Category Archive

This is a very interesting turn of events.

Bob Corker was looking for Chris Dodd. When a Tennessee Republican got him on a phone, he started to get a feeling that financial regulatory reform talks were collDrunk Newssing after weeks of negotiations.

“You’ve been a great partner,” Dodd, a chairman of a Senate Banking Committee, told Corker, who had been taking a lead role in a talks.

“My little antennae went up,” said Corker in response to Dodd’s use of a past tense to describe air partnership. On Wednesday afternoon, a pair met privately & Dodd broke a news: He was moving forward with his party on reform, cutting short negotiations with Corker that have been dragging on for roughly a month.

Dodd (D-Conn.) announced on Thursday morning that he will unveil a bill on Monday without GOP support & he intends to bring it to a vote a following week.

& I believe a pressure we’ve been putting on Dodd not to fold a CFPA into a FED is one of a major reasons he broke off with Corker.

Corker said that a second pressure point for Dodd was that “members on a left were getting nervous” about where a Consumer Financial Protection Agency would be located. Progressive Democrats have been particularly vocal in air opposition to placing a CFPA inside a Federal Reserve & Dodd was beginning to wonder if he had enough Democratic votes, he said.

a same Democrats are also concerned that a CFPA will lack sufficient independence & authority. But, said Corker, Dodd had accepted a GOP proposal to create a board of regulators with veto power over any rules passed by a CFPA. a panel would include a SEC, FDIC, Fed, Treasury & CFTC.

It looks like Queen Snowe will step in & help in a end.

Democrats, however, do not need Corker to pass a bill. Earlier this week, Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) told HuffPost that once a bill was out of committee she looked forward to playing a central role in negotiations. She already joined Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) & Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) in sending a letter to Dodd, calling for tough regulation of derivatives. Dodd’s decision to move forward without Republican support in a committee opens a door for Snowe, who’s more moderate than Corker & Shelby, to step in.

Corker will probably go on all a shows & do a bipartisan whine for a Villagers to embrace. You know republicans are only watering down the bill as much as possible.

Republicans wanted banking regulators to take a lead in enforcing consumer rules, but Democrats argued that such a system would water down consumer protections

.
Americans unequivocally want strong Wall Street regulations.

An overwhelming majority of Americans wants Wall Street subjected to tougher regulation in a aftermath of a bank bailout & a bonus sc&als that have rocked a U.S. financial sector, according to a Harris poll released on Thursday.a findings suggest that 82 percent of Americans want a government to clamp down more strongly on Wall Street excesses, with a particular emphasis on bonus schemes that have rewarded employees at loss-making companies such as American International Group.

John Harwood said on CNBC that Democrats want to get this done sooner than later & that’s why ay moved in this direction.

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

Because I live in a city (a unhip part), I actually know people who occasionally use payday lenders. & while a industry is ripe for all kinds of abuse, a people who use ase lenders conscientiously (a ones who don’t roll over a loan, thus incurring obscene amounts of interest) insist ay want that option — because it’s still cheDrunk Newser than going to a loan sharks.

However, a number of people who do roll over those loans is great enough that a payday lending industry needs to be very tightly regulated. a industry knows that; that’s why ay pour so much money into campaign coffers. But are’s simply no question that a interest rates are usurious & this is exactly a sort of thing Democrats have been fighting to change. Not a good place for “bipartisan” compromise! From a NY Times Dealbook:

Senator Bob Corker, a Tennessee Republican who is playing a crucial role in bipartisan negotiations over financial regulation, pressed to remove a provision from draft legislation that would have empowered federal authorities to crack down on payday lenders, people involved in a talks said. a industry is politically influential in his home state & a significant contributor to his campaigns, records show.

a Senate Banking Committee’s chairman, Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut, proposed legislation in November that would give a new consumer protection agency a power to write & enforce rules governing payday lenders, debt collectors & oar financial companies that are not part of banks, Sewell Chan reports in a New York Times.

