Washington, U.S.A. — The Concord Coalition has said that new projections by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) underscore the need for Washington to commit to long-term fiscal reforms while dealing with this year’s looming budget decisions. Concord said the new numbers should also provide a sobering picture for this year’s candidates for federal office one that should temper election-year impulses to offer voters unrealistic promises.

“Once again, CBO’s projections show that if politicians don’t deviate from current policies, the country will continue down an unsustainable path that threatens to weaken the country, jeopardize our standard of living and leave our children and future generations with unmanageable levels of government debt,” said Robert L. Bixby, Concord’s executive director. “These numbers should frame this year’s political debates, and candidates from both parties would do well to spend some time studying their implications.”

“We need to put the country on a better fiscal path,” he added, “and candidates must clearly explain to voters — with specifics, not empty rhetoric — how they plan to do that. It will require setting priorities and making changes throughout the federal budget, and voters deserve to hear credible plans for doing this.”

CBO’s Update to the Budget and Economic Outlook estimates that the federal deficit for this fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, will total $1.1 trillion. While that is down slightly from CBO’s March projection, it will be the fourth consecutive deficit of more than $1 trillion. In addition, federal debt held by the public would reach 73 percent of GDP, which CBO notes is the highest level since 1950 and is “about twice the share that it measured at the end of 2007, before the financial crisis and recession.”

The CBO prepared two sets of projections. The first — the CBO’s “baseline projections” — assumes that current laws will generally remain in effect. An alternative scenario, however, looks at what could happen if Congress changes certain laws to continue many current policies. This alternative scenario presents a far more troubling long-term picture. Using the new CBO numbers, The Concord Coalition today updated its own “Plausible Baseline,” which applies what Concord considers to be realistic assumptions about future policy decisions. These projections are close to the CBO’s alternative scenario.

The budget office notes that the outlook for budget deficits, federal debt and the economy are “especially uncertain now because substantial changes to tax and spending policies are scheduled to take effect in January 2013.” These changes have often been called the “fiscal cliff” because if Congress allows all of them to take effect at once, it could cause substantial short-term economic damage, perhaps triggering a recession.

Under Concord’s Plausible Baseline, deficits between 2013 and 2022 would be much higher, averaging over 5 percent of GDP rather than 1 percent. Debt held by the public would grow to 93 percent of GDP by 2022, the highest level since shortly after World War II. As the budget office points out, that is not a sustainable level of federal debt.

“The differences between the CBO baseline and either CBO’s alternative scenario or Concord’s Plausible Baseline are striking, and they highlight the importance of the policy decisions that elected officials must confront before the end of the year,” Bixby said.

“While it is important to support the economic recovery, Washington should also be laying the groundwork for the big fiscal reforms that are necessary to put the federal budget on a more responsible track over the long term. It is possible to do both, but this will require more thoughtful policy-making and greater bipartisanship than we have seen in Washington recently.”

• Choices over tax policy, account for the bulk of the difference between the CBO baseline and the more plausible scenarios within the 10-year budget window. Extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, along with fixes to the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) and debt service costs would add $5.2 trillion to deficits over 10 years.
• In CBO’s baseline projections, mandatory spending will increase from 13.3 percent of GDP in 2013 to 14.4 percent in 2022. Nearly all of that increase would be due to the growth of just Social Security and Medicare — representing the effect of the baby boom generation entering retirement. CBO projects that by 2022 over half of the entire federal budget will be spent on just Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.
• For Medicare specifically, baseline growth is not attributable to health care inflation but instead to demographics.
• The mandatory spending category of income security, now higher than normal because of the recession, would drop by over 60 percent over the budget window (from 2.1 percent of GDP to 1.3 percent).
• Interest payments under the Concord Plausible Baseline would more than double, growing from 1.4 percent of GDP this year to 3.6 percent in 2022, and would cost over $5 trillion during the 10-year period.
• If the caps included in the Budget Control Act are adhered to, CBO projects that discretionary spending would decrease from 8.3 percent of GDP in 2012 to 5.6 percent by 2022 — the lowest level in the last 50 years.

For more about our plausible baseline visit:

http://www.concordcoalition.org/concord-coalition-plausible-baseline

Image Courtesy of  Third Way

The article CBO Projections Show Candidates Face Difficult Decisions appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Washington D.C., U.S.A. — Survivors of Iran-backed bombings in Beirut in 1983, at the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia in 1996, and families who lost loved ones in these attacks praised the House and Senate for coming to agreement on an Iran sanctions bill, especially for including language that clarifies and strengthens current law governing collection of court awarded judgments against Iran for its role in the two terrorist events.

