debate in order to act on legislation. Leaders have received “no final commitments” from Democrats about voting for the bill “until people have a chance to review it carefully,” Durbin said. “Clearly, we are going to make some changes as we talk to the caucus,” he said. Cracks in Bloc Already there are cracks in the party’s bloc of votes. Democratic Senators Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas won’t commit to even allowing debate to start. Among other things, both have criticized idea of the government-run insurer, known as the public option. Snowe also opposes the public option, saying it should be triggered only if the private market fails to lower premiums within a certain period of time. Asked if leaders are considering a trigger, Durbin said “there are lots possibilities, and I don’t know what they’ll be.” Durbin and Reid said they expect to resolve differences over restrictions on government financing of abortion. The House legislation bans the government insurance program from paying for abortions and prohibits subsidies for the purchase of private insurance covering the procedure. The bill passed 220-215 on Nov. 7. Distraction Seen House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said yesterday the abortion debate is a distraction meant to delay a health-care overhaul. “We will continue to try and find common ground,” Pelosi, a California Democrat, told reporters in San Francisco. Reid said the legislation he proposes in the Senate will “ensure that no federal funds are used for abortion.” He said he’ll seek a compromise “that is fair and reasonable” to maintain the legal status quo on abortion. Durbin said senators are committed to acting on the overall bill as soon as they can and said he has talked to Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel , about timing. “They want us to finish quickly,” Durbin said. “We do too, but some of these things are beyond our control.” To contact the reporters on this story: James Rowley in Washington t jarowley@bloomberg.net ; Kristin Jensen in Washington at kjensen@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

House Passes $1 Trillion Legislation to Overhaul U.S. Health Care System

November 8, 2009

By Kristin Jensen and James Rowley Nov. 7 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. House passed legislation with the most far-reaching changes to the nation’s health-care system in four decades, requiring all Americans to get coverage, and subjecting insurers to new restrictions and competition from a government program. The House voted 220-215 today to approve the measure , which would cost more than $1 trillion over 10 years. Just one Republican, Representative Joseph Cao of Louisiana, backed the plan, and 39 Democrats broke ranks to oppose it. Lawmakers hailed the step as a historic follow-on to the 1965 creation of the Medicare program for the elderly and disabled. They said the bill would cover 36 million uninsured Americans and curb costs. New rules would prevent insurers from denying coverage to people with preexisting conditions, and seniors would get help obtaining preventive care and medicine. “This bill is change that the American people urgently need,” President Barack Obama said earlier in the day after meeting with Democrats on Capitol Hill. With the House vote, Congress moved closer than ever to a goal of universal access to health care. Former President Bill Clinton and first lady Hillary Clinton , now secretary of state, never got past committee work in the early 1990s. Spotlight on Senate The spotlight now moves to the Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid is struggling to get the votes to even begin debate on his version. Once the Senate passes a bill, lawmakers from each chamber would work together on a compromise for a new round of votes, a process likely to take months. Reid this week wouldn’t commit to meeting Obama’s goal of signing a health-care bill into law by the end of the year. Already, that would have represented a five-month gap between the votes of four of the five congressional committees assigned to work on health care and a White House signing ceremony. The House vote came after a daylong session, in which a battle over funding for abortion threatened to derail the bill’s chances, and disputes over everything from illegal immigrants to the cost of the legislation peeled away enough Democrats to make the balloting close. Republican John Boehner called it a “big government takeover of health care.” The margin was narrow enough to prompt last-minute lobbying from Obama, who pressed lawmakers to “rise to this moment, answer the call of history” and pass his signature initiative. Dingell’s Gavel The day began with a raucous debate over the ground rules for considering the legislation. Michigan Representative John Dingell , 83, presided over the proceedings, wielding the same gavel he used during the debate that led to the creation of Medicare to calm down lawmakers shouting over each other. After more than 5 1/2 hours of general debate, the lawmakers turned to an amendment from Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak that would have further limited the use of federal dollars for abortions. It passed on a 240-194 vote . They then rejected a Republican alternative bill by a 258- 176 vote. For most of the year, the biggest fight has been over the creation of a government-run insurance program, the so-called public option, to compete with private insurers such as Hartford, Connecticut-based Aetna Inc. Public Option House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , a California Democrat, had to scale back her original proposal for the public option. Lacking votes for tying the program’s reimbursements to doctors to the lower rates paid by Medicare , she settled on a plan that would instead negotiate rates with providers, as private insurers do. The Senate version calls for a similar program that would allow states to opt out. Still, Reid faces opposition from Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman , an independent aligned with the Democrats, and Snowe, the only Republican to vote for any proposal so far. At least four Senate Democrats have also been critical of the idea. Reid needs all 60 votes controlled by the Democratic caucus to even begin debate, and it’s not certain he has them. He would then need 60 votes again to cut off debate and take a vote, amid battles over the public option and new taxes to pay for the expanded insurance coverage for Americans. “We’re going to do this legislation as expeditiously as we can, but we’re going to do it as fairly as we can also,” Reid told reporters on Nov. 3. Both the House and Senate bills require Americans to get insurance, add new restrictions on insurers and encourage greater use of preventive medicine, electronic records and research on the effectiveness of treatments. 2010 Provisions Many of the House provisions take effect in 2010. The elderly would face no co-payments for preventive care and get help paying for drugs. The uninsured would get temporary aid until new purchasing exchanges are created, and young adults could stay on their parents’ plans until they turn 27. House leaders also included an expansion of the government Medicaid program for the poor, which may cost the federal government less than providing subsidies to help people buy insurance. The plan would expand eligibility to people whose incomes are 150 percent of the official poverty level. To finance their bill, House Democrats opted for a surtax on couples who make more than $1 million a year. They would also impose a 2.5 percent excise tax on medical devices that the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation estimates would raise $20 billion over 10 years. The House bill also requires that employers offer insurance or pay a penalty, with exemptions for businesses with payrolls of less than $500,000. That is a subject of debate in the Senate, where the chamber’s health committee included a mandate and the finance panel rejected it. New Fees, Limits The bill would make large businesses that self-insure their employees pay $2 billion in fees over the next decade. And it adopts a Senate proposal to set a $2,500 limit beginning in 2011 on contributions to tax-advantaged Flexible Spending Accounts used to pay out-of-pocket medical costs. To address rising costs, the bill calls for the independent Institute of Medicine to make recommendations on how to fix the Medicare payment system and calls for Medicare to negotiate prices for drugs, potentially driving down prices. Drugmakers managed to keep the negotiation provision out of the legislation that created the Medicare prescription drug program in 2003 and have fought it this year. The industry reached an agreement, now under fire, with Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus and the White House to pledge $80 billion to the overhaul effort and avert further contributions. To contact the reporters on this story: James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net ; Kristin Jensen in Washington at kjensen@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Reid Gambles on Democratic Unity in Senate With Push for Public Option

