You are currently browsing the monthly archive for February 2009.
Edited – 2-27-09 at 5:14 a.m. pst
This is one of those posts where, true to my word, I will ask more questions than give answers. But I really want to know what is going on with the “Fairness Doctrine,” currently being pushed by Senate Democrat Debbie Stabenow and others.
I’m hoping all that I am hearing is not just conservative hype and rabble rousing. I fear it is not.
It is reported that today, Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina attached an amendment to prevent imposition of a ‘fairness doctrine’ to the Voting Rights bill being considered by the Senate. That Bill, among other things would give Washington, D.C. a representative in the House. It is popular with Democrats, not as much with Republicans. That Bill passed the Senate by 87 votes to 11. In the same report, it says that Dick Durban of Illinois offered another amendment that could bring the Fairness Doctrine in via the back door by requiring the FCC to “encourage” radio stations to have a diversity of views.
The White House announced that President Obama does not support the Fairness Doctrine. Since the FCC established the policy which became the original Fairness Doctrine in 1949, it seems that it could again establish such a policy.
So here are the questions:
How is it possible that any Senator or Congressman could even propose legislation that would have the effect of censorship? Have they not all heard of the First Amendment?
Could this nation have slipped so far to the left as to make such a doctrine a realistic posibility?
Is Senator Stabenow so clueless that she thinks we won’t notice that her husband was v.p. of liberal talk radio’s Air America and is still heavily invested in lib talk radio?
Could Mr. Obama become a “pragmatist” and actually sign such a bill to keep his party happy and supportive of his other goals?
Is this just a Conservative talking point to illustrate the evil intentions of their Liberal opponents?
I would sure like to know more about this entire issue.
Why? You ask.
Most markets anticipate the future and price goods, services, and securities with future conditions in mind. Over the past month as the Stimulus was crafted and passed and signed, most markets have trended downward. The Dow has dropped by about 10% below what it was on Inauguration Day.
Contrary to the headlines grabbed by the big risk-takers (day-traders, etc.) on Wall Street, most folks on Wall Street, indeed, most investors worldwide are a relatively sober group. They make decisions after much study and deliberation. When they worry over future uncertainties, they tend to hold their money out of the market. That means less buyers and falling prices.
What our economy needed was a clear message that well-thought-out measures were being combined to stimulate the economy. Wall Street needed to hear a message that would inspire confidence. The way the bill was created and passed and many items included in the bill sent a far stronger message to Wall Street than the economic concepts that were employed. Rather than inspire confidence, the message has been highly unsettling to Wall Street.
Some thoughts on how to make investors more likely to get back in the market/to regain confidence:
1. First and foremost, act with confidence and speak positively about the future. This doesn’t mean that President Obama and his staff need to avoid speaking truthfully about the current state of our economy. It does mean that they have to stop the current drumbeat of “Depression” and “unemployment” and “starving” that seems to be their daily litany.
2. Using fear is a tool of politics. Using hopeful words and showing confidence are the tools we need to stimulate our economic activity. Stop using the “fear card” at every turn.
3. Don’t underestimate the audience. When you talk to investors about a plan for supporting our banking system, have specifics and know what you are talking about. When Timothy Geitner presented the Bank Bailout plan he left far more doubts than he answered questions. This single act, underestimating the importance of this message, underestimating the investor audience, cost the Obama Administration as much loss of credibility as the failed nomination of Tom Daschle.
4. Talking only of Revenues and how we will be spending tax dollars leaves the other half of the story to the imagination. Most investors read into the stimulus discussion “more government,” and “more spending.” Show where you have plans to cut expenditures to match lower revenues. Investors look at both sides of the ledger. They want to see equilibrium, stability.
Until investors feel good about the direction of our government, expect more of what we have seen for the past year.
I live in Oregon and read some of the local press and blogs related to politics both here and elsewhere from the local perspective. One of the blogs I read is BlueOregon, a “progressive” blog. It is moderated very loosely and as a result gets comments from a wide variety of viewpoints, though the majority are “progressive.”
A recent discussion was held (and continues) on BlueOregon about the speed/haste with which the Stimulus Bill was crafted. I have written on this blog more than once about my dislike for the haste. Many will argue that the speed was required and admire it.
I contend that Senators Snowe, Collins, and Specter all voted with the Democrats for strictly political reasons, not because their vote served their constituents. I would also argue that it was politics that caused all the Republicans in the House to vote against the Bill as a “team.”. I think the Democrats in Congress wanted it passed before Members had a chance to read and consider the bill properly because it served their overarching political purposes.
