Abortion in the Health Care Reform Bill: Who is telling the truth?
They're not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft of S.773 (excerpt), which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency."
Looks like the EFF is looking into this.http://www.eff.org/press/mentions
Any politician that votes for, or is in support of, this bill (or any resemblance of this bill) will lose my vote and should lose every vote. DO NOT MAKE THIS MISTAKE Washington. I will personally go door to door and convience any and all voters that all supporters of this idea should be fired. I know I will not get them all, but I have a feeling no one can afford the votes. What good is health care without liberty (on or off the net)?
CNET SOURCE:http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10320096-38.html
It is time for those that hate, not only healthcare reform, but also democracy and freedom, to stop inciting riots by spreading lies. The most despicable lie about the new health care bill regards a simple provision that a physician can be reimbursed if a patient wants to have a discussion about how they wish to be cared for if they become extremely ill.
That discussion could be that the patient wants to remain hooked to a machine that keeps them alive indefinitely, or the decision could be that the patient wishes to be unhooked from such a machine if they are brain dead, or the decision could be that the patients wants their spouse, parent or child to make such a decision. The common denominator is that this is a patient decision. The provision in the bill simply allows physicians to be reimbursed when they listen to patient’s decisions.
It’s a compassionate clause. It allows for us to have a conversation with our physician, as we do with our attorneys when we create our will. Lawyers get paid for making wills. This bill simply says that physicians will get paid for helping us during such difficult times. It’s about reimbursement, nothing more.
But horrific organizers against health care reform are causing people to wrongly believe that the bill somehow states that the government will kill you, that the government will mandate euthanasia. That is so preposterous that had I in advance seen that the strategies of these protestors would rely on such a nonsensical plan, I would have not even been concerned that such a far-fetched idea could have a chance of working, that anyone would ever believe such nonsense, such a distorted reversal of the actual facts. But incredibly, fear is a great lever. People actually believe that in the bill, there are provisions allowing the government to kill citizens through health care. And this lie is gaining traction, a lot of traction. The lie is working.
It’s time for intelligent people to say enough.
Enough fear mongering.
Enough distortion.
Enough bringing up Hitler and comparing that horrific individual to our President.
Enough.
President Obama, it’s time to make a significant speech about fear mongering, about the psychology of the lynch mob and why as a decent society we should abhor such insidious tactics. We cannot sit idly by and watch our society devolve into such horrors as we have seen in the past when lynch mobs, rather then the rule of law, governed our land.
President Obama, please bring your eloquence to the table of hatred and help stop this madness.
"With support from President Obama, Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) and Congressman Danny Davis (D-IL) introduced the Responsible Fatherhood and Healthy Families Act of 2009 for Father's Day, a bill cosponsored by then-Senator Barack Obama in the last Congress. Obviously Bayh and Davis have to contend with DC political realities, which work against fathers and make rational legislation to help them politically difficult. Still, this Responsible Fatherhood bill will help bureaucrats and others far more than it helps dads, and in some ways it will hurt fathers"
A decade after safety concerns were first raised by experts, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) conducted public hearings on Diacetyl – a chemical widely used to flavor microwave popcorn. The public comment period ended on April 21st.
Recent studies show laboratory mice made to inhale diacetyl vapors for just three months developed lymphocytic bronchiolitis.
Popcorn producers are not required to label Diacetyl separately, and may list it under a general heading on labels as a flavoring ingredient.
Project on Scientific Knowledge and Public Policy Director David Michaels says: “This is an example of a potentially toxic substance receiving GRAS (generally recognized as safe) designation without undergoing adequate testing. It’s also an example of how our key public health agencies rely on chemical manufacturers themselves to provide critical health effects data. Whether food additives, pesticides, or industrial chemicals, the public's health and safety should not rely solely on industry affirmations.”
OSHA Closes Hearing For Diacetyl RulemakingOSHA intends the term ``diacetyl and food flavorings containing diacetyl'' to encompass other constituents of food flavorings containing diacetyl. In addition to information on diacetyl, OSHA seeks information on acetoin, acetaldehyde, acetic acid, furfural, and other compounds present in food flavorings that may cause or contribute to flavoring-related lung disease. OSHA is also interested in and seeks information about diacetyl present in substances other than food flavorings (e.g., naturally occurring diacetyl or diacetyl in fragrances) as well as substitutes used in place of diacetyl (e.g., diacetyl trimer). The information received in response to this document will assist the Agency in developing a proposed standard addressing occupational exposure to diacetyl and food flavorings containing diacetyl. The Comment period ended April 21, 2009. http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-1125.htm
OSHA Closes Hearing For Diacetyl Rulemaking
OSHA intends the term ``diacetyl and food flavorings containing diacetyl'' to encompass other constituents of food flavorings containing diacetyl. In addition to information on diacetyl, OSHA seeks information on acetoin, acetaldehyde, acetic acid, furfural, and other compounds present in food flavorings that may cause or contribute to flavoring-related lung disease. OSHA is also interested in and seeks information about diacetyl present in substances other than food flavorings (e.g., naturally occurring diacetyl or diacetyl in fragrances) as well as substitutes used in place of diacetyl (e.g., diacetyl trimer). The information received in response to this document will assist the Agency in developing a proposed standard addressing occupational exposure to diacetyl and food flavorings containing diacetyl. The Comment period ended April 21, 2009. http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-1125.htm
Despite lawsuit verdicts in the millions, finding in favor of microwave popcorn factory workers and against Diacetyl, neither the Food and Drug Administration nor the Consumer Product Safety Commission have investigated.
In 2000, OSHA conducted several studies that confirmed the link between occupational exposure the artificial butter flavoring Diacetyl and lung diseases.
In 2003, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Diacetyl investigation findings were distributed privately to the popcorn industry.
In 2006, two labor unions petitioned the OSHA to issue an emergency temporary standard on Diacetyl to protect workers in the food and flavorings industries. More than 42 scientists and public health experts signed a letter supporting the petition.
In 2007, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA), Chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension (HELP) Committee, and Sen. Patty Murray (D-WT) Chair HELP Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety, wrote to FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach, and CDC Director Julie Gerberding. They also wrote to Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao and Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Edwin G. Foulke, asking for an Emergency Temporary Standard to protect workers from Diacetyl – an action supported by unions and manufacturers. No action has been taken.
In 2008, by a vote of 260 to 154, the US House of Representatives has passed H.R. 2693, the Popcorn Workers Lung Disease Prevention Act. The vote demonstrates the widespread recognition that OSHA failed to protect workers and Congress needed to act. To date, the Senate has not acted.
California
In 2008, our State Senate passed SB 456: Diacetyl Toxic Substance Ban, a bill that bans diacetyl, a vapor used in the production of microwave popcorn, pancake syrup, cakes, candies, frozen foods, and other products that has been associated to lung illness. The bill currently sits in the Health Committee.
Similarly, scientists and consumer groups point to a much larger health problem posed by unlabeled genetically modified organisms, also permitted by the FDA to enter the food supply under the GRAS designation several years ago.
The OSHA contact for this Emergency Temporary Standard rulemaking (numbered RIN 1218-AC33) is Dorothy Dougherty, director of the Directorate of Standards and Guidance (202-693-1950, dougherty.dorothy@dol.gov).
Reader Note: Andrew Schneider, a two-time Pulitzer prize winning journalist broke this story several years ago. I recommend reading his reports for additional information.
Frustration boiled over recently when Americans discovered that emaciated insurance company aig paid out $165 million in bonuses to its executives. The uproar from the American public was understandable. The bonus money, which came via a $180 billion federal government bailout, came from their wallets.
Many in Washington saw the outrage as an opportunity...more
A quick read: http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc111/h1207_ih.xml.
What do you think?
EMK
The economic crisis seems negotiable in favor of what apparently was a more pressing agenda to make sure President Obama didn't get the bi- partisan support his change initiative sought during the campaign. It may be premature to speculate on a hidden agenda at this point, but that's all the more reason to turn up the awareness and think about 2012. Jimmy Carter and George Bush 1 would have a lot to teach the Obama machine and the Democratic Party.
Not only is it of dire importance to keep the the Democratic momentum going in the coming congressional elections, but to make sure the nuts and bolts are in place for another Obama victory in 2012. Given the extra effort Black Americans have always had to bring to their jobs, nothing short of a victory for Obama in 2012 will serve to validate this election and make the country safe for more African-American presidents down the line.
Hopefully, in future considerations concerning the economy or other pressing issues, the Republican Party will concern itself more with people in need than with avenging their painful loss of 2008. All it takes is the right candidate, a war that won't go away, and an economy that just won't rebound. I would not put it past the Republicans to viscerate this historical moment by continuing to block vote against Obama's bills and initiatives. It's never to early to get involved.
BH
Take a look at this and see what you think about it. This one is current.
THOMAS (GPO PDF version)
Initial comments on the bill.
The war on Terror has come home. It has been on its way but is now fully through the door and has been invited. Here in the United States we passed the "Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007"
Here is a quote from the homeland security webpage about the bill; "We must intervene before a person crosses the line separating radical views from violent behavior, create an environment that discourages disillusionment and alienation, and instill in young people a sense of belonging and faith in the future"
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1955 The full text of the bill, "Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007".
http://homeland.house.gov/about/subcommittees.asp?ID=287&SubSection=0&Is This is the DOHS's brief on the above bill.
http://www.dhs.gov/xres/programs/editorial_0498.shtm This is a page from the DOHS website. It outlines the "Centers for Excellence" program and lists the institutions involved with links and the tasks each is charged with.
This is a disturbing development in the world of counter+errorism. A self empowerment which outlines plans to snip in the bud, the, according to the authors, evolution of radicals to terrorists via a plethora of studies by institutions both public and private collated and made judgment upon by a central commission whose sole responsibility is to, "Examine and report upon the facts and causes of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States, including United States connections to non-United States persons and networks, violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in prison, individual or `lone wolf' violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence, and other faces of the phenomena of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence that the Commission considers important."
A report was mandated within eighteen months, submitted to the president and congress, it was to consist of "Findings and conclusions, legislative recommendations for immediate and long-term countermeasures to violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence, and measures that can be taken to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence from developing and spreading within the United States, and any final recommendations for any additional grant programs to support these purposes. The report may also be accompanied by a classified annex."
Also there is to be formed a network of cooperative "Centers for Excellence" Check the link above for a list Here is the relevant quote from the bill… "The Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish or designate a university-based Center of Excellence for the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States (hereinafter referred to as `Center') following the merit-review processes and procedures and other limitations that have been previously established for selecting and supporting University Programs Centers of Excellence. The Center shall assist Federal, State, local and tribal homeland security officials through training, education, and research in preventing violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in the United States. In carrying out this section, the Secretary may choose to either create a new Center designed exclusively for the purpose stated herein or identify and expand an existing Department of Homeland Security Center of Excellence so that a working group is exclusively designated within the existing Center of Excellence to achieve the purpose set forth in subsection (b). `(b) Purpose- It shall be the purpose of the Center to study the social, criminal, political, psychological, and economic roots of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in the United States and methods that can be utilized by Federal, State, local, and tribal homeland security officials to mitigate violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism"
Of course the beginning of the bill contains definitions; here are some of them,
VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.
HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.
I am speechless, probably because I am holding my breath until that report comes out. Unfortunately there will be a classified annex to the report which we the public will not have access to. I guess you noticed that the "Centers for Excellence" are charged with training and informing operatives within the DOHS.
This appears to be outside the parameters of the bill as written and allude to a future time in which the information gathered and the obvious agenda are brought together, decisions made and acted upon that presumably shall imperil political dissidents all over the nation. I wonder; will they be considered innocent before proven guilty? What will be the determined definition of guilty? What of the quote from the DOHS's webpage which appears earlier in this blog that reads, "Instill in young people a sense of belonging and faith in the future". What does this mean, this instilling?