October 27, 2009

By Laura Litvan and James Rowley Oct. 27 (Bloomberg) — U.S. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid is gambling that he can keep his party’s votes together as he pushes for a government-run health-insurance program that’s likely to alienate the one Republican on his side. Reid said he will ask the Senate to vote for the so-called public option that would allow states to opt out, as part of broader health-care legislation. That idea is opposed by Senator Olympia Snowe , the only Republican to support any of the bills before Congress to remake the medical system. With no room for error, Reid expressed confidence he would be able to corral all 60 votes the Democrats control to allow debate to start on legislation, President Barack Obama’s top domestic priority. The public option has divided lawmakers, drawing opposition from every Senate Republican and some Democrats who say it would undermine the private market. “We clearly will have the support of my caucus to move to this bill and start legislating,” Reid, a Nevada Democrat, told reporters in Washington yesterday. He called the public option “an important way to ensure competition” for insurers. Lawmakers are trying to cover tens of millions of uninsured Americans while curbing rising medical costs. Their proposals, including new purchasing exchanges, subsidies and a requirement that all Americans have insurance, would represent the biggest changes to U.S. health care in four decades. Melding Bills Reid is seeking a Congressional Budget Office cost estimate for the proposal. He has been melding a measure passed by the Senate health committee in July with an $829 billion plan approved by the finance panel on Oct. 13. The health panel included a public option; the finance committee rejected it. Illinois Senator Richard Durbin , the No. 2 Senate Democrat, said he didn’t know if leaders had enough votes to bring legislation to the floor. Reid’s spokesman, Jim Manley , said Reid was “within striking distance” of getting 60 votes. Reid’s decision on the public option risks the loss of Republican support that Obama and Democrats such as Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus have sought for months, wooing Snowe especially. Baucus said as recently as Sept. 29 that he saw no way for a public option to pass. Snowe said last week she would vote against allowing Democrats to bring a bill with a public option to the floor. She favors triggering the plan only if the private insurance market fails to lower premiums. ‘Deeply Disappointed’ “I am deeply disappointed,” Snowe said in a statement after Reid’s press conference yesterday. A trigger “could have been the road toward achieving a broader bipartisan consensus.” Asked by reporters if she felt deflated by Reid’s move after having been courted by Democrats for months, Snowe said, “nothing surprises me in the political process.” While she pledged to continue meeting with moderate Democrats, she said the public option “constrains us for those who don’t support that type of approach.” Without Snowe, Reid can’t afford to lose a single Democrat and may have to accept changes. One Democrat critical of the public option, Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson , has said he wouldn’t support legislation without Republican votes. “I certainly am not excited about a public option where states would opt out,” Nelson said on CNN’S “State of the Union” program on Oct. 25. He said he prefers letting states decide to opt in. Nelson’s Vote Nelson said he would decide whether to vote for allowing debate to proceed once he has seen a specific proposal. His office referred to the CNN interview when asked for a comment. Two other Democrats, Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln and Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu , have criticized the public option. Landrieu said last week she’s hopeful for compromise. Lincoln says she might join with Republicans to block debate on legislation she didn’t support. Reid has been under pressure to include a public option from most Democrats in the chamber and from unions. Durbin said Reid had considered Snowe’s trigger idea. “Unfortunately, it’s a zero-sum situation,” Durbin said. “There were some who felt that it just didn’t go far enough.” Under the proposal, states could opt out of the public plan in 2014. Senators are still deciding whether to require states to participate for at least a year or two, Manley said. Seed Money The bill will also include seed money for nonprofit health-care cooperatives, Reid said. States that opt out of the public option wouldn’t be eligible, Manley said. Reid’s decision may clear the way for more cooperation between the Senate and House, which has a public option in its version of the legislation. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters on Oct. 23 that she “didn’t think there’s much problem” with allowing states to opt out. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said today that Democratic leaders in that chamber intend to bring their health legislation to the floor next week. “A bill is possible this week,” the Maryland Democrat told reporters. “That would be our objective as we want to consider it next week.” Reid, when asked why he would take a chance of alienating Snowe, expressed frustration with the partisanship of the Senate, and insisted that after years of a moderate Republican tradition in the chamber he can now “count them on two fingers.” “We hope that Olympia will come back,” Reid said. “She’s a very good legislator. I’m disappointed that the one issue, the public option, has been something that’s frightened her.” To contact the reporters on this story: Laura Litvan in Washington at +1- llitvan@bloomberg.net ; James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