The original post on BlueOregon was a guest post and open letter from Congressmean Peter DeFazio (southwestern Oregon – main population in the Eugene area). Mr. DeFazio wrote the letter to explain his “reluctant yes vote.” His reluctant vote was due largely to the fact that he felt not enough was being done. I would disagree with that reason, instead arguing that the right things are not done by the bill. The thread of comments to the post, however, give great input to things the bill should and should not have done. It was a lively debate. Reading all of it gives you the feeling that Members of Congress, in the rush to pass this legislation, missed an opportunity to hear what their constituents had to say. They missed a chance to represent the people of their districts/states.
To me this is what is meant by “Taxation without Representation.” I am convinced that if Congress had been able to talk with and listen to their constituents prior to finalizing and voting on this bill, it would have come out much different. Instead, politics ruled the day and we got poorly considered “solutions” that I fear will be worse than the problem in the long run.
I don’t like all the blaming of this on the Democrats or on the Republicans. I don’t like the finger pointing and name calling. It’s the NeoCons or it’s the Liberals. It’s the Looney Left or the Religous Right. The blame, in my opinion, lies squarely in Washington, D.C. where the insular state of Members of Congress makes for a disconnect with the people. It is, however, the people’s fault, yours and mine, that we don’t correct the situation.
What will it take to restore civil debate? What will it take to create true consensus decision making? What will it take for our “Representatives” to take action for the good of the people, not just the political good of the Members of Congress and their minions and makers?
Ever buy a house? Part of the drill is to read the twenty pages or so of fine print associated with the deal. There is the mortgage agreement, the title report, etc. If you don’t read these documents, you are likely to end up like thousands of Americans who have lost their homes to foreclosure. Usually, people complain that there is just too much detail and they don’t want to spend the time. Big mistake.
Now Congress is about to buy the farm, IMO. More correctly stated, they are about to spend about $790,000,000,000 of your tax dollars. The plan to do this is now a 1071 page document, released late last night (around 11:00 p.m. Thursday, February 12, I believe). There is a summary (that can be a bit deceiving*) available. It is reported in today’s news that a vote is planned for 1:00 p.m. on the bill. That means that members of Congress have about 14 hours (if they choose not to sleep) to read, understand, consider and then vote on this bill. My guess is that there will not be a single Member of Congress who will have read all of the bill prior to voting. I guess they are just too busy with this “emergency” to read the details.
I have read more of the bill than most. I find a great deal of it to be “politics-as-usual” in Washington, D.C. There are pet projects for almost every Member of Congress who will vote for the plan. To my way of thinking, less than half of the funds will be spent on items that are remotely connected with “Stimulus.”
I would sure like someone who has read the bill to give me a rationale as to why this bill must be passed and signed before anyone has read it. I would also like to know (if it is such an emergency to pass this bill before anyone has read it), why is such a large percentage of the money not allocated for use for two or three years. It may be brilliant or it may be trash but I am quite sure no Member of Congress will truly know which it is before he or she votes on it. What a sad day this is and what a sad commentary on our Congress. Politics as Usual, $790 Billion of it. Vote now. Worry about what you are doing later.
* I wanted to show an example but could not get the full bill on the internet until after the actual time of the vote. I just got a copy via Huffington Post (not on the Appropriations Committee website) and it is a late mark-up version that still may not be the final.
** As an example of the fun it is to read all 200,000+ words of this document, here is an minute example:
(a) AUTHORITY TO MAKE PAYMENTS.-
19 (1) ELIGIBILITY.-
20 (A) IN GENERAL.-Subject to paragraph
21 (5) (B), the Secretary of the Treasury shall dis-
22 burse a $250 payment to each individual who,
23 for any month during the 3-month period end-
24 ing with the month which ends prior to the
25 month that includes the date of the enactment
1 of this Act, is entitled to a benefit payment de-
2 scribed in clause (i), (ii), or (iii) of subpara-
3 gTaph (B) or is eligible for a SSI cash benefit
4 described in subparagraph (C).
First, the “Stimulus Bill” that Congress will present to Mr. Obama is rushed and terribly flawed. Mr. Obama has a rare opportunity to lead. He has a chance to prove to all of us that he was serious about changing Washington. He has a chance to become what the true believers hoped he would be.
He can send the “stimulus bill” back to congress with the following note:
Dear Senator Reid, Congresswoman Pelosi, Senators and Congressmen,
I am returning your bill, HR1, for a rewrite before I will sign it. It appears that you did not believe me when I promised all Americans that we would change the way we do business in Washington, D.C. I promised the American People that there would be no earmarks, no pet projects in a stimulus bill. HR1 is filled with both.
I want you to send me a bill that will be all about stimulus and not about Education, Global Climate Change, Energy Policy, Aid to States, etc. Those are important topics that we need to tackle. Let’s do that in separate legislation with a single bill addressing a single issue.