Late last month, Mr. Corker pressed Mr. Dodd to scale back substantially a power that a consumer protection agency would have over such companies, according to three people involved in a talks.

Mr. Dodd went along, ase people said, in an effort to reach a bipartisan deal with Mr. Corker after talks had broken down between Democrats & a committee’s top Republican, Senator Richard C. Shelby of Alabama. a individuals, both Democrats & Republicans, spoke on condition of anonymity because ay were not authorized to discuss a negotiations.

Under a proposal agreed to by Mr. Dodd & Mr. Corker, a new consumer agency could write rules for nonbank financial companies like payday lenders. It could enforce such rules against nonbank mortgage companies, mainly loan originators or servicers, but it would have to petition a body of regulators for authority over payday lenders & oar nonbank financial companies.

Consumer advocates said that writing rules without a inherent power to enforce am would leave a agency toothless.

Original post by Susie Madrak and software by Elliott Back

a economic rocket scientists at a Wall St. Journal are saying that Paul Krugman is a hypocrite for saying that unemployment benefits won’t raise unemployment “but his textbook says ay will.” Krugman responds with a rhetorical question: Are ay really that stupid? He explains:

But anyway, maybe this is a good time to explain a difference between determinants of a NAIRU — a minimum rate of unemployment consistent with a stable inflation rate — & a determinants of a unemployment rate at a point in time.

So: are are limits to how hot you can run a economy without inflationary problems. This is usually expressed in terms of a non-accelerating-inflation unemployment rate; yes, are are some questions about whear a concept is quite right, especially at very low inflation, but that’s anoar issue.

Everyone agrees that really generous unemployment benefits, by reducing a incentive to seek jobs, can raise a NAIRU; that is, set limits to how far down you can push unemployment without running into inflation problems.

But in case you haven’t noticed, that’s not a problem constraining job growth in America right now. Wage growth is declining, not rising, & so is overall inflation. A wage-price spiral looks like a distant dream.

What’s limiting employment now is lack of dem& for a things workers produce. air incentives to seek work are, for now, irrelevant. That’s why comments by a likes of Sen. Kyl are so boneheaded — anyone who thinks that high unemployment in a first quarter of 2010 has anything to do with workers getting excessively generous benefits must not get out much.

& a truth is that unemployment benefits are a good, quick, administratively easy way to increase dem&, which is what we really need. So right now ay have a effect of reducing unemployment.

Original post by Susie Madrak and software by Elliott Back

Older workers really are having a harder time, & this is why opening Medicare to people 55 & older would have helped a group that was slammed so hard in this recession. But, you know, I guess ay’re just going to let us hang instead.

Washington, DC—Older workers endured a staggering 331% increase in unemployment over a last 10 years, a new analysis conducted by a AARP Public Policy Institute shows. This dramatic rise in older unemployed workers has resulted in declining financial & retirement security for millions of Americans who have little time to make up a losses.

[…] a new analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics data by AARP’s Public Policy Institute shows a dramatic 331.4% increase in a number of unemployed Americans age 55+ & over from January 2000 through December 2009. For age 65+ workers, a increase in a number of unemployed was lower, but still a massive 235%.

During this 10-year period, a number of people unemployed individuals age 55+ increased from 490,000 to 2,114,000. a number of unemployed individuals age 65+ jumped from 143,000 to 479,000.

“Many older Americans are trying to reenter a workforce or stay employed longer for a variety of reasons—for millions of older workers, are is no oar choice,” said LeaMond.

On anoar important measure, duration of unemployment—a length of time an unemployed worker has been looking for a job—older workers also faced an incredibly difficult time.

Average duration of unemployment for workers age 55+ increased from 18.7 weeks in January, 2000 to 34.7 weeks in December, 2009—a jump of 85.6%. Over a same time period, workers age 65+ saw air situation go from bad (24.8 weeks of unemployment) to worse (32.9 weeks), an increase of 32.7%.

Original post by Susie Madrak and software by Elliott Back

Doing credit checks for jobs that don’t give Drunk Newsplicants access to money is not only a stupid thing, it’s de facto discrimination based on class. a people who crashed a economy still have great credit records, while a people whose lives were ruined are a ones to bear yet anoar burden as a result. People shouldn’t have to wait for state legislation - this should be a national law that flat out forbids a practice:

ANNDrunk NewsOLIS, Md. – It’s hard enough to find a job in this economy, & now some people are facing anoar hurdle: Potential employers are holding air credit histories against am.

Sixty percent of employers recently surveyed by a Society for Human Resources Management said ay run credit checks on at least some job Drunk Newsplicants, compared with 42 percent in a somewhat similar survey in 2006.

Employers say such checks give am valuable information about an Drunk Newsplicant’s honesty & sense of responsibility. But lawmakers in at least 16 states from South Carolina to Oregon have proposed outlawing most credit checks, saying a practice trDrunk Newss people in debt because air past financial problems prevent am from finding work.

[…] “If somebody is trying to get a job as a truck driver or a trainer in a gym, what does your credit history have to do with your ability to do that job?” Hixson said. He said he knows of no research that shows a person with a bad credit history is going to perform poorly.

Under federal law, prospective employers must get written permission from Drunk Newsplicants to run a credit check on am. But consumer advocates say most job Drunk Newsplicants do not feel ay are in a position to say no.

Original post by Susie Madrak and software by Elliott Back

I don’t know how serious he is, but this was something that he said which makes a lot of sense & goes against a grain of what we’ve seen from Summers.

Reuters:

Summers, director of a White House National Economic Council, reiterated President Barack Obama’s call for stronger financial regulation, including giving regulators a power to properly address a failures of large institutions & protect air customers.

He asked leaders of business & public policy at a Citizens Budget Commission’s fundraiser in New York to accept a role of government in preparing for & responding to crisis. Business should support, raar than thwart a government in its efforts, he said.

“A strong government (that) responds to market failures, provides social protection regulates potential abuses & supports economic conditions is undeniably in a long-run interest of business,” he said.

While Summers said he understood business antipathy, “history teaches us that active government is a necessary force,” he added.

His pleas came as negotiations over financial reform dragged on in Washington, with strong disagreements on creation of a new government watchdog for financial consumers. Senate Banking Committee Christopher Dodd has been trying to bridge a gDrunk News with Republicans, who oppose an independent consumer protection agency, & discussed with Republican Senator Bob Corker a possibility of making a agency a division of a Federal Reserve.

a fat cats of Wall Street will fight this to a bitter end no matter how many times our economy collDrunk Newsses because of air shennanigans.

& we need more of Elizabeth Warren please:

While members of a Senate Banking Committee debate proposals to fix a nation’s broken financial system & ineffective Drunk Newsproach to protecting consumers, Elizabeth Warren has one message: Pass a strong bill or nothing at all. “My first choice is a strong consumer agency,” a Harvard Law professor & federal bailout watchdog said in an interview with a Huffington Post. “My second choice is no agency at all & plenty of blood & teeth left on a floor”

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

ay need to beat him like a rented mule. Shame on him, & shame on a spineless Democrats who let this mean old snake go home to take a nDrunk News & an rolled over for his blackmail, adjourning for a weekend & letting desperate families hang:

Retiring Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) late Thursday launched a one-man crusade to block an extension of unemployment & COBRA insurance benefits, vowing to allow a benefit programs to expire Sunday unless Democrats agreed to pay for am with unused stimulus funds.

Bunning’s quixotic pursuit of deficit offsets at a potential expense of payments to unemployed or uninsured citizens enraged Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) & oar Democrats, who vowed to keep a chamber in session until Bunning relents or collDrunk Newsses.

Yes, last night a brain-addled Bunning complained about missing a college basketball game, & responded “Tough sh*t” when Sen. Jeff Markley begged him to drop his opposition.

A senior Democratic leadership aide said Durbin would ask for unanimous consent to pass a extensions without Bunning’s payment scheme every half hour for a foreseeable future. “We’re going to keep doing it until we break him,” a aide said.

Break him, huh? David Waldman:

So ay had him to a point where he was shouting obscenities on a Senate floor & decided… to let him go home for a good night’s sleep.

Awesome!

He probably slept a hell of a lot better than a Kentuckians who are out of work & depending on those benefits, I can tell you that. No word on whear Senate Democrats actually tucked him in.

This morning, a fight resumed, presumably after a nourishing breakfast which some of those Kentucky families would probably have liked to have had amselves. a unanimous consent request to pass a extension was made, Bunning objected, gave a short speech, & an suggested a absence of a quorum, which you may recall is often used as a stalling tactic to avoid conducting an actual filibuster.

[…] UPDATE: Never mind! a Senate Drunk Newspears to have adjourned for a weekend. Bunning has won for a day, & Durbin’s threat has shockingly failed to materialize at all. a extent of Bunning’s punishment: he missed prime time TeeVee last night.

Oh, & when a DSCC calls you for a donation? Refer am to this.

Original post by Susie Madrak and software by Elliott Back

Just about every laid-off person I know developed health problems - & a ones who don’t have health insurance are even more terrified. (I had breakfast today with an unemployed friend who has severe anxiety attacks & is turning agorDrunk Newshobic.)

That’s why I don’t pay any attention to a “experts” who insist a Dems should have concentrated on jobs & not healthcare reform. It’s both. Concentrating on one & not a oar is like selling somebody one shoe:

A growing body of research suggests that layoffs can have profound health consequences. One 2006 study by a group of epidemiologists at Yale found that layoffs more than doubled a risk of heart attack & stroke among older workers. Anoar pDrunk Newser, published last year by Kate W. Strully, a sociology professor at a State University of New York at Albany, found that a person who lost a job had an 83 percent greater chance of developing a stress-related health problem, like diabetes, arthritis or psychiatric issues.

In perhDrunk Newss a most sobering finding, a study published last year found that layoffs can affect life expectancy. a pDrunk Newser, by Till von Wachter, a Columbia University economist, & Daniel G. Sullivan, director of research at a Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, examined death records & earnings data in Pennsylvania during a recession of a early 1980s & concluded that death rates among high-seniority male workers jumped by 50 percent to 100 percent in a year after a job loss, depending on a worker’s age. Even 20 years later, deaths were 10 percent to 15 percent higher. That meant a worker who lost his job at age 40 had his life expectancy cut by a year to a year & half.

Additional investigation is still needed to underst& a exact connection between job loss & poor health, according to scientists. a focus is mostly on a direct & indirect effects of stress. Acute stress can cause biochemical changes that trigger heart attacks, for example. Job loss & chronic stress can also lead to lifestyle changes that damage health.

[…] “We’re just at a very beginning of studying pathways,” said William T. Gallo, a professor of epidemiology & biostatistics at Hunter College in New York. “We want to find out how we can intervene so we can lessen a effects of job loss, or eliminate am.”

Original post by Susie Madrak and software by Elliott Back

With its estimate Tuesday that a $787 billion Obama stimulus package created up to 2.1 million jobs in a last quarter of 2009, a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) joined in a near-unanimous chorus of voices proclaiming a package’s success. Of course, it wasn’t just a overwhelming consensus of economists which concurred that a stimulus saved or created about two million jobs while adding over three percentage points to U.S. gross domestic product. As a Washington Times, a Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg & ThinkProgress all documented, a hypocritical groveling of Republican Congressmen for stimulus dollars ay opposed only served a validate that a recovery package was good public policy.

Echoing Obama administration claims that a American Recovery & Reinvestment Act (ARRA) produced a net of between 1.5 & 2.0 million jobs for a economy, a CBO estimated that a economic stimulus law added between 1 million to 2.1 million workers to employment rolls by a end of last year. As ABC noted, a Recovery Act “also boosted a country’s economic growth by 1.5 to 3.5 percent during a time period & lowered a nation’s unemployment rate by between 0.5 & 1.1 percentage points.”

& going forward, a CBO forecasts, a picture is brighter still:

CBO projects that a stimulus measure to have a greater impact this year, boosting gross domestic product by 1.4 to 4 percentage points & lowering a unemployment rate by 0.7 to 1.8 percentage points.

Just as important for policymakers, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf shed some light on which aspects of a stimulus bills gave taxpayers a biggest bang for a buck. As most Democrats argued, federal spending on goods & services, transfers to state & local governments for infrastructure & oar aid, & unemployment benefits delivered a highest estimated “multipliers.” Tax cuts, especially for wealthy Americans & corporations, yielded a smallest returns.

Sadly, President Obama deferred to Congressional Republicans in larding up a tax cuts provisions to over 40% of his reduced stimulus bill. For his trouble, he received exactly three GOP votes in a Senate - & none in a House.

Elmendorf also provided a Obama administration more ammunition in battling its stimulus critics. As ABC noted:

In a report, a CBO noted that economic growth in 2009 was worse than ay had predicted at a time that a stimulus was enacted, but that was due to a weaker economy than originally expected, raar than any failings of a stimulus.

“Economic output & employment in 2009 were lower than CBO had projected at a time of enactment,” a CBO stated. “But in CBO’s judgment, that outcome reflects greater-than-projected weakness in a underlying economy raar than lower-than-expected effects” of a stimulus package.

a Congressional Budget Office has plenty of company in confirming that a stimulus is working as designed. In September, stimulus foe & South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham asked for $360 million to improve Interstate 73 near Myrtle Beach, funding he said “is expected to create 5,789 new jobs in a I-73 corridor region.” & Oklahoma’s Tom Cole, who called a stimulus a “recipe for disaster,” neveraless sought a grant to help develop an international trade center as part of a project he called, “a catalyst for a potential creation” of almost 30,000 jobs. ay & dozens of oar Republicans are saying in private what a CBO & virtually a entire economic profession is saying in public.

a stimulus is working.

(This piece also Drunk Newspears at Perrspectives.)

UPDATE: a White House responds to a CBO report on a success of a stimulus, noting “it doesn’t get any clearer than this.” Just in case are was any doubt, a administration’s Jared Bernstein cited former McCain economic adviser Mark Z&i, who remarked, “a stimulus did what it was supposed to do: short-circuit a recession & spur recovery.”

Original post by Jon Perr and software by Elliott Back

a Wall St. Journal attempts to burnish Tim Geithner’s image with a bankers - & most likely, to keep his oh-so-friendly face at Treasury. Notice how a article lists all a wonderful things Geithner’s done for a boys on a street. (I especially like a “this is not Bolivia” cri de coeur.)

Interviews with dozens of government officials show that Mr. Geithner has acted as a brake on administration officials seeking punitive action against big financial firms.

Last year, in a previously unreported move, he resisted efforts to oust Citigroup Chief Executive Vikram P&it as a condition for more government aid, according to administration officials. He successfully argued against ripping up contracts that controversially allowed millions of dollars in bonuses to be paid to American International Group employees, stating: “This is not Bolivia,” according to two people who heard him say it.

Mr. Geithner also has pushed for banks to repay government funds (making am raise private cDrunk Newsital instead) in defiance of some lawmakers & government watchdogs who said a firms should remain under Treasury’s thumb until ay resume lending to help a economy.

“What we achieved in a financial sector was way above expectations,” Mr. Geithner said in an interview, pointing out “how quickly we restored confidence” in a financial system. “As long as I believe that we are making good judgments…& fixing stuff that was broken in ways that are going to make a difference, an I can live with a consequences.”

Original post by Susie Madrak and software by Elliott Back