NOTE:Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
The Republicans are telling Americans how they will treat us…..LISTEN!
Republicans/Tea Party Contract on America
Midterm elections are in November….PLEASE VOTE!
NOTE:Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
During Elena Kagan’s confirmation hearings a phrase that was continually used to malign Republican/Democrat judicial nominees is ”judicial activist.” Hearing many politicans dismiss the idea of “judicial activism” as something the other side of the ideological divide or loser of a case says when they dislike the outcome of a case is pathetic. The unimaginative dismissal of this very serious issue by politicians and pundits alike demonstrate how easy it is to support the narrative rather than doing real journalism. There are objective definitions of “judicial activism.” Judicial activism is result-oriented judging designed to reinforce a specific political ideological lean (Democrat/Republican) irrespective of precedent, legislative intent/history, and judicial restraint, three sacred tenents of the Judiciary. Or perhaps you prefer the Blacks Law Dictionary definition, “a philosophy of judicial decision-making whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy, among other factors, to guide their decisions.”
The Founders drafted the Constititution specifically separating the powers of the Executive, the Legislature, and the Judiciary. The Congress makes the laws, the Executive faithfully executes the laws, and the Judiciary interprets the laws. INTERPRETS not MAKE. The Constitution was designed in such a way so that the powers of each branch are separate and serves as a check on the powers of the other branches. Congress and the Judiciary serve as checks on the Executive. The Executive and Congress serve as checks on the Judiciary (ex. Executive appoints, Senate confirms). The Judiciary, through its independence and responsibility to interpret the laws, serves as a check on Congress and the Executive.
Judicial activists who legislate from the bench by disregarding legislative intent, deciding cases broadly, deciding questions not before the court, or disregarding established precedent (stare decises) to achieve a desired result, threatens the balance of our democracy. This is why the hackneyed dismissal of such a serious issue by those with microphones is troubling to say the least. The above objective measures should be used to determine whether judicial activism exists and each measure have nothing to do with political ideology or what political ideology is reinforced by the judicial opinion in question.
The next time someone says that a Judge is engaging in judicial activism ask them what he/she means?
NOTE:Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
Embattled CEO of BP has been fired and replaced. FINALLY!
Tony Hayward was relieved of his duties as BP’s Chief Executive Officer and will be replaced by Robert Dudley, the American currently overseeing the Gulf Coast disaster. It probably had something to do with Hayward’s many PR blunders during his brief stint as point person for the Gulf plug and clean up efforts.
He became the lightning rod for anti-BP feeling in the United States and didn’t help matters with a series of gaffes, raising hackles by saying “I want my life back,” going sailing, and what was viewed as an evasive performance before U.S. congressmen in June.
SNIP
BP said the decision to replace Hayward, 53, with the company’s first ever non-British CEO was made by mutual agreement. In a mark of faith in its outgoing leader, BP said it planned to recommend him for a non-executive board position at its Russian joint venture and will pay him 1.045 million pounds ($1.6 million), a year’s salary, in lieu of notice.
So Hayward will receive a 1.6 million dollar payout and a million dollar a year pension for his efforts. One wonders what the families that lost their loved ones will receive from BP?? If they are prevented from suing BP directly perhaps they should take a stab at the its former CEO who seems to have been unfairly rewarded considering that he promised to focus “like a laser” on safety as newly crowned CEO in 2007.
NOTE: Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
NOTE: Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
A bit of news from the White House.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said the Obama administration will allow tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans to expire on schedule despite calls from a small but increasingly vocal group of Democrats to delay any tax increases.
SNIP
Mr. Geithner said the White House will allow taxes on top earners to increase on Jan. 1, 2011, as part of an effort to help bring down the mounting budget deficit. He said the White House still plans to extend tax cuts for middle- and lower-income Americans and expects to undertake a broader tax overhaul next year.
“We believe it is appropriate to let those tax cuts that go to the most fortunate expire,”Mr. Geithner said at a breakfast with reporters, hosted by the Christian Science Monitor.
Remember the trickle down theory does not work. Those who are concerned with higher taxes on the wealthy perhaps this will incentivize wealthy individuals to not create taxable events and invest in building the economy by creating jobs through business expansion rather than withdrawing wealth as personal income. During the period from 1945-1970 the tax rates were the highest in history and we had an enormous middle class boom. When Bill Clinton increased taxes on the wealthy we had an economic boom. This is argued by economist to be partly because wealthy individuals were incentivized to keep their money in their businesses instead of taking their money out for personal consumption and speculative activities. Actions that would be a taxable events thereby resulting in such individuals being charged the higher tax rate. Instead wealthy taxpayers put their money back into their businesses by hiring more people and growing their businesses.