The survivors and families from across the United States said they are now closer to being able to hold Iran responsible for murdering 241 American service men in Beirut and 19 at the Khobar Towers and for maiming many others at both locations.

“This legislation is a major step in making sure that Iran understands that it will have to face responsibility for killing and injuring Americans. No legislation or legal judgment can repair the awful damage Iran did to all of our families, but at least we can all know that our country stands behind us in seeking justice forIran’s murderous rampages,” said Lynn Smith Derbyshire National Spokesperson for the Beirut Families and whose brother, Marine Captain Vincent Smith, was killed in the bombing.

The American victims of Iranian terrorism groups commended Congress for taking a strong stand in an array of sanctions areas. They said they were particularly grateful to the Senate Banking Committee, especially Senators Robert Menendez (D-NY) and Senator Mark Kirk (R-IL); the House Foreign Affairs Committee; especially the Chair, Representative Ileana Ross-Lehtinen (R-FL); the House Financial Services Committee and Chair, Spencer Bachus; the House Judiciary Committee and Chair, Lamar Smith(R-TX); and Representative Robert Turner (R-NY) as well as the tireless efforts of House and Senate staffers for their collective efforts in assuring that provisions that will make it easier to make Iran pay for its terrorism were included in the omnibus bill.

The groups urged expeditious passage of a final bill and expressed hopes that President Obama will sign it into law promptly.

Image Courtesy of    Official U.S. Air Force

The article Beirut and Khobar Bombing Victims Praise Iran Sanctions Bill appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The Stop Online Piracy Act led to the voluntary blackouts of websites like Reddit and Wikipedia, while the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act gained President Obama’s promise of a veto.

The Cybersecurity Act of 2012 was originally introduced into the Senate on Feb. 12, “To enhance the security and resiliency of the cyber and communications infrastructure of the United States.” On July 19, Senators Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) reintroduced a revised version of the legislation for consideration in the Senate, expected to reach the floor sometime this week.

The revised bill has been praised for addressing privacy concerns raised by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Democracy and Technology, such as the bill’s provisions that ensure information is passed onto civilian government agencies instead of military agencies. It also allows individuals to pursue litigation if the use of their information violates the law, a notably absent provision in CISPA.

The legislation also incorporates narrowed language regarding its provisions to create a National Cybersecurity Council from existing members of the Departments of Defense, Justice and Commerce in collaboration with members of the intelligence community and federal agencies. Authors of the bill also included a new section on “incentivizing the adoption of voluntary cybersecurity practices” by providing protection for “owners of critical infrastructure” who meet the standards of cybersecurity practices, as determined by the Council.

Unlike previous pieces of legislation geared towards cybersecurity, CSA has the White House’s approval. In a July 19 op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal, President Obama urged the U.S. Congress to pass the Act, citing a serious need for comprehensive cybersecurity legislation to avoid being compromised.

“It doesn’t take much to imagine the consequences of a successful cyber attack. In a future conflict, an adversary unable to match our military supremacy on the battlefield might seek to exploit our computer vulnerabilities here at home,” Mr. Obama wrote. “This is the future we have to avoid.”

However, organizations like the Heritage Foundation and the Electronic Frontier Foundation still have reservations about the bill’s language regarding monitoring and countermeasures. The EFF raises concerns that, “the bill specifically authorizes companies to use cybersecurity as an excuse for engaging in nearly unlimited monitoring of user data,” which the organization finds especially broad and susceptible to administrative abuse.

Similarly, the Heritage Foundation finds the revised legislation still provides, “far too great an intrusive federal role in defining cybersecurity standards.” Instead, Heritage calls for the legislation to prohibit, “any effort to create a new regulatory system for cybersecurity.”

With the bill reaching the Senate floor this week, the amendments in place may or may not remain in their current form, but will hopefully fulfill Mr. Obama’s words:

“It’s time to strengthen our defenses against growing danger.”

The article Cybersecurity Act of 2012: Revised and Revealed appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Senator Marco Rubio is the rising star of the Republican Party. He is seen as the best hope to bring Hispanic voters back to the party they abandoned in the 2008 election, in which, almost two-thirds voted for Barack Obama. But in the 2012 elections things might be different, Senator Rubio is trying to persuade the Latino voters that Mitt Romney would not follow the Arizona example, referring to the immigration law. That’s why he has become a serious option for vice president, and, who knows, if in the future he might be an option for president.

It seems that Mr. Rubio wants to show the world that the Republican Party would be more permissive with illegal immigrants. This is an important move, because if the Republicans are unable to convince the Hispanic population to vote for Romney they could lose crucial states like Florida, Colorado and Nevada.

Mitt Romney knows it and trusts that Mr. Rubio would be the man who would balance the forces and bring back the Hispanic vote to the Republican Party. In recent declarations Senator Rubio criticized the Democrat Party position over immigration, he stated that ” there are many in the Democratic Party that want immigration to be unsolved issue at least for the time being, because it’s more useful as a campaign issue than it is as a solved issue.”

The Hispanic Vote has become crucial in this election; it forced Mitt Romney to change the position he had in the primaries, in which he criticized Governor Rick Perry for granting in-State tuition to Texas universities to immigrants, to a much more permissive posture, in which he said he would consider a new version of the Dream Act. Congress voted down the Act in 2012, which supposedly will be proposed by Sen. Marco Rubio.

Senator Rubio is in favor of giving nonimmigrant visas to young illegals that were brought to the United States by a certain date, a date that for now is unknown, as long as they have graduated from high school and haven’t committed any crime. Andrea Saul, a spokesman for Mitt Romney’s campaign, said: “Governor Romney will study and consider any proposal on immigration from his republican partners,” to show that Senator Rubio’s proposals will be heard.

President Obama also knows of how crucial the Hispanic vote will be in this election, that’s why a few weeks ago he passed the Dream Act by an executive order, this will temporally make almost 800,000 young people who were brought to the country illegally as children safe from deportation. This does not mean these individuals can apply for their citizenship. Senator Rubio criticized president Obama´s action affirming that it was “an election-year action that in the long-term is going to have negative consequences.”

The battle to gain the support from the Hispanic voters has begun. Both parties know very well how crucial this segment of the population will be in the November election. A recent Gallup shows that president Obama has over 65% of Hispanic voters support. So now we just have to wait and see if the Republican Party is able to regain their trust. They have already chosen Marco Rubio to fulfill this difficult task; if he succeeds, there is a big chance that in the future he might become the Republican candidate for the White House.

Image Courtesy of  Gage Skidmore

The article Senator Marco Rubio and the Hispanic Vote appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Washington,U.S.A–The U.S. Senate passed the 2012 Farm Bill today, meaning the measure is a big step closer to enactment. The Farm Bill, renewed every five years, is the largest source of funding for conservation on America’s working farmland, ranchland and private forestland. In addition to funding federal conservation and nutrition programs, the bill also authorizes risk management and other programs that influence the decisions of land managers across the country.

“The Farm Bill is the United States’ primary means for engaging farmers, ranchers and foresters in stewardship of America’s natural resources,” said Sara Hopper, agricultural policy director of Environmental Defense Fund. “The continuing economic prosperity of agriculture is critical to the nation. But it is also true that agriculture has a significant environmental footprint. It affects – and is affected by – soil health, reliable supplies of clean water, and healthy ecosystems.”

As part of an effort to reduce the federal deficit, the Senate voted to cut more than $23 billion from the Farm Bill budget over the next 10 years, including $6.4 billion from conservation programs. While these cuts will hurt conservation efforts on the ground, senators made an effort to mitigate the impact of the loss in conservation funding by including policies that will make conservation programs more effective. Specifically, the Senate bill consolidates some conservation programs and creates a stronger emphasis on leveraging additional resources from local and state governments and other partners who can assist producers in voluntary, cooperative efforts to address local, state and regional conservation priorities. Senators also voted yesterday to apply to taxpayer-funded crop insurance premium subsidies the requirements that farmers of some environmentally sensitive lands currently have to meet in order to receive other farm subsidies.

“With increasing pressures to feed a growing global population, America’s natural resources are under more demand and stress than ever before,” said Hopper. “Demand for conservation assistance for farmers already outstrips available conservation dollars. Congress must maintain and strengthen its commitment to conservation in this Farm Bill and one way to do that is through innovate partnership programs that bring conservation dollars to local communities.”

The article 2012 Farm Bill Passes the Senate appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Washington, U.S.A - The Conservative electoral wave of 2010 is alive and well and headed toward the Senate. Groups representing all aspects of the movement declare that the 2012 Conservative takeover that began in Indiana when Richard Mourdock ousted 36 year-incumbent Richard Lugar, must continue in Nebraska this Tuesday.

Diverse conservative groups, Eagle Forum, Gun Owners of America, FRCAction and FreedomWorks are uniting behind State Treasurer Don Stenberg because of his proven record, having delivered on his promises to conservatives each of the four times he has been elected to statewide office.  The groups issued the following statements:

FRCAction PAC

“Don Stenberg is a known quantity, and he is known as a warrior for marriage and the unborn, having defended Nebraska’s partial birth abortion bill all the way to the Supreme Court. He is also a warrior on the fiscal front, as he fought to keep costs under control as Nebraska’s Attorney General and Treasurer.”

FreedomWorks

Stenberg has a record of standing strong against interventionist economic policies, such as cap-and-trade and ObamaCare. A critic of excessive government spending before it was fashionable; Stenberg decried Republican big-spending initiatives such as Medicare Part D, No Child Left Behind, and corporate bailouts.  We know we can count on him to take a stand for our economic freedom, even if it means standing against his own party.

Gun Owners of America

Gun Owners of America stands with Don Stenberg who is strong on all the issues, especially appointees and nominees that shape policy for generations.  He is the polar opposite of Jon Bruning, who wrote a letter supporting the nomination of Attorney General Eric Holder, and continues, unapologetically to stand by his support for Eric Holder despite many calls to renounce it.

Even in the face of Congressman Darrell Issa’s impending Contempt of Congress charges Bruning still wants to go along to get along.  This is exactly what is wrong with our party and Establishment candidates like Dick Lugar, who recently was defeated by another staunch conservative.

Eagle Forum

“With the possibility of two to three vacancies on the Supreme Court and hundreds of other federal benches over the next four years, we must elect conservatives with the backbone to stand up against nominees who don’t share our values. Don Stenberg is the only candidate in this race that we know will take such a stand.”

Stenberg is also endorsed by Kentucky Senator Rand Paul and Utah Senator Mike Lee, both of whom were elected in the 2010 conservative wave, as well as Senator Jim DeMint’s Senate Conservative Fund and the pro-business Club for Growth.

Image Courtesy of   Andrew Aliferis

The article Conservative Senate Revolution to Continue in Nebraska appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

It looks as if women’s rights are the hot button on the political landscape this year. There was fighting at the contraception mandate front, as well as over the efforts in Virginia and Ohio to force ultrasounds before an abortion, even in cases of rape or incest.

A measure in February attempted to cut off all financial aid to Planned Parenthood. Something that would seem to be more clear-cut than the previous legislations, The Violence Against Women Act, is up for renewal, and some provisions within the act are putting Republicans in an even greater quandary than they were before.

No politician wants to look like he or she is not against domestic violence. The title alone, as some Republican politicians are pointing out, can make the legislation politically risky to oppose, particularly in an election year. As Senator Roy Blunt put it, “Obviously, you want to be for the title. If Republicans can’t be for it, we need to have a very convincing alternative.”

There is no alternative as of yet, and so Republicans are forced to grapple with the current version. According to the New York Times, it would extend federal grants that are already in place to battered women’s shelters, as well as to local law enforcement. Same-sex couples are included in programs as well, as are transgender victims. So are immigrants without status, that have been victims of domestic violence, and more of them would be able to claim temporary visas. The act would also expand efforts to reach the Indian tribes in some rural areas.

According to Fox News, the measure would also give tribes the authority to prosecute persons who are not members of the tribe. The concern is that this move gives tribal courts too much authority over individuals who are not formally part of a tribe.

It is particularly the last provisions that make the legislation so hard to swallow for Republican politicians. They believe that the overall message is being diluted with these extra provisions. Furthermore, they see some groups as undeserving of this aid.

Republicans allege that the timing of the Act is part of a larger Democrat strategy to “rig legislation that the GOP can’t back,” according to the Huffington Post. This is particularly touchy in an election year in which Congress has a 9 percent approval rating.

Senate Democrats hope to bring up the bill before Easter break.

Image Courtesy of   http://www.flickr.com/photos/gageskidmore/

The article A Battle in The War Against Women appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

A Senate Committee on Indian Affairs hearing will explore how Indian tribes could be impacted by the recent U.S. Department of Justice opinion that permits states to allow all forms of online betting that do not involve sports.

After numerous hearings over the past months on the opportunity to regulate Internet gambling, Michael Waxman, spokesperson for the Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative, issued the following statement that calls on Congress to adopt federal legislation that regulates the industry in order to best protect consumers.

“There is no question that the recent Justice Department opinion has increased pressure on Congress to move on legislation to regulate Internet gambling activity. If the main objective of regulation is to protect consumers, this can be best achieved through federal legislation that sets the strict standard for licensing operators, requires the most innovative safeguards be put in place and stringently monitors all gambling and financial activity.

Alternatively, states being left to develop a patchwork of regulatory structures will not encourage national collaboration to monitor the many operators expected to offer services and ensure the utilization of state-of-the-art technologies to protect consumers and combat fraud and money laundering. Moreover, the time to move is now, as numerous states are starting to move quickly to create Internet gambling programs.

“The federal regulation of Internet gambling should respect the rights of Indian sovereignty, reinforce states’ rights and utilize the enforcement expertise of existing regulatory bodies – all objectives proposed in pending legislation to regulate the industry. Indian tribes should be able to apply for a license and become an Internet gambling operator or set any restrictions they wish on the activity within their respective geographic borders.

“Hearings are valuable for providing information, but the facts haven’t changed since Congress first started to explore the need to regulate Internet gambling – without regulation consumers are left unprotected and all of the economic benefits that could be gained for controlling the activity will continue to be lost to offshore operators.

“Congress should immediately consider pending bills introduced by Reps. Campbell and Barton which provide a path to requiring licensed operators to put in place practical and enforceable standards to control Internet gambling activity, protect consumers and respect Indian sovereignty.

The upside for the Campbell bill is wider protections and opportunities for economic benefits through more jobs and government revenue.”

The article US Senate Commitee: How Online Betting May Impact Indian Tribes? appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

On December 19, Lung Cancer Alliance (LCA) praised Senator Scott Brown for his support for the first comprehensive lung cancer legislation now pending action in the Senate and the House of Representatives.

The Lung Cancer Mortality Reduction Act, S. 752 and H.R. 1394, is a bicameral, bipartisan call to action on the leading cause of cancer death.  Senator John Kerry is one of the primary sponsors of the Senate bill that was introduced earlier this year. Other supporters from the Massachusetts congressional delegation include Congressman Barney Frank, Stephen Lynch, John Olver and John Tierney.

Lung Cancer Alliance’s President & CEO Laurie Fenton-Ambrose said, “We are thrilled to see this strong bi-partisan recognition of the urgent need to have a better plan of action to address all aspects of lung cancer which we hope will continue to grow and include all members of the Massachusetts delegation.”

Lung cancer is by far the leading cause of cancer death worldwide, nationally and in every ethnic group. According the National Cancer Institute estimates, this year, in Massachusetts more people will die of lung cancer – 3,490 – more than the combined total of deaths due to breast cancer (760), colon cancer (980) and prostate cancer (640).

Diane Legg, LCA-New England Co-Director said, “As a seven year survivor of lung cancer, it is reassuring to know that our elected leaders have heard our stories, have become better educated about the disease and have become proponents of a call to action that would put life-saving, cost-saving, cancer reducing benefits in motion.”

Rich Monopoli, LCA-New England Co-Director said, “Sadly, the impact of lung cancer goes beyond epidemic yet few people even know that today 80% of lung cancer patients have never smoked or had already quit, often decades ago.  That is why support for a more coordinated and comprehensive plan for this disease is so important – as it will help reduce lung cancer’s stigma and reverse decades of neglect.

The Lung Cancer Mortality Reduction Act is win-win for all and I am hopeful that the entire Massachusettsdelegation and their New England colleagues will join our call to action.” LCA has been building a network of support for the call to action which includes leading research, veterans, and minority health and labor organizations.

The legislation, H.R. 1394 in the House and S. 752 in the Senate, calls for the Departments of Health and Human Services, Defense and Affairs to develop a coordinated research, prevention, early detection and treatment effort with the specific goal of cutting lung cancer mortality in half by the end of the decade.

Lung Cancer Alliance is the only national non-profit dedicated to providing support and advocacy for those living with or at risk for lung cancer.  LCA is committed to reversing decades of stigma and neglect by empowering those with or at risk for lung cancer, elevating awareness and changing health policy at both the federal and state level. For more information visit: www.lungcanceralliance.org.

Image Courtesy of   http://www.flickr.com/photos/massgovernor/

The article Lung Cancer Alliance Praises Senator Scott Brown for Support appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

“Progress in preventing HIV in the United States will be set back, while little will be done to provide additional care and treatment to people already living with HIV/AIDS in our country,” said Carl Schmid, Deputy Executive Director of The AIDS Institute, commenting on the final Fiscal Year 2012 spending bill to be voted on by Congress on December 16.

“This is especially disappointing in light of the optimism expressed by national and global leaders just two weeks ago on World AIDS Day,” he continued.

At the insistence of the House of Representatives, the bill would reinstate a federal funding ban of syringe exchange programs, a scientifically proven method to prevent HIV and other blood borne infections, while not increasing drug use. Additionally, the bill would resurrect failed abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, but only at a minimal level of $5 million.

Despite an estimated 50,000 new HIV infections each year and over 240,000 people unaware of their infection, funding for HIV prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) would be cut by $10 million. Surprisingly, this cut would be to its school health HIV program. The CDC reports that young people aged 13–29 accounted for 39% of all new HIV infections in 2009.

The bill flat funds the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program except for a $15 million increase, originally proposed by the Senate, for the AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP). The Ryan White Program provides care and treatment to over 550,000 low-income people with HIV/AIDS. According to NASTAD, there are currently 4,155 people in 12 states on ADAP waiting lists and over 445 people in six states who have been disenrolled from the program due to budget constraints and growing enrollment.

On World AIDS Day, President Obama, recognizing the need for additional funding for both care and treatment for low income people with HIV/AIDS in the U.S., announced $50 million in additional funds for the Ryan White Program. As part of that announcement, ADAP would receive an additional $35 million. While it is not known yet how the funds will be distributed, taken together, the $50 million in new ADAP money could eliminate the ADAP wait lists if it is distributed to the wait list states.

“We are extremely grateful to both President Obama and the Congress for continuing to recognize the importance of providing medications to people with HIV/AIDS and the serious funding gap for ADAP,” commented Michael Ruppal, Executive Director of The AIDS Institute. “While it is far from enough to meet the growing need, these increases are a very positive development.”

According to HRSA data, the number of ADAP clients served nationally has grown an astounding 40 percent from FY07-CY10. Under the bill, funding for medical research at the National Institutes of Health would increase by $299 million.

The final bill, which is a product of negotiation between the House and the Senate, is far better than the one introduced earlier this year by House Labor, HHS, Education and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Denny Rehberg.

That bill would have decimated the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program by cutting its budget from $105 million to $20 million, eliminate all Title X spending, and the entire Prevention and Public Health Fund. Additionally it would have prevented implementation of much of the Affordable Care Act. The bill also includes an across the board 0.189 percent cut, meaning all programs are subject to being cut even further

Jose Gil / Shutterstock.com

The article HIV/AIDS Programs in US Largely Funded by Federal Spending Bill appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The middle class may finally have another advocate in the Senate. The lone spokesperson in the Senate for the middle and lower class, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) may soon be joined by consumer advocate and longtime President Obama adviser Elizabeth Warren. Many democratic insiders are hinting that Warren will announce a Senate bid after Labor Day challenging Scott Brown (R-MA) for his seat in Massachusetts.

The Massachusetts resident and Harvard Law School professor wrote a blog on Thursday afternoon stating that she would not “stop fighting for middle class families.” Other sources also suggest that Warren is preparing a major campaign launch. Warren is currently being assisted by two influential Democratic operatives in the state: Doug Rubin, the chief strategist for Gov.

Deval Patrick’s two successful statewide runs, and Kyle Sullivan, Patrick’s press secretary for his first term. She has also begun making a series of calls to influential activists and party officials in the state.

Warren recently stepped down as an adviser to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau because of Republicans refusal to confirm Warren for a permanent post in the organization that she created.

“In the weeks ahead, I want to hear from you about the challenges we face and how we get our economy growing again,” she wrote in her post on Blue Mass Group. “I also want to hear your ideas about how we can fix what all of us — regardless of party — know is a badly broken political system.”

“She is spending several hours today making calls around the state, governor, lieutenant governor, congressional delegation, party leaders, and grassroots activists,” a source within the national Democratic Party told The Huffington Post.

“The calls will continue for the next couple of days so she can have as many personal conversations as possible. She will start traveling early next week doing one on one meetings, small group get togethers, all very casual.”

As for why Warren waited until now to begin reaching out to state officials, the source noted that she was previously restricted from doing so under the Hatch Act: “She needed to completely wrap up her work [with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau] before starting to make Massachusetts political calls.”
Image Courtesy  of  http://www.flickr.com/photos/newamerica/

The article Elizabeth Warren May Save the Middle Class appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

With the prospect of a debt default looming just over the horizon, the House of Representatives tonight passed compromise legislation to raise the debt ceiling.

The House voted in favor of the bill by a margin of 269-161 after a dramatic day of legislative wrangling on Capitol Hill. Although the compromise was announced last night, the leaders of both parties had to spend much of today trying to win over their respective caucuses.

The bill is essentially a modified version of John Boehner’s (R-OH) plan, which passed the House last week. It would immediately raise the debt ceiling by $400 billion, while allowing President Obama to order a $500 billion increase in the fall, unless both houses of Congress vote to block it. It also imposes spending cuts of $1 trillion by setting ten-year caps on the budgets of Cabinet agencies.

A further debt ceiling increase of up to $1.5 trillion will be granted if Congress can offset it through additional spending cuts. A special bipartisan committee of both houses will be responsible for proposing these cuts, but if the committee cannot agree or Congress does not enact their proposals, the White House will be empowered to order across-the-board cuts, including reductions in defense spending and farm subsidies. However, the debt ceiling increase could still go through if Congress approves a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution and sends it to the states for ratification.

Neither side ended up truly winning the day. While Obama and the Democrats got their wish for a debt ceiling increase that will see them through the 2012 election, they will not be able to raise taxes on the wealthy in order to reduce the debt. And while the Republicans succeeded in wringing deep spending cuts from the Democrats, the agreed-upon cuts are not as deep as the ones the House passed last week. It is also far from certain that a balanced-budget amendment will actually go to the states since it is no longer required in order to raise the debt ceiling.

Like most compromises, this one was not to everyone’s liking. Presidential hopeful Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) announced her intention to vote against the bill, claiming that it did not cut spending enough. “Someone has to say no, I will,” she said.

At the other end of the political spectrum, the co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva (D-AZ), also lambasted the bill. “This deal weakens the Democratic Party as badly as it weakens the country. We have given much and received nothing in return,” he said.

The Senate will likely take up the bill tomorrow, where it is almost certain to pass, given the bipartisan show of support in the House and the fact that a debt default could be just around the corner if they balk.

The article House Passes Debt Ceiling Increase: No True Winner appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) believes that the poor, not the rich, should pay more to help reduce the nation’s debt. Just another example of a Saturday Night Live skit that has come to life. “I hear how they’re so caring for the poor and so forth,” Hatch said in remarks on the Senate floor Wednesday, in reference to Democrats.

“The poor need jobs! And they also need to share some of the responsibility.” Hatch made these comments during debate on a motion that would allow the Senate to begin debating a non-binding resolution that says millionaires and billionaires should play a more meaningful role in reducing the nation’s debt. The motion passed 74 to 22 despite Hatch’s argument. Only one Democrat, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) voted against the debate while Sen.

Jeff Sessions (R-Ala), who had called the resolution “pathetic”, voted to move ahead with the debate. But, the attention fell on Hatch on Wednesday when he suggested that the wealthy in the nation are already doing too much. Even though, if you remember, the nation’s effective tax rates are at modern lows since the Bush administration slashed rates in 2001 and 2003. In his view, it seems, the middle class and poor should be picking up the slack.

“The top 1 percent of the so-called wealthy pay 38 percent of all income tax. The top 10 percent are paying 70 percent of all income tax,” Hatch said. “The top 50 percent pay somewhere near 98 percent of all income taxes. 51 percent don’t pay anything,” Hatch said, suggesting the payroll taxes that the poor and middle classes pay towards Social Security yields them an especially generous benefit. “Democrats say they [the 51 percent] pay payroll taxes.

Well, everybody does that because that’s Social Security. They pay about one-third of what they’re going to take out over the years in social security,” Hatch railed. “Obamacare — a family of four earning over $80,000 a year — gets subsidies. Think about that. That’s what we call the poor?”

Hatch hedged that the poorest of the poor shouldn’t have to pay taxes. But he was clear that people who qualify for subsidies because they can’t afford things like health care should dig deeper. “Now, we don’t want the really poor people who are in poverty to have to pay income taxes,” he said.