Hiding a major change to the Whistleblower Act inside a stimulus bill is the old way of doing business in Washington. Funding elderly and disabled programs and state and local law enforcement programs are separate issues only distantly related to stimulus and should be forwarded to me as individual bills, each addressing just one issue.
We have promised transparency. We cannot deliver that if we continue to trade pet projects and earmarks to get the votes to pass a bill.
If you will send me a bill that is devoid of pet projects and what the American people call “Pork,” I will sign it. If you send me a bill like this one that is only halfway about actions directly related to stimulating the economy, I will veto it.
Whatever you send to me, I will, as promised publish for all Americans to be able to read and comment. I will make sure that we all have at least 5 days to consider the legislations before I sign or veto the measure. I want a good bill that will work. If you want a bill in which to hide all your other priorities, I can assure you that you will need to override my veto.
Thank you for your cooperation,
President B. Obama
Last night, President Obama took his show on the road to Elkhart, Indiana to sell his “stimulus bill.”
I was quite impressed with his ability to cover all the points he wanted to cover and make each point the answer to a question from the press. I was quite impressed that Helen Thomas, at 88, is still able to stand and ask a question, let alone be mobile and lucid enough to continue to do her job. I was quite impressed by Mr. Obama’s composure and his ability to stay above the level of those who resort to attacks and name calling. I was impressed that it appears that Mr. Obama has actually conferred with advisors from all political stripes.
I was most concerned by a couple of things that, for me, undermined most of the other good things that I saw and heard.
First, I was highly disappointed that Mr. Obama continued to use the “fear” card to sell his plan. He clearly told us, ”For every day we wait or point fingers or drag our feet, more Americans will lose their jobs. More families will lose their savings. More dreams will be deferred and denied” he warned. ”And our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.” He could have said that we need to be serious and commit the government to doing things that will stimulate the economy. He could have said that it is important to do this soon. I am worried about the rush to get this done and the size of it. I REALLY don’t like the President’s use of fear to sell this.
Second, I could not help but see President Bill Clinton sitting in front of the cameras saying, “It depends on what the meaning of the word “is” is.” How could Mr. Obama say with a straight face (and he did. I saw it.) that there were “no pet projects. Not a single earmark” in the stimulus bill? When he handed the drafting of the bill over to Nancy Pelosi and crew, they labored long and hard to include every pet project and all the lard they could find onto the bill. They knew that Mr. Obama would do his best to get the bill passed and they wanted all their goodies to ride along on the coattails of both Mr. Obama and the fear of depression if we don’t pass the bill.
Let’s see – pet projects and earmarks. As first written by Pelosi and the House*, no funds would be allowed to go to Illinois unless Rod Blagojevich is removed as Governor. What does that have to do with stimulus? It is a pure and simple political move or “pet project.” No funds can be used by any entity that does not agree to participate in the Immigration “e-verify program.” This is another voluntary pet program that they are using this bill to force on contractors. Again, I don’t see how this is a stimulus to the economy. The bill from the House added “enhancements” to the whistleblower act (to be called the ‘‘Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2009’’.) This is to put back into the legislation (40 pages of) things that the Dems could not get with the first whistleblower act. Is this a pet project or a stimulus? There are salaries and expenses for information technology for the Farm Services Agency, a billion dollars for periodic censuses and programs, $400,000,000 for habitat restoration and mitigation activities for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The list goes on for 680 pages. Most of those 680 pages are dedicated to pet projects and earmarks.
I was certain that Mr. Clinton knew the meaning of the word “is.” I am certain that Mr. Obama knows what an earmark is. He also knows as well that the “stimulus bill” is the granddaddy of all earmark bills.
I am so disappointed.
* Disclaimer: I have only read (large parts of) the original House bill that was sent to the Senate. Some of the offending items may have been struck by the Senate.
Mr. Obama is pushing all the buttons and doing his best to get Congress to get a stimulus bill to his desk as soon as possible. He is using fear tactics to sell the need to rush the bill. He is saying that if we don’t get this stimulus bill passed now, we will ”sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.”
Current polling says that the majority of the american people think the Bill as it now stands will not cure our ills and will waste Billions on pork and pet projects that could not stand on their own merits.
If this is worth doing, it is worth doing right. IMO doing it wrong now will not only fail to “solve” the problem. It will exacerbate it.
I think the real reason to rush it through Congress is to pass a lot of pork that could not withstand the light of day. Given time for the public to learn about what is in this bill, I think it would not even pass in a Democrat controlled Congress.
No. Not back from New York. I just got back from a week in Las Vegas at the World’s largest annual trade show and conference for the Concrete Construction industry. I apologize for not posting but was totally involved with customers, suppliers, and friends.