U.S. Senate Vote on Extending Unemployment Benefits Could Come Next Week

October 9, 2009

By Brian Faler Oct. 9 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. Senate may vote as soon as next week to extend unemployment benefits after Democratic lawmakers resolved a dispute over how to distribute benefits across states with varying jobless rates. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid , a Nevada Democrat, announced a compromise plan yesterday that would extend aid to all states for at least 14 weeks. The hardest-hit states, with unemployment rates topping 8.5 percent, would get a 20-week extension. “This agreement recognizes the need to extend unemployment benefits for workers in every state,” Reid said in a statement. “Our compromise recognizes that workers in the hardest-hit states have even greater challenges finding work and are in the greatest need of assistance.” Reid said he wants the vote on the measure to occur next week. The plan would distribute benefits more widely than legislation approved last month by the House that focused only on those states with the nation’s worst unemployment. The House Bill would extend benefits for 13 weeks in states with jobless rates of at least 8.5 percent. Democrats had said they hoped to forward the House measure to President Barack Obama before 400,000 Americans exhausted benefits at the end of September. The plan ran into opposition, though, from 17 senators whose states would have been excluded. September’s Figure The national unemployment rate in September was 9.8 percent, the highest since 1983, according to the Labor Department. Also, long-term joblessness hit the highest level last month in at least a half-century, according to the Labor Department. The share of the unemployed who were out of work for at least six months reached 35.6 percent in September, the most since the agency began keeping statistics in 1948. More than 5.4 million people have been unemployed for at least 27 weeks, the agency said. About 1.3 million people will exhaust their benefits by the end of this year, according to the National Employment Law Project. “Unemployed workers use these benefits to buy essentials and pay the bills; extending unemployment benefits is one of the most effective actions we can take to stimulate the economy,” said Senator Jeanne Shaheen , a New Hampshire Democrat. Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona, the chamber’s No. 2 Republican, blocked the agreed-upon plan from coming up for a vote yesterday because he said his colleagues didn’t have enough time to study it. “I have no doubt that at the appropriate time we’ll be able to work out some kind of agreement,” said Kyl. “But our side is going to need some time to look at it.” Lawmakers are considering other actions amid the widening job losses. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , a California Democrat, said Democrats may extend a $8,000 tax credit for first-time homebuyers that expires Dec. 1. She said lawmakers also are debating whether to expand tax breaks for companies. To contact the reporter on this story: Brian Faler in Washington at bfaler@bloomberg.net .

Read the full article →

Insurer Windfall Profit Tax Is Studied to Pay for Health Plan, Pelosi Says

October 8, 2009

By James Rowley Oct. 8 (Bloomberg) — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Democratic lawmakers are considering a windfall profits tax on health insurers to help finance an overhaul of the nation’s health-care system. The Morgan Stanley Health Care Payer Index of 11 insurance companies fell as much as 3.8 percent, led by a 7 percent decline for WellPoint Inc. , the largest in the group by enrollment. The intraday drop in the index was the biggest in three months. Pelosi told reporters today the idea was “very preliminary” and that she was asking Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel of New York to study it. Insurance companies and other parts of the health-care industry such as drugmakers have “much more they can put on the table to bring down the cost,” said Pelosi, of California. Representative Gerald Connolly , a Virginia Democrat, said the windfall profits tax was broached “as a trial balloon” by party leaders last night and again today. He said no details were given on the proposal, which he said would be “very popular” among lawmakers because insurers are the one health industry group that hasn’t pledged to make savings. ‘More Customers’ By expanding the number of insured Americans, insurance companies will become “even more profitable because we are going to create more customers for them,” Connolly said. In the Senate, health-care overhaul legislation cleared its latest obstacle yesterday when the Congressional Budget Office said a Senate finance panel measure would reduce the federal budget deficit while insuring millions more people. Pelosi said she will send a draft health plan with three versions of a government-run insurance option to the CBO for cost estimates. House Democratic leaders are working to merge health-insurance overhaul plans passed by three committees into a single version to be considered on the House floor. “When we get the response back from the CBO, then we’ll make our decision as to what legislation we bring to the floor,” the speaker said. “I want to be fair and give the most opportunity to all of the options that the members have put forth.” Her spokesman, Brendan Daly , said the draft legislation will be sent to CBO today or tomorrow. Pegging Rates Democrats have to decide whether to peg doctor and hospital reimbursements under the government-run plan to Medicare , the government insurance program for the elderly, or require the plan to negotiate rates. Medicare-tethered rates would save $110 billion and negotiated rates would save $25 billion, according to an earlier Congressional Budget Office estimate provided to the House. How to structure the public plan has divided the Democratic caucus and neither side has the votes to win a 218- vote majority of the House, lawmakers said. “Most of the caucus prefers a robust plan” tied to Medicare rates, said North Dakota Democrat Earl Pomeroy , who favors negotiated rates. He said Democrats, lacking Republican support for the legislation, don’t have enough votes for a plan tied to rates for Medicare. One option Pelosi has presented would allow negotiated rates unless they fail to hold insurance premiums down. If premiums go up too fast, the rates tied to Medicare would be implemented to reimburse doctors and hospitals. Another proposal would expand eligibility for Medicaid, the health-care program for low-income people. Cutting Costs “The irony is that” by expanding “the number of citizens that are getting Medicaid you actually dramatically reduce the cost of the bill,” said New York Democrat Anthony Weiner. “It’s actually cheaper for taxpayers to give someone 100 percent government-funded care under Medicaid than it is to pay additional premiums.” Pelosi also presented an alternative to reimburse doctors and hospitals at 10 percent to 15 percent below the average rate in particular regions of the country. With most Democrats favoring reimbursement tied to Medicare, “there was not wild enthusiasm for many of these” options, Pomeroy said. To contact the reporter on this story: James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Senate Tax on `Cadillac’ Health Plans Is Opposed by Most House Democrats

October 7, 2009

By Ryan J. Donmoyer Oct. 7 (Bloomberg) — About 3 out of 5 House Democrats say they oppose a Senate proposal to tax so-called Cadillac insurance plans, setting the stage for a clash over a provision that would fund about a quarter of health-care legislation. One-hundred fifty-seven of the chamber’s 256 Democrats signed a letter written by Representative Joe Courtney of Connecticut urging Speaker Nancy Pelosi to reject the 40 percent excise tax that’s likely to anchor the tax provisions in Senate legislation. The Senate proposal “is a non-starter for the supermajority of the House Democratic caucus,” Courtney said at a press conference today. He called the letter “a big warning flag” for congressional negotiators. The letter puts additional pressure on Pelosi as she searches for votes on the House legislation, which already differs from the Senate approach on such issues as including a government-run insurance option. The Senate proposal, which Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus has said was the product of negotiations with Republicans, would impose a 40 percent excise tax on insurance plans valued at more than $8,000 for individuals and $21,000 for families. The thresholds would be higher for retirees over age 55 and workers in high-risk occupations such as mining and law enforcement. Tax on Wealthy The House legislation would pay for about 40 percent of its legislation with a surtax on high-earners, including a special 5.4 percent levy on millionaires. The surtax would begin at 1 percent on incomes between $280,000 and $400,000 for individuals and $350,000 and $500,000 for married couples filing jointly. A 1.5 percent surtax would apply to incomes between $400,000 and $800,000 for single filers and $500,000 and $1 million for married couples. The 5.4 percent surtax would be assessed on every dollar earned above $800,000 for individuals and $1 million for couples. To contact the reporter on this story: Ryan Donmoyer in Washington at rdonmoyer@bloomberg.net ;

Read the full article →

Obama to Consider `All Options’ as Republicans Seize on Employment Losses

October 3, 2009

By Catherine Dodge Oct. 3 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama said he is exploring “any and all additional options” to bolster the economy as Republicans seized on a report showing accelerating job losses to criticize the administration’s polices. Obama yesterday called the report “a sobering reminder that progress comes in fits and starts and that we’re going to need to grind out this recovery step by step.” U.S. payrolls dropped by 263,000 last month and the unemployment rate ticked up to 9.8 percent — its highest level since 1983 — with losses extending from cash-strapped state and local governments to retailers and builders, a Labor Department report released yesterday showed. Speaking at the White House after returning from a trip to Copenhagen for what turned out to be a failed bid to bring the 2016 Olympics to Chicago, Obama said he and his advisers would look at “options and measures that we might take to promote job creation.” Those options don’t include a second stimulus package, according to an administration official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Rather, Obama is considering tax cuts, investments in infrastructure and additional aid to states and safety-net programs. The official said it was too soon to tell if the steps would be needed. Signs of Recovery Republicans said the jobs data are evidence Obama’s $787 billion stimulus plan and the administration’s other economic recovery programs are failing. The report put Obama on the defensive after previous economic reports signaled a recovery was gaining traction. It also could allow critics to shift the blame for the crisis to Obama and away from his predecessor, George W. Bush , said Christopher Rupkey , chief financial economist at Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd. in New York. “The focus and blame for this recession will start to shift to the current occupant of the Oval Office soon enough if these job losses continue to mount,” Rupkey said. Within minutes of the release of the government’s report, Republicans began e-mailing statements faulting Obama’s policies. “President Obama can either acknowledge that his economic experiments have failed and change course, or continue down this path and see even more Americans lose their jobs,” Michael Steele , chairman of the Republican National Committee , said in a statement. House Republican leader John Boehner , who criticized Obama for traveling to Copenhagen, said Democrats’ pledges that the stimulus package would create jobs are proving false. ‘Where Are the Jobs?’ “The president himself has said that job creation is the ultimate measure of economic performance,” Boehner said in a statement. “With roughly 3 million private-sector jobs lost since the ‘stimulus’ was enacted, Americans can’t be blamed for asking, ‘Where are the jobs?’” Jared Bernstein , chief economic adviser to Vice President Joe Biden , said “the recession would be much worse without those interventions.” Still, he added, the job picture is “worse than anyone thought.” Obama may soon suffer the political fallout from the recession, said political scientist Bruce Buchanan at the University of Texas in Austin. The president and his party would pay a price in next year’s congressional elections if the numbers continue to disappoint. ‘Drag on Midterms’ “There’s no escaping the economy as a drag on the midterms,” Buchanan said. Democrats at this point aren’t in danger of losing their majorities in Congress, he said. The political damage will be limited, “barring some peg to hang repetition on.” When Obama took office in January, the U.S. unemployment rate was 7.6 percent. September’s unemployment figure would have reached 10.4 percent if hundreds of thousands of Americans hadn’t opted out of the labor force because jobs are so hard to get, Rupkey said. Before taking office, Obama’s team predicted that passage of the stimulus plan would keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent, said John Pitney , a political-science professor at Claremont McKenna College in Claremont, California. “As long as the unemployment rate tops that level, the story isn’t ‘hope’ or ‘change’ but disappointment,” he said. In June, Obama said he expected the unemployment rate to reach 10 percent. Too Early Joseph LaVorgna , chief U.S. economist at Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. in New York, said it’s too soon to point the finger at Obama, who took office Jan. 20. The president’s policies and programs need to be in place for a year before they can be fairly judged, he said. “Regardless of your political stripes, you need to have some patience,” he said. “The question will be: How does the economy look in the first quarter of next year?” Biden said the unemployment figures show there’s “more work to do” on the economy. The administration “inherited an awful lot of baggage,” he said. Still he said he remains confident in the recovery and defended the stimulus package. “We are working hard on every front to turn this economy around,” Biden said. “As bad as things are, they would be far worse without the recovery plan,” he said. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , a California Democrat, said in a statement that even though the rate of job losses has begun to decline from the final months of the Bush presidency, Democrats “will not be satisfied until we have job growth.” For Related News and Information: Stories on the U.S. economy: TNI US ECO Bloomberg news on the U.S. labor market: TNI US LABOR BN To run a search on the recession: STNI USRECESSION

Read the full article →

Davidson Realty’s Speaker Series Addresses Bankruptcy, Wealth Editor Choice

October 3, 2009

clients each day, discussed bankruptcy options and the potential tax consequences of losing control of a piece of real estate. Davidson Realtys Fall Speaker Series continues next month with Short-term Solutions to Long-term Wealth; Why Now is the Time to

Read the full article →

John Pironti Joins Archer Technologies as Chief Information Risk Strategist

September 28, 2009

Acclaimed Author, Speaker and Industry Luminary to Play Key Role in Archer’s IT Governance, Risk and Compliance Solution Strategy

Read the full article →

Schumer, Rockefeller to Challenge Baucus on Health-Care Plan Public Optio

September 25, 2009

By Nicole Gaouette and Kristin Jensen Sept. 25 (Bloomberg) — Democrats will step up their challenge to Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus’s health-care-overhaul plan today, the opening salvo in a larger fight over the shape and scope of final legislation. Senators Charles Schumer of New York and Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia will push for a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers such as Indianapolis-based WellPoint Inc. While four other congressional panels have adopted that “public option,” Baucus, a Montana Democrat, has endorsed more limited health cooperatives instead in a bid to draw Republican support, antagonizing members of his own party. “Tomorrow is the opening day in the big fight,” Schumer, a member of the Senate leadership, said last night in an interview. “It will be a big fight all the way down to the wire. The health-care bill that will be signed by the president will have a good, strong, robust public option.” The public option is the most contentious element of President Barack Obama’s effort to lower costs and expand coverage to tens of millions of uninsured Americans. Republicans say a government-operated competitor would drive many private insurance companies out of business. While Baucus has yet to secure Republican support, he has come closer than any of the other panel chairmen to drafting a bipartisan measure and has won praise from the White House. Baucus has thwarted challenges to his bill from both parties during his committee’s debate on the legislation this week, though Democrats say the battle has just begun. ‘Weaker Health Plan’ Schumer and Rockefeller each intend to introduce amendments that would include a public option in the finance committee bill. Rockefeller said including a federally backed insurance alternative was crucial to bringing down costs. “A health-care plan without a public option is a much weaker health plan because insurance companies continue to rule,” Rockefeller said in an interview. He said a public plan would help keep costs down because it wouldn’t need to make a profit or spend money on marketing. “That’s going to force other companies to bring down costs over time,” he said. Schumer said that in 40 states, two insurance companies have more than half the market share. “It’s very, very important to have a competitor” for insurers, he said. He said he was confident he and other “progressives” would prevail in the end on the public option, even if their amendments fail in the finance committee. The overall Senate Democratic caucus is more supportive of a public option than some party members on the finance panel, he said. The finance committee consists of 13 Democrats and 10 Republicans. Under $900 Billion Baucus’s staff has estimated that after the changes to his bill this week, the measure will cost $900 billion over 10 years and reduce the federal budget deficit by $23 billion. Baucus yesterday fended off Democratic amendments that would have torpedoed a deal he made with drugmakers. A Republican proposal to kill a commission designed to set payment rates for the Medicare program for the elderly was defeated earlier this week. His victories in defending his proposal may bode well for final passage by the committee and lessen the chance that medical industries would organize to defeat it. Still, Baucus has faced criticism from Democrats for wooing Republicans, most of whom have responded to his efforts by attacking the proposal. Senator John Cornyn , a Texas Republican, told reporters the plan “spends too much money, borrows too much money and cuts too much out of Medicare benefits.” Revisiting Drug Deal In one of the livelier debates yesterday, Baucus helped defeat a proposal by Senator Bill Nelson , a Florida Democrat, that would have required drugmakers to provide $106 billion in rebates over 10 years. The amendment would have overridden an $80 billion agreement Baucus reached with the industry in June. “This might undermine our ability to pass comprehensive health-care reform this Congress,” said Senator Thomas Carper , a Delaware Democrat. He and Democratic Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey, whose state is home to drugmakers including Merck & Co. of Whitehouse Station, joined Baucus and panel Republicans in voting against the amendment. Legislation passed by three House committees is now being melded together. While all three contain the public option, lawmakers are debating whether to require the new program to negotiate rates with providers, as private insurers do, or peg them to the lower levels paid by Medicare. Blue Dogs The Blue Dog Coalition of fiscally conservative Democrats is pushing the requirement for negotiated rates. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , a California Democrat, said yesterday pegging the rates to Medicare is the best way to cut costs. “Where else would we go to bend the curve and pay for the legislation?” she said during a news conference in Washington. Pelosi also voiced opposition to triggering the implementation of the public option on whether the market for health-care coverage becomes more competitive. She called the trigger “an excuse for not doing anything.” A Senate finance panel bill would have to be combined with one produced by the chamber’s health committee before the final product goes for a floor vote. Floor passage got easier for the Democrats as Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick tapped Democrat Paul G. Kirk Jr . to fill the Senate seat of the late Edward Kennedy , who championed universal health care. With the appointment, Democrats will again control 60 votes in the Senate, enough to overcome Republican stalling tactics. Asked how Kirk will affect the health-care debate, Baucus called him “the perfect choice” because “he knows the Kennedy family so well. He’s very smart, he doesn’t grandstand.” To contact the reporters on this story: Nicole Gaouette in Washington at ngaouette@bloomberg.net Kristin Jensen in Washington at kjensen@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

As Acorn Falls, Democrats Would Be Wise to Duck: Kevin Hassett

September 21, 2009

Commentary by Kevin Hassett Sept. 21 (Bloomberg) — The group known as Acorn found itself at the center of a media storm last week, when two young filmmakers exposed the willingness of workers at several of its offices to offer assistance to a nascent prostitution ring. The video sent shockwaves through Washington. The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now is no fringe organization. It is woven into the political firmament at the highest levels. Over the past 15 years, Acorn has received more than $53 million from the U.S. government, according to a recent report by House Republicans. Democrats clearly appreciate the value they received for that funding. While specific budget lines seldom include the word Acorn, the group and similar nonprofits are eligible to receive as much as $8.5 billion in stimulus money alone. Consider also a list of the luminaries who serve on its advisory council, which now has responsibility to reform the organization. They include Chicago native John Podesta , who was co-chair of President Barack Obama’s transition; Andrew Stern , president of the Service Employees International Union; and Kathleen Kennedy Townsend , former lieutenant governor of Maryland and daughter of Robert F. Kennedy . This is clearly the A team. What exactly has Acorn done with its money? It’s hard to tell. Acorn purports to serve noble objectives, such as registering voters, but the organization is unbelievably complex and opaque. Acorn makes Enron seem like a simple organization. Disturbing Allegations The July 23 investigative report by the Republican staff of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform carried the provocative title, “Is Acorn Intentionally Structured as a Criminal Enterprise?” While the report undoubtedly has a political agenda, its allegations are as disturbing as the videos. Acorn has, the report asserts, evaded taxes, obstructed justice, abetted a cover-up of embezzlement, committed investment fraud, engaged in racketeering and submitted false filings to the Internal Revenue Service. Another allegation in the report might explain why Democrats looked the other way. The report says Acorn had close connections with numerous political campaigns, including Obama’s. “Each of these campaigns received financial and personnel-resource contributions from Acorn and its affiliates as part of a scheme to use taxpayer monies to support a partisan political agenda,” the report says. “These actions are a clear violation of numerous tax and election laws.” Moreover, as I wrote last year, Acorn employees have been engaged in voter scams that have likely generated countless fraudulent ballots for the Democrats. Fast Backtrack At least until last week, Democrats at the highest levels aggressively defended their political ally. That quickly changed. Last Monday, the Senate voted to sever federal funding for the organization. The House followed three days later. The U.S. Census Bureau also severed ties with Acorn, after planning to work in conjunction with the group on the 2010 census. These steps are too little, too late. Democratic leadership has been running interference for the organization for years. Last March, Democratic Representative John Conyers , chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, initiated a probe into Acorn’s activities, only to back off. In May, he issued a statement saying, “Based on my review of the information regarding the complaints against Acorn, I have concluded that a hearing on this matter appears unwarranted at this time.” In June, he explained , “The powers that be decided against it.” Although Conyers refrained from revealing which powers he had yielded to, John Fund reported in a recent Wall Street Journal column that a Republican representative’s six attempts to call a House vote to restrict Acorn’s federal funding were stopped by Speaker “ Nancy Pelosi’s hand-picked Rules Committee members.” Inquiry Stopped The stonewalling of Conyers wasn’t the first time that “the powers that be” called off investigations of Acorn. In 2008, Acorn’s national board assigned two members, Karen Inman and Marcel Reid, to conduct an internal investigation of allegations that the brother of an Acorn founder had embezzled almost $1 million. As part of the inquiry, Inman and Reid sought access to the group’s books. They were then dismissed from the board and stripped of their membership, shutting down the internal inquiry, according to a CNN report. The willingness of Democrats to steer tens of millions of taxpayer dollars, at least, to an organization that dismissed its own board members when they sought an internal audit isn’t much different from the willingness of Acorn members, so evident in last week’s videos, to abet prostitution. Now that the public is alerted, and stonewalling no longer is an option, the only question is, how far will the trail lead? Before it is done, the Acorn scandal could be as historically significant as Watergate. ( Kevin Hassett , director of economic-policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, is a Bloomberg News columnist. He was an adviser to Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona in the 2008 presidential election. The opinions expressed are his own.) To contact the writer of this column: Kevin Hassett at khassett@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Baucus Makes Last Health-Care Bid After Obama’s `Game Changer’ Address

September 14, 2009

By Kristin Jensen and Laura Litvan Sept. 14 (Bloomberg) — Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus will make one last attempt this week to win Republican support before he joins Democrats in a party-line effort to overhaul the U.S. health-care system. While Baucus said President Barack Obama’s Sept. 9 speech to Congress “breathed new life” into negotiations for a bipartisan compromise, the Montana Democrat vowed to present draft legislation with or without Republican votes, after struggling for months to reach a deal. Failure to achieve a bipartisan bill may undermine public support for the measure, some Republicans have warned. It would also raise the question of whether Obama and congressional leaders can keep enough Democrats unified to pass legislation. “There’s not very many moderates,” said James Thurber , director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University in Washington. “You move to the middle and you start losing people, significant people.” The finance committee is the last of five congressional panels to deal with legislation intended to cover more of the 46 million uninsured Americans and tame rising health-care costs , which account for a sixth of the U.S. economy. They are grappling with whether to create a government-run program to compete with private insurers , whether to require employers to cover workers and how to pay for the $900-billion plan. Democratic Divisions Congressional Republicans say the proposal is too costly and will add to the federal deficit, which is forecast to be $1.5 trillion next year. Besides failing to win over any Republicans, Democrats have faced divisions within their own party, particularly over the idea of the new government program, or “public option,” which some party members say would threaten private insurers. Obama may have helped get Democrats in line during his Sept. 9 speech. He exhorted a joint session of Congress to stop bickering and start cooperating. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , who had said she couldn’t pass a plan without a public option, said on Sept. 10 that she had no “non-negotiable” demands. Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson , one of the most vocal skeptics of the public option among Democrats, called Obama’s speech a “game changer.” Steve Hildebrand , Obama’s former deputy campaign manager who had criticized the president for not pushing liberal policies hard enough, echoed those remarks. ‘Both Parties’ “This is going to reach the public, and that’s going to reach senators of both parties,” said Senator Charles Schumer , a New York Democrat. A CBS News poll taken the day after Obama spoke found that 52 percent of Americans now approve of the way he’s handling health care, up from 40 percent the week before. And three- fifths of those who watched said they “mostly agree” with the plans the president presented, CBS said. In the speech, Obama focused on proposed changes such as barring insurers from refusing to accept new clients with preexisting conditions and limiting out-of-pocket expenses. He also embraced the idea of a tax on companies offering the most expensive insurance policies and left the door open to nonprofit member-run cooperatives instead of a public option. “It’s cannily similar to what we’re working on,” Baucus said. The Baucus plan would also require most Americans to get insurance or pay a fine, and allow states to form compacts to sell health insurance across state lines, a Republican priority. Sticking Points One sticking point for Baucus’s group is how an expansion of the Medicaid program for the poor affects state governments, which would pick up a portion of the costs. Baucus wants to extend Medicaid coverage to those with incomes 133 percent above the poverty level. That’s worried governors, some of whom will speak to committee members today, said Senator Kent Conrad , a North Dakota Democrat who’s in the negotiating group. Meanwhile, the group may go further than Obama in making changes to medical malpractice law — an effort designed to make an overhaul appeal more to Republicans. There is consensus to include “safe harbor” legal protection for doctors who can show they comply with “best practices,” and expanded use of arbitration to end disputes between patients and practitioners, Conrad said on Sept. 10. Without Republicans, the options for Democrats may be limited. They control 59 of the 99 current votes in the Senate, short of the 60 usually need to pass legislation. While they can use a budget process known as reconciliation that requires only a simple majority vote, it comes with limits that might require Democrats to significantly scale back their plans. ‘Obama = Socialism’ There are few signs that skeptics are coming on board. Thousands of protesters carrying signs saying “Obama = Socialism” and “Keep Government out of Health Care,” descended on Washington on Sept. 12 to oppose government spending and the rising U.S. budget deficit. Demonstrators expressing disapproval of plans to overhaul the health-care system, filled Pennsylvania Avenue near the White House and marched toward the U.S. Capitol. And Senator George Voinovich , an Ohio Republican seen as one possible vote for the Democrats, said he won’t support an expansion of health care at a time of soaring deficits. “I am very, very, very concerned about the fragility of our financial situation,” Voinovich told reporters on Sept. 10. 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 →

Congress Must End Bickering on Health Care, Pass Legislation, Obama Says

September 10, 2009

By Kristin Jensen and Julianna Goldman Sept. 10 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama , attempting to reignite his campaign to overhaul the U.S. health-care system, exhorted Congress to end its “bickering” and pass legislation, calling the status quo unacceptable. During a 47-minute speech to a joint session of Congress, Obama focused mainly on familiar arguments, saying changes such as restrictions on insurers would offer Americans “more security and stability.” In one of the few new twists, he embraced a plan to tax insurers on the most-expensive policies. The president struck a tone that was both conciliatory and unyielding, offering to hear ideas from both parties while saying he would waste no time on people who only want to kill the $900 billion plan. No Republican has supported any of the measures passed by four congressional panels. “The politically safe move would be to kick the can further down the road, to defer reform one more year, or one more election,” Obama said. “But that is not what the moment calls for. That’s not what we came here to do. We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it.” Obama spoke before today’s planned release of new figures tracking the number of uninsured Americans, which in 2007 stood at 46 million. The legislation is designed to cover a greater number of those people while also reining in rising health-care costs that account for a sixth of the nation’s economy. Republicans React Through much of the speech, Republicans remained seated and quiet as Democrats cheered and gave the president standing ovations. At one point, Representative Joe Wilson , a South Carolina Republican, shouted “you lie” at Obama. Wilson later apologized to the White House. Louisiana Representative Charles Boustany , a heart surgeon who gave the official Republican response, criticized Obama for supporting a government-run insurance option that would compete with private insurers. “We can do better, with a targeted approach that tackles the biggest problems,” Boustany said. The Senate Finance Committee is still seeking a bipartisan compromise, though panel chairman Max Baucus yesterday said he would present legislation next week even if Republicans don’t support it. “We’ve seen Washington at its best and at its worst,” Obama said of the health-care debate. He told lawmakers that failure isn’t an option and reminded them of the bipartisan work of the late Senator Edward Kennedy , a Massachusetts Democrat who led efforts to pass health-care legislation. Medical Malpractice As part of his bid to woo more Republicans, Obama said he’s pursuing a pilot project designed to prevent doctors from practicing “defensive medicine” by ordering unnecessary tests for fear of being sued. Curbing medical malpractice lawsuits is a leading goal of business groups that isn’t included in the congressional plans passed so far. Obama also spent time addressing what he called “all the misinformation,” saying he realized that many Americans had grown nervous about the plan. Rumors that the government would set up panels that would decide who lived and died is “a lie, plain and simple,” he said to applause. The president also said the proposals wouldn’t cover illegal immigrants, use federal dollars for abortions or lead to a government “takeover” of health care. He said his plan would require coverage of preventive care and create a purchasing exchange to allow people to shop for cheaper insurance. He said insurers would compete in the exchange to gain access to millions of new customers; all Americans would be required to get insurance, just as they do to drive cars. Funding Legislation The estimated $900 billion cost of the legislation would be spread out over 10 years, and would be less than the amount spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Obama said. He vowed again not to sign any measure that adds to the federal budget deficit . The White House hasn’t said how it will fully pay for the legislation. Obama yesterday for the first time embraced a proposal to tax insurers on their most-expensive health-care plans, which administration officials say would contribute more than $100 billion toward the financing of the overhaul. Earlier in the day, a senior White House official said two- thirds of the plan would be funded by savings from across the health-care industry, including from Medicare and Medicaid as well as from hospitals and drugmakers. While the official promised to provide specific ways in which the White House envisioned raising revenue for the remaining $200 billion or so, aides last night declined to go any further. Public Option Obama said the goal of widening coverage and lowering health-care costs could be achieved with a government-run program that would compete with insurers such as Hartford, Connecticut-based Aetna Inc . He stopped short of insisting on that so-called public option. “It is only one part of my plan, and shouldn’t be used as a handy excuse for the usual Washington ideological battles,” Obama said. “We should remain open to other ideas.” Republicans oppose the public option, and the proposal has divided Democrats. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she can’t pass legislation without it because many members insist it’s the only way to provide affordable, universal insurance. Yet it’s opposed by members such as Arkansas Representative Mike Ross , the chief health negotiator for a group of self-described fiscally conservative Democrats known as the Blue Dogs . Top Senate Democrats including Baucus say the public option can’t win passage in their chamber because of concern it will unfairly undercut the market for private insurers. Obama called on the lawmakers to overcome their disagreements and pass the legislation. “The time for bickering is over,” he said. “Now is the season for action.” To contact the reporters on this story: Kristin Jensen in Washington at kjensen@bloomberg.net ; Julianna Goldman in Washington at jgoldman6@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Boeing, Xerox, Business Groups Object to U.S. Health-Care Plan Over Costs

July 31, 2009

By John Hughes and Holly Rosenkrantz July 31 (Bloomberg) — Boeing Co. , Xerox Corp. and Caterpillar Inc

Read the full article →

Senate Faces Health-Overhaul Setback as Last Panel in U.S. House Wraps Up

July 31, 2009

By Laura Litvan and Kristin Jensen July 31 (Bloomberg) — Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus said his panel won’t be able to pass health-care legislation next week, dealing a setback to President Barack Obama and underscoring the rifts in Congress over the measure. “It’s clear there won’t be a markup next week,” Baucus told reporters after meeting with a group of lawmakers at the Capitol yesterday. “We are committed to finding a bipartisan solution as expeditiously as possible.” Baucus was facing pressure from fellow Democrats to schedule a committee vote before the Senate’s Aug

Read the full article →

Senate Health-Care Bill Deal Won’t Be Reached by August Recess, Enzi Says

July 30, 2009

By Laura Litvan and Kristin Jensen July 30 (Bloomberg) — One of three Republican senators working on bipartisan health-care legislation said he won’t agree to a plan before the Senate adjourns next week, setting back the measure’s progress even as it advanced in the House. “The bill is not ready for prime time, so I don’t know of any way it can be completed today or next week or before the August break,” Senator Mike Enzi , a Wyoming Republican and member of the finance committee, told reporters after leaving a meeting of Republicans. “There’s a train wreck that’s going to happen” if Democrats keep pushing for faster results, he said. Enzi’s comments matter because the finance committee is the only panel trying to fashion a plan that both parties can embrace to cover millions of uninsured Americans and curb health-care costs

Read the full article →

Grassley, Ross Forecast Health-Care Reform Passage by Congress This Year

July 24, 2009

By Ryan J. Donmoyer July 24 (Bloomberg) — The top Senate Republican drafting health-care legislation and a leader of House Democrats balking at the plan predicted there won’t be committee or floor votes by the August congressional recess, though they said a bill will eventually pass. Charles Grassley , the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said “it’s going to be difficult” for his panel to approve legislation in the next two weeks.

Read the full article →

Obama Open to Bank Fees for Risks, Surtax on Wealthy for Health-Care Plan

July 23, 2009

By Catherine Dodge and Edwin Chen July 23 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama signaled support for a proposal to impose fees on some of the nation’s largest financial firms to cover losses from risky transactions and avert another market meltdown. Obama, at a White House news conference last night, said the U.S. may need a mechanism similar to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

Read the full article →