“But 51% of all households. And that’s going up, by the way, because of our friend down in the White House and his allies.” Dude, you cannot get blood from a turnip. There is nowhere else for me to dig. The wealthy have savings and retirement accounts. I don’t.

Image Courtesy of  http://www.flickr.com/photos/bvcphoto/3178527172/

The article Orrin Hatch Suggests that Poor Should Pay More in Taxes appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The Republicans argument over the debt ceiling is becoming increasingly ridiculous. And apparently, asking for millionaires to share some of the sacrifice is pathetic, at least according to Sen. Jeff Sessions, a Republican from Alabama.

The top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee called the idea “pathetic” after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) proposed a measure. The non-binding resolution states: “It is the sense of the Senate that any agreement to reduce the budget deficit should require that those earning $1,000,000 or more per year make a more meaningful contribution to the deficit reduction effort.”

Reid’s measure includes how the income gap continues to grow. He cited statistics that state the median income of S&P 500 companies chief financial officers jumped $2.9 million last year alone, even though the “median family income has declined by more than $2,500″ in the last 10 years. The resolution also notes that 20 percent all income goes to the top 1 percent, and 80 percent of the nation’s income growth over the last quarter century has also gone to the top 1 percent.

Sessions and his colleagues did not express any interest in the growing income disparity in the United States, stating only delays getting around to major cuts. “It’s a sense of the Senate,” Sessions scoffed. “We’re supposed to have legislation in place by Aug. 2 to deal with raising the debt limit — and that’s got to be real numbers and real figures.”

“So I guess we can say we’re beginning to talk about something with this rather pathetic response from the majority leader,” he said. “I’m not happy about that.”

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn) was also not impressed with the resolution, but suggested it was a sign Democrats were getting ready to listen to the GOP. “While today, obviously, we’re not going to have anything really serious to talk about — it’s just a sense of the Senate — my sense is that very quickly we’re going to have something before us that actually is real,” Corker said.

Reid spokesman Adam Jentleson commented on the GOP statements: “Apparently, nothing irritates Republicans more than the prospect that millionaires and billionaires might be asked to share in the burden of deficit reduction.”

The article Asking Millionaires to Pay a Fair Share is “Pathetic” According to Senate GOP appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Senator Bernie Sanders delivered an epic speech on the Senate floor once again. Reminding Americans about the growing income gap, the Senator from Vermont urged President Obama to not shrink the debt on the backs of the middle class and working families.

In his 10,000 word speech, Sanders explained what causes deficits including war, Wall Street bailouts and tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans. He stated what I have been trying to say for months now. Why are we only trying to reduce the deficit by cutting spending? Sure, spending probably should be cut. But, we also need to increase revenue. It is basic mathematical skills.

Senator Sanders summed up his argument in a letter to the president. “As we address the issue of deficit reduction we must not ignore the painful economic reality of today — which is that the wealthiest people in our country and the largest corporations are doing phenomenally well while the middle class is collapsing and poverty is increasing. In fact, the United States today has, by far, the most unequal distribution of wealth and income of any major country on earth,” Sanders writes.

Sanders points out the importance of shared sacrifice to get out of our debt and reduce the federal deficit. “It is absolutely imperative, however, that as we go forward with deficit reduction we completely reject the Republican approach that demands savage cuts in desperately-needed programs for working families, the elderly, the sick, our children and the poor, while not asking the wealthiest among us to contribute one penny.”

He goes on to close his letter with a plea to Obama.”Mr. President, please listen to the overwhelming majority of the American people who believe that deficit reduction must be about shared sacrifice. The wealthiest Americans and the most profitable corporations in this country must pay their fair share. At least 50 percent of any deficit reduction package must come from revenue raised by ending tax breaks for the wealthy and eliminating tax loopholes that benefit large, profitable corporations and Wall Street financial institutions. A sensible deficit reduction package must also include significant cuts to unnecessary and wasteful Pentagon spending.

“Please do not yield to outrageous Republican demands that would greatly increase suffering for the weakest and most vulnerable members of our society. Now is the time to stand with the tens of millions of Americans who are struggling to survive economically, not with the millionaires and billionaires who have never had it so good.”

Sign or view the letter here.

Image Courtesy of  http://www.flickr.com/photos/arbayne/

The article Sen. Bernie Sanders and Shared Sacrifice appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.