People laugh at “conventions” in Las Vegas. Those who have never exhibited products at such an event don’t have a clue how difficult and how rewarding such a show can be. I didn’t gamble a single cent nor go to a single show. I was there to work. Most of the people who filled the 1.5 million square feet of exhibit space did the same.
For me, this is a chance to see what people see on the ground. How are their businesses doing? What do they see in the future? This may not be Washington, D.C. where they are trying to “stimulate” the economy, but this is where people know what happens each time government steps in and tries to fix things. There is a reason that business people generally feel that the scariest words in the English language are, “I’m from the Government and I’m here to help.” This is ground zero in the Economy of our nation and probably the world.
I spoke with literally hundreds of business people. There were concrete contractors and readymix producers and precasters and folks who do stunning art in concrete materials. Annually, about 80,000 people in the industry (probably only 60,000 this year) come from all over the world to learn at seminars, to see new products, and to plan their buying for equipment and supplies they will need in the coming year.
My imprressions:
1. Almost no Chinese attendees and very few Chinese exhibitors – in the past there were likely 1000 attendees and exhibitors combined, not the 50 or so I saw this year.
2. There were very few Europeans. Again, it seemed like there were about 10% of the normal number.
3. More attendees (at least as a percentage) were from Canada and Mexico. More from all of Latin America were there.
4. People were looking to buy only what they truly needed. A few saw this as a buying opportunity but the vast majority were shopping only to replace what they really needed. They were prepared to wait on marginal purchases.
5. I can’t count the number of folks who said that they would not make any purchases until sometime into the summer when they could see how things were going.
6. I heard almost universal dislike for what is going on in Congress. It mattered not whether they were Democrat or Republican, they expressed a distaste for all the spending. Without any prompting (As a rule, I don’t talk politics with customers) I heard a couple dozen people say that they thought the $800 Billion “Bailout Bill” was going to cause huge problems for all of us. Many stated they thought it was intended to bail out congressmen and women only.
7. Business people in general can figure out how to get the job done in any conditions. They do like to have a known set of conditions with which to work. Most have been burned by changing conditions. When Steel went up 40% in two months a few years back lots were hurt. When Oil and transportation costs skyrocketted, the same thing happened. Most admit to being afraid of major changes that they cannot predict.
8. The most common fear I heard was that all the loose spending by the Federal Government would create massive inflation. Many used the words, “even worse than when Jimmy Carter did the same things.”
I like the thinking in Washington.
Congress and the Administrations started a year ago saying they would solve the Mortgage Mess with a bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac with about $300 Billion of our tax dollars. The initial efforts weren’t completely successful.
They also noted that there were a few banks and other financial institutions about to go under. And, a couple of major Auto manufacturers. So, their thinking went, why not add a bit more to the pot. Surely we can solve the problem(s) with a few hundred billion dollars more. And, it would stimulate the economy.
Now, the “Bailout” looks like about a Trillion Dollars more. And, Sallie Mae and about half the State Governments are looking for bailouts, too.
Call me crazy, but I think Congress and the Administration are on to something. The only problem is they seem to lack the guts to do the job properly. Or, they just don’t know how to think BIG.
I propose we go for a $14 trillion bailout. I know. You’re saying to yourself, “$14 Trillion? That’s the size of our entire GDP for a year.” True, it is a lot of money, but think of the benefits. All we have to do is divide the money on a per capita basis and send out the checks. Each of us would get about $45,000. Wow! Send me mine right now!
Just think. That means most families of four would have enough money to pay off that mortgage that was almost in default yesterday. So the problem with the banks and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would all go away. The few folks who had been responsible about their housing choices and who did not have a soon-to-default-mortgage, would have enough to run down to buy a brand new Hummer or Explorer Hybrid, for cash. Poof, away goes the need for an auto bailout. And think of all the new money in circulation. In fact, banks would have so much cash they would be begging people to borrow. Businesses would have all the money they need to expand and build inventory. They would be hiring like crazy. They would be spending on R & D and creating important new products. They might even find a solution to the energy crisis. Everyone who wanted a job would have three offers. If everyone was employed, the need for social programs for the poor would drop dramatically. We could cut the size of government………
There would be a few minor side effects, but, hey, doesn’t every one of our miracle drugs (like Botox and Viagra) have side effects? Inflation would probably be triple digits. But, that would only last for about a year or two … I think. And the dollar would be devalued against every other currency. But that means that stuff made in America would be cheap in Euros or Yen, so the US businesses would be exporting like crazy……
Why doesn’t our Congress and our Administration have the vision to think of such a great solution, let alone pull this off?
Maybe we elected the wrong people.
.
Latest comments: