Senate Adds Long List Worth $149 Billion of New Items To Bailout Bill; “Blue Dog” Dems Support In Doubt

The bail out bill passed by the Senate adds $149 Billion to the original $700 Billion package.  It is hoped that these additions will attract “Yes” votes in the House, but, it may cause some fiscally conservative House members, who previously had approved the $700 Billion bail out, to switch their vote to “No.”
The Senate package includes:

  • Repeal for a year of the Alternative Minimum Tax (first drafted to make sure that the superrich pay some income taxes, but now set to hit more than 22 million additional Americans if Congress does not act); This repeal would spare 24 million households from a $62 billion alternative minimum tax.
  • Extend $17 billion in benefits to companies that produce alternative energy.
  • Disaster relief (for Hurricane Ike).
  • Temporary increase the limit on federal insurance for bank deposits to $250,000 from $100,000.
  • A new property tax deduction of up to $1,000 for homeowners who do not currently itemize deductions on their federal income taxes. (Advocates say 30 million people would be eligible for the benefit.)
  • Deductions for tuition and education expenses, and deductions for sales tax in states that do not have an income tax.
  • A clean-energy tax package; and tax-break extensions, such as the popular research-and-development tax credit.
  • Deductions for sales tax in states that do not have an income tax.
  • Film and TV programs receive a $344 million tax break.
  • Motorsports racing track facilities get a tax break of $140 million.
  • Restaurateurs and retailers get a $5.8 billion break for restaurant and retail improvements.
  • Indian reservations get a $624 million break to accelerate depreciation on business property.
  • Washington, D.C., receives $132 million of tax incentives to attract investment to the District, and
  • A mental health parity bill.

The Democrats “Blue Dog Coalition,” a fiscally conservative group, has previously blocked legislation to repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), because the proposed legislation did not have provision to pay for the repeal.  The Senate version of the bail out tacks this same AMT legislation to the bail out package.

Paul Blumenthal on the Sunlight Foundation blog writes, “In classic congressional fashion, the Senate has decided to use a crisis piece of legislation as a way to push through a massive package of other priorities forcing an inter-chamber factional battle to come to a head.”

According to The Hill, Of the Blue Dogs’ 49 members, 23 voted for the bill Monday.  Because of the added $149 Billion in the Senate version — with no provision to offset any of this expense — the support of these Blue Dog Democrats in now in question.

The New York Times reports that Charles B. Rangel, Democrat of New York and the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, said the Senate was setting a bad precedent by trying to impose its tax legislation on the House.  Rangel is quoted as saying, “The Senate leadership took an unprecedented gamble when they attached a package of tax extenders to the emergency financial rescue legislation”

Posted in Special Reports | Leave a comment

Does The Rise Of Sarah Palin Illustrate The “Peter Principle” At Work?

What a sweetheart Sarah Palin seems to be — pretty, vivacious, and, she knows how to handle a gun.  It’s easy to see how she has been popular her whole life.  I imagine that in high school she was often the center of attention, the “barracuda” of her high school girl’s basketball team, “Miss Congeniality” at the beauty contest.  Who wouldn’t vote for such a girl?

She now has risen to dizzying heights on the national stage.  And the question is, has she risen way beyond her level of competence?  Is she ready to take control of the launch codes of our nuclear arsenal?

The Peter Principle was a book published in 1968 that made the observation that often in an organization, people rise to a “level of their incompetence.”  You’ve got to wonder if, in Sarah Palin, we are seeing the Peter Principle in action.

I’ve been watching some of the Katie Couric interviews with Sarah Palin.  They are almost painful to watch.  In this video, Couric questions Palin about her reading habits, and asks, “When it comes to establishing your world view, I am curious what newspapers and magazines you regularly read before you were tapped …”

And here Couric starts her question to Palin with the comment, “You’ve cited the proximity of Russia as part of your foreign experience ….”

Posted in M Bock, Opinion | 9 Comments

Is This The End For The GOP?

Is this the end for the GOP?  An interesting post on at Slate, GOP, RIP?, By Timothy Noah says, “For Republicans the events of Sept. 29 could well be remembered as the start of a decades long exile from power—much as Democrats remember Nov. 4, 1980.”

Noah seems to argue that because the success of the GOP is based on a con, and because this con is becoming undone, the GOP may become undone as well:  Excerpts from the article:

  • The central con of the political coalition assembled by Ronald Reagan and maintained by his successors was that government was a common enemy.
  • This was a con for two reasons. First, the middle and upper classes were both dependent on the federal government for a variety of benefits …
  • Second, the distribution of this government largesse greatly favored the rich. In the April 1992 Atlantic, Neil Howe and Philip Longman, citing unpublished data from the Congressional Budget Office, reported that U.S. households with incomes above $100,000 received, on average, slightly more in federal cash and in-kind benefits ($5,690) than households with incomes below $10,000 ($5,560).
  • The Reagan coalition survived because nobody wanted to believe this and because both upper and middle classes were bought off with President George W. Bush’s tax cuts. (That the tax cuts favored the wealthy didn’t seem to matter.) But the proposed $700 billion bank bailout made it hard for Republicans to cling to their cherished illusion that government exists only to indulge spendthrift widows and orphans.
  • It should be remembered that a fundamentalist belief in untrammeled capitalism is not the first but, rather, the second pillar of Reagan-style Republicanism to fall. The first was the belief that the United States should extend military power wherever enemies lurk, regardless of what our allies do. Reagan didn’t actually practice this doctrine, except to overthrow a teensy regime in Grenada and to deploy (and, after a deadly terrorist bombing, withdraw) U.S. Marines in Lebanon;
  • President Bush, alas, took Reagan at his saber-rattling word, waging a war against Saddam Hussein so unilateral that, except for a few Kurds, there was no indigenous fighting force to prop up the way we propped up the ARVN in South Vietnam.
  • I also thought the GOP was cracking up in 2000, when, desperate to find fault with every last aspect of the Clinton administration, it started bad-mouthing prosperity. I got that wrong, too. So maybe the GOP isn’t really dead.
Posted in M Bock, Opinion | 11 Comments