The Pickens Plan: For those who would like to become an active participant in a solution for our nations energy needs I urge you to join with T.Boone Pickens in his quest for a cleaner planet through alternative energy.
Also see Green Wave Energy: Green Wave was founded by Mark Holmes and was formulated for viable alternative energy solutions. Green Wave Energy is promoting state-of-the-art energy-saving products and services throughout the country.
Green Wave Energy understands alternative energy technology will become “main stream” when
Call 949.645.1701 for information on how Green Wave Energy can help you save the planet.
Alternative EnergySource: David Apperson
url: http://veterans.barackobama.com/page/community/tag/alternative-energy
Afton * Aladdin * Albin * Alcova * Alpine * Alva * Arapahoe * Arminto * Arvada * Auburn * Baggs * Bairoil * Banner * Basin * Bedford * Beulah * Big Horn * Big Piney * Bill * Bondurant * Bosler * Boulder * Buffalo * Buford * Burlington * Burns * Byron * Carlile * Carpenter * Casper * Centennial * Cheyenne * Chugwater * Clearmont * Cody * Cokeville * Cora * Cowley * Crowheart * Dayton * Deaver * Devils Tower * Diamondville * Dixon * Douglas * Dubois * Edgerton * Elk Mountain * Emblem * Encampment * Etna * Evanston * Evansville * Fairview * Farson * Fe Warren AFB * Fort Bridger * Fort Laramie * Fort Washakie * Four Corners * Frannie * Frontier * Garrett * Gillette * Glendo * Glenrock * Granger * Granite Canon * Green River * Greybull * Grover * Guernsey * Hamilton Dome * Hanna * Hartville * Hawk Springs * Hiland * Hillsdale * Horse Creek * Hudson * Hulett * Huntley * Hyattville * Jackson * Jay Em * Jeffrey City * Kaycee * Kelly * Kemmerer * Kinnear * Kirby * La Barge * Lagrange * Lance Creek * Lander * Laramie * Leiter * Linch * Lingle * Little America * Lontetree * Lost Springs * Lovell * Lusk * Lyman * Lysite * Manderson * Manville * McKinnon * Medicine Bow * Meeteetse * Meriden * Midwest * Mills * Moorcroft * Moose * Moran * Mountain View * Natrona * Newcastle * Opal * Osage * Otto * Parkman * Pavillion * Pinedale * Point of Rocks * Powder River * Powell * Ralston * Ranchester * Rawlins * Recluse * Reliance * Riverton * Robertson * Rock River * Rock Springs * Rozet * Saddlestring * Saint Stephens * Saratoga * Savery * Shawnee * Shell * Sheridan * Shirley Basin * Shoshoni * Sinclair * Smoot * Story * Sundance * Superior * Ten Sleep * Teton Village * Thayne * Thermopolis * Tie Siding * Torrington * Upton * Van Tassell * Veteran * Vista West * Walcott * Wamsutter * Wapiti
so here we are: one day remaining. doesn't seem too long ago that i kept catching glimpses of this obama fellow in 2007 and thought how wonderful would it be... never expecting him to come this far up against edwards and clinton. as i have said before, from a marketing perspective, gaining a significant share of the market (in this case: eligible voters) is complicated in today's environment. any start-up firm would be hard pressed to snatch away a significant portion of p&g or coca cola customers. that same start-up firm would exemplify modern brilliance should it manage to overtake the market and gain control for any period of time. that is, in essence, what obama did in 2008. i recognized his potential. i praised his marketing campaign. yet, until super tuesday, i remained unconvinced that obama would succeed at becoming the nominee and beat the two well-established brands of edwards and clinton. once we knew obama was our nominee, i often joked that the only way mccain stood a chance against obama was by selecting a female running mate. i certainly did not mean "that one." when mccain announced palin in dayton, i first cringed. then i googled her investigation to confirm that she had been exhonerated. to my surprise, his popular governor from alaska was still under investigation for abuse of power and likely guilty as hell. was the crime all that bad? not really. yet, just as getting a blow job or sticking a cigar in your chubby aide's kootch is not that bad... when you lie repeatedly and attempt to disguise your blunder... that is often far worse than the original crime. what people i have met and people like palin do not seem to understand, many of us are forgiving of a mistake or two... just not the pattern of lies or unfaithfulness that accompanies deception. its the compulsiveness, the ease, and the noticeable pattern that deteriorates and ultimately destroys trust.needless to say, prior to the veep picks, i began imagining an electoral map in 2008 that mimics the map ross perot carved out for bill clinton in 1992. while initially i was nervous to see what became of clinton's stalwart supporters of which,in exit polls, many had proudly proclaimed gender as major factor in their support. however, with time, palin did backfire in the sense that she was ineffective at luring independents and former clinton voters. arguably, i assert that palin has been effective in igniting the base to match the sweat behind obama. only tomorrow will we know whether the fire palin lit in the far right-wing nuts of our country is burning strong or whether it turns out to be like a rash between your legs after a good date gone bad.to refresh your memory, review the electoral map in 1992 where clinton pulled out a huge upset against the incumbent thanks to ross perot who remains the only successful third party candidate in modern elections.
first states i would point our are louisiana, kentucky, and tennessee. i knew this summer that those states were outside the realm of possibility. in fact, tennessee turned against gore in 2000 largely due to his environmental convictions. given that bobby jindal is about as far too the right as sarah palin, i assumed louisiana was also outside the realm of possibility despite the outcome in the primary in obama's favor. and kentucky... well that ole kentucky home is a thorn in my side, but i will defend her natural beauty until my dying day... just not the folks' politics. ross perot's impressive 18% popular vote splintered the would-be republican votes and carved out a victory for bill clinton in additional states that stay with mccain: arkansas, montana, and west virgnina. while its true that mccain's lead in arkansas is presently only in single digits, i was always hopeful that with help from bill and hillary, obama would remain more competitive as far south as arkansas. like kentucky, west virginia seems to be very confused as to who has their best interest at heart. and, i might as well say it within this blog since i had to slam a door on my fingers a few weeks ago when i thought about writing a blog strictly targeting the separation of church and state. for those of you who forgot, we are suppose to acknowledge a separation of church and state! separation of church and state is among the founding principles of the united states of america. heads up people! when we fail to pratice our civil duties and vote for the best qualified leader to restore economic and foriegn matters because we want a candidate that agrees with the majority of our religious doctrine... hello... that is how you end up with george w. bush twice and the deteriorated condition of our country today. vote for the best candidate. don't vote based on religious convictions. if we transfer our country's power and wealth to china, russia. or the middle east... you may not have always have the freedom to practice that religion you love so much and wanted to shove down my throat. obama appears to be strongly competing to win with an electoral map much like bill clinton's first win. the difference, and what makes this especially remarkable, obama will accomplish this without a strong third party candidate which means he is winning with a more united country and a greater percentage or the popular vote. a percentage not seen since the eighties. obama's net reduction would be 39 electoral votes after losing these five states which is still enough to make him the victor tomorrow. however, obama will likely and hopefully pick up states that even bill clinton could not win in 1992. according to new sources such as real clear politics, abc and msnbc news, toss up states include: montana, indiana, missouri, north carolina, ohio, georgia, virginia, and florida. the other three that are sometimes considered a toss-up are: nevada, north dakota, and arizona. however, i am relatively confident that nevada will break for obama and north dakota and arizona will break for mccain... albiet narrow victories no matter what the outcome. with that said, my electoral predicions for tomorrow night:
given the nature of a predicion, i have to make a few tough calls and my map is admitedly optimistic in the sense that i really want obama to win in north carolina and georgia and prevent mccain from narrowly squeaking by him. since the beginning of the summer, i have envisioned a 1992 map where obama gave up four or five states and replaced them florida, virginia, and georgia which is a net 51 electoral votes. the end result would be a few less states, but a greater electoral and popular vote win on election day for barack. based on a series of recent polls and early voting results, i feel good about viginia and florida. i may still be overly optimistic about georgia, but it now looks like obama has an equally optimistic chance in north carolina so i moved both to obama's column. if you read my earlier blog during the primaries, i liked to mention obama's performance in north and south carolina. he alone, had more votes cast for him than mccain and his republican counterparts combined. early voting and polls show the margin in the general election tight in south carolina while virtually tied and potentially leaning to obama in north carolina. amazing! as for georgia, a relatively strong third party candidate in georgia, bob barr, could "help" tip that state to obama like ross perot did in 1992. barr polled around 8% this spring, but third party candidates generally poll better early than the final outcome because more and more voters fold into the two major parties. presently, "other" in georgia is at 4% and bob barr, a georgian, is believed to compose the majority of that 4% or better... as he has been gaining in the polls this last few weeks by picking up undecided georgia independents.last week's cnn/time poll revealed that among "likely" georgia voters — presumably those who are both registered and have a proven track record of participating in elections, the race breaks down as follows: mccain: 50%, obama: 46%, barr: 3%
however, if the pool of voters is widened to include simply registered voters — which would include first-time voters or those who rarely participate in general elections — then the georgia vote shifts in obama's favor: mccain: 46%, obama: 49%, barr: 4%
so there you have it, i was dissappointed when the obama for america campaign shifted resourced from georgia last month, but happy to hear that more than half of registered voters have voted early thought to benefit obama. i was also happy when obama shifted resources back to georgia last week and may help see my wish to fruition.
what of my other swing state calls? montana is close. originally, that state looked good for obama, but slipped back to mccain after the palin pick. perhaps montana is the one state that palin helps mccain win. yet, we are squabbling over three electoral votes and i my calculations are that obama will succeed with or without montana. i call montana for mccain because the last month's series of polls generally have mccain leading in spite of that gap closing and now close. the same is true of arizona. i was in arizona in may. i kept asking people i met, and i gathered that if mccain was not from arizona, the state would go blue. yet, i see arizona staying narrowly red. meanwhile, long before the pundits and major shift in the polls, i have felt confident that obama would perform better in florida than ohio which was not the case for bill clinton in 1992. however, like nevada, florida's economy is hurting and unlike mccain who hosted a convention centered around terrorism... i have long thought the economy is the greatest security risk facing our country. i trust that florida agrees and i will take back every sand bar comment i've made since 2000.
ultimately, i call ohio for obama... but i predict ohio to be too close to call until after the west coast polls are closed. additionally, for the same reason i foresee ohio ending close, i also see indiana close. however, i see indiana narrowly red for mccain. unlike missiouri, indiana's popular senator is somewhat a bore and moderate. indiana reminds me of northern kentucky democrats. in order to win, you have to market yourself as a virtual republican. with that said and given that indiana did not break for clinton with perot's help, i call indiana for mccain and i call missiouri for obama... home of the likable, well-known, and early obama activist, senator claire mccaskill. if she ran for governor first, she could be president in 2016, eh?
end game: obama with 379 electoral votes. the greatest victory since the eighties. and incidentally, i alway hinted he would prove to be our next great american president. finally, i win a contest... by virtue of association or vicariously or something like that.
If you're an Obama supporter, as I have been for the last two years, this post may bother you. On the other hand, you may have perceived many of the same ideas while listening to Obama address the Senate yesterday, concerning the bailout bill.
Frankly, I was very disappointed with Obama's support of the bill. I was even more disappointed with his speech! To my ears, Obama used a rusty formulaic structure for his speech, with an unusual amount of fear and guilt lathered on the American people.
From the beginning of the speech, he was talking about blame for the state of the economy - but he didn't mention the Iraq War, outsourcing of jobs, or the plummeting employment rate. He used an analogy of putting out a fire now (by passing this bill in a hurry), but he failed to mention the other truthful part of that analogy - that some fires actually need to happen in order to destroy things so that new things can take place. Example: some of the moldy houses that Katrina visited had to be allowed to burn down, so new ones could be rebuilt. Many people have commented on the similarity between the devastation caused by Katrina, and the destruction to our economy.
Obama went on to accuse the House of failing to act. This is a blatant mischaracterization. The House DID act, just not the way Obama and others wanted it to. This is partisanship, pure and simple. I was surprised to hear Obama go there. He also connected the stock market drop to the House decision to vote down the original bailout bill. I was watching the stock market going down before the voting even started. Plus, it is simply inaccurate to attribute the activity in the stock market to anything other than investors' willingness to invest. Period. There are a multitude of reasons why investors choose to buy and sell stocks. Most of those reasons have nothing to do with what is happening at the same time in Congress.
Bottom line, Obama used fear and guilt in large doses in an attempt to persuade the American people to approve of this bailout bill created in the Senate. The bulk of his speech is chock full of talk about dire consequences, dangerous situations, threats of what will happen if we don't act now to rescue Wall Street. It was horrifying to hear him use causes near and dear, such as mortgages, car loans and college tuitions, payrolls, and bills, to convnce fellow Senators of the viability of this bailout bill. To plead the case for the bill based on a fear of a recession - that most of us already know we're in - well, that was an insult to our intelligence.
Obama also erroneously appropriated credit to the bailout bill for things that the bill simply doesn't guarantee, such as real protections for taxpayers, oversight, accountability, help for homeowners, elimination of golden parachutes, and profits or returns on our taxpayer contributions to this bill. Yes, those things are mentioned in the bill (I've read all 106 pages) - but every condition has a giant loophole for the Treasury Secretary to slide through, without any obligation to Congress, taxpayers, or anyone at all.
There are absolutely NO guarantees that the provisions of the bill will be managed correctly, that any money will be gotten back by the taxpayers, or that there will be any profits whatsoever. Obama clearly stated this in his speech. But didn't he also say previously that he would NOT support a bill that didn't have those guarantees built in?
One key item in the bill, which Obama mentioned in his speech, concerns the possibility Obama described by saying, "If we fall short, we will levy a fee on financial institutions so that they can repay us for the losses they caused." There's a clause in the bill about this, true. However, there are many more clauses in the bill, which indicate the very real possibility, even intention, that the Treasury Secretary will buy up assets and then dismantle the financial institutions. There would be no entity to "bill" a fee to, no financial institution from which to obtain reimbursement for our losses.
Another Senator has called this bailout bill "legislative blackmail."
The conclusion of Obama's speech exhorted the American people to do more to help our economy, to take more action to prevent the economic downfall we face. From this soapbox, Obama launched his familiar stump speech - blaming the runaway spending of the Bush Administration, and saying that many important programs will be delayed or abandoned, in spite of our great sacrifices.
The best line of his speech came at the very end, where he said, "...our destiny is not written for us, but by us." That rang true. Unfortunately, that truth was cloaked in thick political rhetoric, the likes of which has a real potential to derail Obama's voting base.
Dear Senator Obama,
Please take the next step, and show real leadership, by demanding that Congress immediately begin drafting legislation to address regulating the banking industry, so that the current financial disaster will not happen again, and our country's economy can grow in a ethically and fiscally responsible manner. Even the supporters of the financial industry bailout agree that the current legislation before congress does not address the issue long term. It is incumbent on you as a senator, and presidential candidate to take the lead on this issue, and demand, among other things more transparency regarding financial instruments, and tougher truth-in-lending laws.
I think that more transparency is necessary so that banks can more clearly evaluate a particular instrument, so that the markets can more closely reflect reality.
One truth-in-lending regulation that I would like to see is that lenders be required to present borrowers who are considering adjustable rate loans a chart that shows clearly what their payments will be based on the change in the prime lending rates.
I hope you will take this seriously, and step out in front on this issue.
Sincerely,
Adam Nisenholz
Dear Citizen,
If you agree with the sentiments in this blog post, please leave a comment. Also feel free to suggest additional or alternative features of new banking regulation.
to anyone that might read this. i attempted to compose an email to the Obama campaign via this website but when i hit the submit button it took me to an error page. i fear my message was not sent so i'm leaving it here.
at the bottom of my letter i included a suggestion for an oversite to the bailout bill. i'd like to encourage others to do the same.
Please don't let this bailout bill go through without some serious oversite. I struggle every week to make ends meet. I guess I'm lucky that I work as a cook in a pizza restaurant because i can't really afford to eat anymore. My health insurance costs more than my rent! I graduated from USC (the REAL one) in December. I have a degree in media arts and haven't been able to find a job. i keep plugging away at my $7.55/hour job giving %110 so that if i am caught stealing food they won't fire me. It sickens me every 2 weeks to see my paycheck cut by ~%34 to give money to a government that is going to give my hard earned money to a bunch of low lives that don't know a thing about struggle. They've used every dirty trick in the book to accumulate their wealth and now that they're in danger of losing it we're going to just hand it back to them? Tell me this...where's the bailout bill for the homeowner that loses their home? where's the bailout bill for the college student that's so steaped in debt they can't afford to pay for the rest of their education? where's the bailout bill for someone that truly needs it? I guess i'm luckier than some. Sir you've had my vote from the moment you began your campaign and you will keep my vote regardless of what transpires in the coming days, but i beg of you to please either find a way to halt this bill entirely or bring it to terms that truly help the american people.
My suggestion for an oversite: individually calculate what each CEO needs to live on per month, and give them $100 over that amount. Let them feel the pressure of barely making ends meet. My ends don't even meet that well.
"Watch Your Rights!" (StahrT)
See also Bernanke Spilled the Beans!!! (Opninions and Debate)
Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act (Introduced in House)
HR 2755 IH
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 2755
To abolish the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks, to repeal the Federal Reserve Act, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
June 15, 2007
Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services
A BILL
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act’.
SEC. 2. FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD ABOLISHED.
(a) In General- Effective at the end of the 1-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and each Federal reserve bank are hereby abolished.
(b) Repeal of Federal Reserve Act- Effective at the end of the 1-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Reserve Act is hereby repealed.
(c) Disposition of Affairs-
(1) MANAGEMENT DURING DISSOLUTION PERIOD- During the 1-year period referred to in subsection (a), the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System–
(A) shall, for the sole purpose of winding up the affairs of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks–
(i) manage the employees of the Board and each such bank and provide for the payment of compensation and benefits of any such employee which accrue before the position of such employee is abolished; and
(ii) manage the assets and liabilities of the Board and each such bank until such assets and liabilities are liquidated or assumed by the Secretary of the Treasury in accordance with this subsection; and
(B) may take such other action as may be necessary, subject to the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, to wind up the affairs of the Board and the Federal reserve banks.
(2) LIQUIDATION OF ASSETS-
(A) IN GENERAL- The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall liquidate all assets of the Board and the Federal reserve banks in an orderly manner so as to achieve as expeditious a liquidation as may be practical while maximizing the return to the Treasury.
(B) TRANSFER TO TREASURY- After satisfying all claims against the Board and any Federal reserve bank which are accepted by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and redeeming the stock of such banks, the net proceeds of the liquidation under subparagraph (A) shall be transferred to the Secretary of the Treasury and deposited in the General Fund of the Treasury.
(3) ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITIES- All outstanding liabilities of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks at the time such entities are abolished, including any liability for retirement and other benefits for former officers and employees of the Board or any such bank in accordance with employee retirement and benefit programs of the Board and any such bank, shall become the liability of the Secretary of the Treasury and shall be paid from amounts deposited in the general fund pursuant to paragraph (2) which are hereby appropriated for such purpose until all such liabilities are satisfied.
(d) Report- At the end of the 18-month period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall submit a joint report to the Congress containing a detailed description of the actions taken to implement this Act and any actions or issues relating to such implementation that remain uncompleted or unresolved as of the date of the report.
ALL ACTIONS:
Feel free to debate and discuss, as this is an important bill.
"The society's degradation relies/ not on our differences/ but the separation within."
-- Linkin Park, "Frgt/10."
.jpg)