NOTE: Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
ProgressPolitics is proud to welcome guest blogger Barbara O’Brien from Mahablog.com
When British Petroleum (BP) applied for a permit to build the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico and begin drilling, it claimed to have the technology and know-how to handle any oil spill.
But in the face of an actual spill, BP is much less confident. “This scares everybody: the fact that we can’t make this well stop flowing, the fact that we haven’t succeeded so far,” BP CEO Doug Suttles said. “Many of the things we’re trying have been done on the surface before, but have never been tried at 5,000 ft.”
They’ve never been tried at 5,000 feet. Drilling for oil this deeply under the ocean is a relatively new enterprise for our species. Oil has been drilled offshore in shallow water for more than a century. But deepwater drilling is much more expensive than shallow-water drilling. For a long time drilling in deep water wasn’t tried, because it would have cost more to extract a barrel of oil than a barrel of oil was worth on world markets. It took the spikes in oil prices in recent years to make deepwater drilling profitable.
Politicians and oil executives assured us that offshore oil drilling was safe. Those tree huggers who worry about environmental disasters are nuts, they said. Yes, there have been oil rig disasters in the past, but (big wink) we know what we’re doing now. Trust us.
The laws of physics work differently nearly a mile underwater than they do on land, or shallow water, however. By now, it is obvious BP is still trying to invent a procedure that might stop the oil leak, maybe, if we’re lucky. No one appears to have been ready for the Deepwater Horizon disaster.
Really, this “trust us” business is getting old. How many times have we been told to “trust” some new thing, and then when the dangers surface we find out the “trusted” ones hadn’t told us the whole truth?
In the mid-20th century we humans went into overdrive digging asbestos out of the earth to use in countless structures and products. There is asbestos in navy ships, in shipyards such as Bath Iron Works, asbestos in our homes and schools, asbestos in old car parts, and asbestos in landfills. And eventually, years after medical science had determined asbestos exposure causes terrible disease, industry executives and politicians reluctantly agreed to shut down asbestos production, or at least most of it. And now the cost of asbestos abatement and mesothelioma treatment is an ongoing problem for individuals, taxpayers, and businesses.
And do we want to talk about Vioxx? Tanning beds? And now there are questions being asked about Bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical found in just about every plastic bottle you’ve ever touched. It may be dangerous, it may not. Opinions vary. Just note that the same political and business leaders who deny BPA could be dangerous are the same ones who like to yell “drill, baby, drill.”
Barbara O’ Brien
NOTE: Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
The GOP has decided that there is no need to offer a alternative plan to governing because it will be scrutinize by the public and the pundits. So the American people are suppose to trust that Republicans can govern competently in spite of a recent eight year track record that clearly demonstrates otherwise. The GOP strategy for governing as revealed so far is to Repeal all the legislation passed in the last eighteen months, Repackage the Bush policies, and Repeat them resulting in Recession deux. For example, when asked repeatedly how are they going to pay for the extension of tax cuts for the wealthy that many GOP Senators and House members are pushing for the answer is silence or its not necessary to pay for such tax cuts. Yet they withhold their vote for unemployment benefits for thousands of Americans struggling to pay their rent and put food on the table for their families. Democrats were able to pass the extension yesterday with the help of Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins but every other GOP senator voted against the extension of benefits to the jobless during this recession.
Because Republicans refuse to inform voters about what is their plan for cutting spending can we expect them to cut social security? How about Medicaid and Medicare benefits? The GOP is exploiting the unemployed for November gain why not seniors next? GOP policies and priorities focus on the entitlement of the wealthy at the expense of the middle class and the poor. And somehow Republicans manage to get the very people they exploit (the working class) to vote against their own interest by voting Republicans into office. The grand old party does so by using a divisive single issue that gets people “wee wee’d up” like same-sex marriage, abortion, or the military industrial complex. Somehow we don’t think that voters will be so easily fooled this time with all the information available on the “Internets and the Google.”.
Try and argue with this logic:
According to Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s and a former campaign advisor to John McCain, unemployment benefits are one of the most effective ways of stimulating the economy, with each dollar the government spends on unemployment benefits generating $1.61 in economic growth. And the impact is rapid.
Which is another reason why the GOP is blocking the benefits because it want to curtail any wins by this administration and Democrat controlled Congress even if it means that Americans are being put out of their homes and sleeping on the streets. Though several GOP members have boasted that if were not for TARP the unemployment rate would be double what it is now they will not give this administration any credit for implementing it. And they continue to say that no jobs were created. A contradiction? Exactly. This administration has taken the country from losing 750,000 jobs per month in the spring of 2009 to creating 100,000 jobs last month. In case you need the math, that is 850,000 jobs saved or created by the policies of the Obama administration and teh Democratic controlled Congress. If you think that the GOP can do better than that for you then you should vote for a Republican in the November midterms. But if you remember that it was GOP policies of trickle down economics that had us losing 750,000 jobs in the spring 09 and eight million jobs in the eight years prior then you should examine the Democratic track record of the past 18 months. Republicans are still pushing tax cuts for the rich and it will trickle down to the middle class and the poor. The theory is not borne out by recent history. The country went from bleeding jobs to gaining them in 18 months. The GOP focus is the more the people of this country suffer the better it is for them in November and that is all that matters.
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
The people have spoken and they WANT Elizabeth Warren as the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Sorry Geitner, you LOSE! Listening to CSPAN this morning you would think that we have a single political party in this country. When C-SPAN posed the question of “should Elizabeth Warren run the Consumer Financial Protection Agency [Bureau]” something like 99 percent of all the callers, Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and Libertarians, from all over the country voiced their enthusiastic support for Elizabeth Warren to lead the new bureau. As a long time listener to Washington Journal this was a first! It was fantastic to hear that people see the greatness in this woman that I have been preaching for the last eighteen months. Warren is a lifetime advocate for the consumer and is the only person who can be trusted with shaping this new agency in the spirit of its genesis.
This is also very important to the American people being that the Bureau’s focus will be consumer protection. This is the Wall Street police and Elizabeth Warren is the only CREDIBLE person who can walk the beat. The President should know that for people to think he is serious he must choose the right person for this job. This is Elizabeth Warren’s brainchild and for her not to be the first person to lead it and set the tone would be a travesty to her as a loyal supporter of this administration and a travesty to the consuming public. The only folks who are alleged to have a problem with Warren are Geitner (because he wants his asst treasury secretary for the position and Warren calls him on his BS), Wall Street (who wants a competent cop with integrity), and the GOP (Wall Street enabler).
Main Street or Wall Street? Elizabeth Warren has proven that she is most definitely Main street. If the President’s goal is to look out for Main Street neither of the other two candidates in contention will do it as well as Warren. Warren is a trustworthy, independent, common sense voice who has the backs of the American people. We will know how serious the President is about consumer protection and this Bureau when he makes this pick.
We trust Elizabeth Warren similar to the way we trust you Mr. President. Please don’t let us down.
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
TRANSCRIPT
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning, everybody. Right now, across this country, many Americans are sitting at the kitchen table, they’re scanning the classifieds, they’re updating their resumes or sending out another job application, hoping that this time they’ll hear back from a potential employer. And they’re filled with a sense of uncertainty about where their next paycheck will come from. And I know the only thing that will entirely free them of those worries –- the only thing that will fully lift that sense of uncertainty –- is the security of a new job.
To that end, we all have to continue our efforts to do everything in our power to spur growth and hiring. And I hope the Senate acts this week on a package of tax cuts and expanded lending for small businesses, where most of America’s jobs are created.
So we’ve got a lot of work to do to make sure that we are digging ourselves out of this tough economic hole that we’ve been in. But even as we work to jumpstart job growth in the private sector, even as we work to get businesses hiring again, we also have another responsibility: to offer emergency assistance to people who desperately need it — to Americans who’ve been laid off in this recession. We’ve got a responsibility to help them make ends meet and support their families even as they’re looking for another job.
That’s why it’s so essential to pass the unemployment insurance extension that comes up for a vote tomorrow. We need to pass it for men like Jim Chukalas, who’s with me here today. Jim worked as a parts manager at a Honda dealership until about two years ago. He’s posted resumes everywhere. He’s gone door-to-door looking for jobs. But he hasn’t gotten a single interview. He’s trying to be strong for his two young kids, but now that he’s exhausted his unemployment benefits, that’s getting harder to do.
We need to pass it for women like Leslie Macko, who lost her job at a fitness center last year and has been looking for work ever since. Because she’s eligible for only a few more weeks of unemployment, she’s doing what she never thought she’d have to do — not at this point, anyway. She’s turning to her father for financial support.
And we need to pass it for Americans like Denise Gibson, who was laid off from a real estate agency earlier this year. Denise has been interviewing for jobs -– but so far nothing has turned up. Meanwhile, she’s fallen further and further behind on her rent. And with her unemployment benefits set to expire, she’s worried about what the future holds.
We need to pass it for all the Americans who haven’t been able to find work in an economy where there are five applicants for every opening; who need emergency relief to help them pay the rent and cover their utilities and put food on the table while they’re looking for another job.
And for a long time, there’s been a tradition –- under both Democratic and Republican Presidents –- to offer relief to the unemployed. That was certainly the case under my predecessor, when Republican senators voted several times to extend emergency unemployment benefits. But right now, these benefits –- benefits that are often the person’s sole source of income while they’re looking for work -– are in jeopardy.
And I have to say, after years of championing policies that turned a record surplus into a massive deficit, the same people who didn’t have any problem spending hundreds of billions of dollars on tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans are now saying we shouldn’t offer relief to middle-class Americans like Jim or Leslie or Denise, who really need help.
Over the past few weeks, a majority of senators have tried -– not once, not twice, but three times –- to extend emergency relief on a temporary basis. Each time, a partisan minority in the Senate has used parliamentary maneuvers to block a vote, denying millions of people who are out of work much-needed relief. These leaders in the Senate who are advancing a misguided notion that emergency relief somehow discourages people from looking for a job should talk to these folks.
That attitude I think reflects a lack of faith in the American people, because the Americans I hear from in letters and meet in town hall meetings –- Americans like Leslie and Jim and Denise — they’re not looking for a handout. They desperately want to work. Just right now they can’t find a job. These are honest, decent, hardworking folks who’ve fallen on hard times through no fault of their own, and who have nowhere else to turn except unemployment benefits and who need emergency relief to help them weather this economic storm.
Now, tomorrow we will have another chance to offer them that relief, to do right by not just Jim and Leslie and Denise, but all the Americans who need a helping hand right now — and I hope we seize it. It’s time to stop holding workers laid off in this recession hostage to Washington politics. It’s time to do what’s right — not for the next election but for the middle class. We’ve got to stop blocking emergency relief for Americans who are out of work. We’ve got to extend unemployment insurance. We need to pass those tax cuts for small businesses and the lending for small businesses.
Times are hard right now. We are moving in the right direction. I know it’s getting close to an election, but there are times where you put elections aside. This is one of those times. And that’s what I hope members of Congress on both sides of the aisle will do tomorrow.
Thanks very much.
*********************************************************************************************************************************
As proof that Republicans are merely playing politics with the lives of the unemployed count how many of them support this bill now that Democrats have the 60 votes to break their filibuster. You can also bet that they will claim that this never happened and that they voted for the extension. They are banking on voters having short memories. Just remember the GOP motto; tax cuts for the wealthy do not have to be paid for but unemployment benefits for the middle class and the poor must be paid for.
Yes, the Republicans will vote for the bill now because if they do not and the bill passes it will cost them in November. This is merely a CYA measure on their part so that when Democrats say that GOP members held up payment to struggling families they can come back and say “I voted for the extension.” Playing this type of politics with people’s lives during such economically hard times for the nation is unforgivable.
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
If there is any chance of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau being competent and effective it MUST have Elizabeth Warren at its helm. The fact that Treasury Secretary Tim Geitner opposes Warren reinforces the above conclusion. Wall Street has been lobbying against Warren since her name was first mention as the only person to lead it. Geitner with his friends in the financial industry are prefer to rule unfettered. Big old Wall Street fears Elizabeth Warren and that is exactly the way it should be. As Chairman of the TARP oversight committee Elizabeth Warren held Wall Street executives and Tim Geitner’s feet to the fire. This is the only person capable and credible enough to fight on behalf of the American consumer. Take a look at why Geitner fears Warren:
While her grilling of Geithner in September, over what members of Congress have called the “backdoor bailout” of Wall Street through AIG, inspired the “squirm” video, just last month Warren pressed Geithner on the administration’s lackluster foreclosure-prevention plan, Making Home Affordable. Criticizing him for Treasury’s failure to keep families in their homes, she questioned Treasury’s commitment to homeowners.
Warren’s persistent oversight is part of the reason for Geithner’s opposition, according to the source.
And another reason for Geitner’s opposition and why Warren is the ONLY person for this job
Geithner’s objections to Warren taking over that role also involve her views on Wall Street, sources say. The longtime professor believes the nation’s megabanks are Too Big To Fail and have been among the biggest abusive lenders in the country. Her toughness on giant banks is said to be a longtime source of tension with Geithner.
The words of our President:
“The truth of the matter is that the banking industry has used credit cards and pushed credit cards on consumers in ways that have been very damaging,” Obama said according to a transcript. “There’s a woman named Elizabeth Warren who’s a professor at Harvard who did a great deal of study around this. And she made a simple point. You know, if you bought a toaster, and the toaster blew up in your face, there would be a law, a consumer safety law, that would protect you from buying that toaster. But if you get a credit card that blows up in your face, that starts off at zero-percent interest, and once they kind of suck in the — buying a bunch of stuff and suddenly it’s 29 percent; and if you’re late two days, suddenly, you know, you just paid another $30, and all kinds of fine print that a lot of folks didn’t understand — well, somehow that’s okay.
“I think generally having some consumer safety, some consumer protection around credit cards, is important,” Obama added.
This really is non-negotiable. If the Obama administration is serious about consumer protection Elizabeth Warren must head the CFPB.
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
Four different polls released recently showed that American voters say that helping the unemployed is more important than reducing the deficit.
Two national polls released Tuesday revealed that registered voters think it’s more important to help the unemployed than to reduce the deficit.
Voters are generally wary of government spending to boost the economy, but they nevertheless told ABC News and CBS News that the deficit is no reason not to help the unemployed.
Fifty-two percent of voters told CBS that Congress should extend unemployment benefits “even if it means increasing the budget deficit,” including 35 percent of Republicans. Sixty-two percent of registered voters told ABC Congress should extend benefits despite concerns that doing so “adds too much to the federal budget deficit.”
In a Bloomberg survey, 70 percent of voters said reducing unemployment is more important than reducing the deficit. But only 47 percent said Congress should reauthorize extended benefits, which in some states provided the unemployed with up to 99 weeks of checks.
A poll commissioned by the National Employment Law Project in June found that 74 percent of voters think helping the unemployed is more important than reducing the deficit.
It was reported yesterday that Nebraska Senator Bill Nelson of “Nebraska kickback” fame held out on the financial reform bill because he had concerns about Elizabeth Warren being appointed to head the pending Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Are you kidding me??? Elizabeth Warren is the only person to head the new Bureau. Warren is the only one that can be trusted not to capitulateto the Federal Reserve and corporate interest. Therein lies corporate captured Nelson’s issue with Warren as the head of the new Bureau. Warren’s focus and priority will be protection of consumers and that represents a huge problem for Nelson’s corporate special interest. If the Administration puts the interest of consumers first it will choose Warren and Nelson’s input will be an empty gesture on its part. Warren has the skill, knowledge, and dedication to get the job done right. There is no other person for this job.
Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) explicitly told reporters this evening he’s not committed to voting for the legislation, citing a handful of measures, and concern about potential future directors of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
“You don’t know who’s going to be head of the consumer protection bureau,” Nelson said after a vote. “You can’t just send a rogue agency out on its own.”
An agency that sole purpose is protecting consumers is a rogue agency???
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
The GOP continues to claim that everything MUST be paid for EXCEPT the extension of Bush tax cuts for the nation’s wealthiest Americans. Yes, according to high ranking GOP members in Congress, the $55 billion dollar price tag that it would cost for one year of extending the Bush tax cuts to Americans making over $250,000 annually should be written off as necessary. So the GOP believe that it is more important for rich people to live better than it is for poor and unemployed individuals to live at all. Who represents your interest and values in Washington, DC?
The second highest ranking Republican in the Senate doubled down on a controversial statement he made this weekend, arguing in greater detail that tax cuts for wealthy people should never be offset by tax increases in other areas — but that unemployment benefits need to be fully paid for by either spending cuts or tax increases. In so doing, he claimed candidly that the very existence of unemployment insurance is a “necessary evil,” while tax cuts ought not be paid for by increases in order to make it easier to shrink the size of government.
“My view, and I think most of the people in my party don’t believe that you should ever have to offset a tax cut,” Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl told a handful of reporters outside the Senate chamber this afternoon. “That clearly reduced savings is a better way to offset increased spending than a tax increase is.”
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
Republicans have turned to their priority constituents to form its policy agenda for the 2010 midterm elections.
Roll Call obtained a letter from Boehner’s office to leaders and lobbyists for the Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers and about two dozen other business groups inviting them to a forum on the Hill to discuss “ways the business community can be an important part of the discussion on America Speaking Out as House Republicans listen and then form a governing agenda.”
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
Mr. President, we are here for you and appreciate all that you are doing. Being President is a thankless job especially when it is the business of an entire network and a nationally syndicated AM radio station to find fault with every accomplishment, action, wardrobe choice, etc. But there is a silent majority out here who really appreciate all the gray hair that you are cropping these days to get the nation back on track. We appreciate you saving us from a Great Depression, we appreciate the passing of landmark healthcare reform that will prevent thousands of Americans from dying each year, we appreciate the achievement of landmark student loan reform that will make it possible for hundreds of thousands more students to attend college, we appreciate your equal pay for equal work legislation that will enable people like Lilly Ledbetter to sue for gender discrimination, we appreciate you investing more in energy and education, we appreciate that the withdrawal from Iraq is on track, we appreciate you leading the effort to pass the largest Wall Street reform legislation since the 1930s, and mostly we appreciate you. Mr. President you have accomplished more in 18 months in office than any president in history.
Being President is a HARD job and anyone who says differently obviously has not lived in that big white house. Mr. President, you are being blamed for everything from the gulf oil spill (solely created by a reckless, ruthless, irresponsible corporation) to Arizona’s passing of a racial profiling law calling it an illegal immigration measure. Give the media a couple of days and they will blame you for the heat wave that we are currently having in DC. Please do not give up Mr. President because you are the best thing that America has going for it at the moment besides its people. We believe you when you said that you were elected to solve problems and help people. We know that it is tiring to be confronted with one crisis after another and be criticized if it is not fixed yesterday but you must soldier on because without your leadership we will end up in a much worst position than we were eighteen months ago. Lets see, you have Afghanistan, gulf oil spill, record unemployment, and all you receive from the people with the loudest microphones is why is it taking so long. Perhaps the pundits believed that when the first African-American entered office he brought with him magical powers. We understand that you are a human being doing the best you can for the country. You are doing a GREAT job under the circumstances. We are thankful for your efforts thus far. The fact that you were able to accomplish much of what you promised during your campaign is disconcerting to many so they keep raising the bar higher and expecting you to clear it. The silent majority out here know that you are a human being doing your best for the people of this nation and we APPRECIATE you. Thank you.
A very wise man once told us the following:
“Sometimes the skies look cloudy and it’s dark. And you think the rains will never pass. The young people understand that the clouds -– these too will pass, that a brighter day will come.” Sen. Barack Obama, September 2008
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
Guess what?? Wall Street is not at all happy with Democrats due to the pending financial regulatory reform bill. The financial epicenter is said to be “revolting” against the Democratic party by way of refusing to donate to the party responsible for putting it in check. It seems that the financial sector has forgotten how it almost drove us over a ditch just a few months ago resulting in several taxpayer funded bailouts. It seems that the courting being carried out by John Boehner and other House and Senate Republicans is paying off. Republican deregulation brought massive Wall Street profits and it was a Republican administration that authorized its taxpayer funded bailout. Now the GOP is gladly accepting Wall Street money hand over fist so that it can return to office and begin the cycle all over again. This is why Democrats are said to look out for the PEOPLE of the United States and Republicans look out for BIG BUSINESS. There will be a clear choice in the fall and as hard as it tries Wall Street cannot vote only you can.
[Democratic] contributions from the world’s financial capital down 65 percent from two years ago.
The drop in support comes from many of the same bankers, hedge fund executives and financial services chief executives who are most upset about the financial regulatory reform bill that House Democrats passed last week with almost no Republican support. The Senate expects to take up the measure this month.
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
The only clear choice to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau if Elizabeth Warren. The whole idea is her brainchild and it is crystal clear that her focus will be consumer first. Warren also has the chops to back up her position. Because it has been suggested that many of the employees will come from existing agencies we need someone at the head who has a clear vision of the Bureau’s purpose and mission. The last thing that American consumers need is for the Bureau to be captured by agencies such as the Federal Reserve and the Treasury department. It would defeat the purpose of the Bureau and put us back in the same place we were prior to its existence.
Once under way, the agency is likely to be the most visible manifestation to consumers from the extensive financial-regulatory legislation expected to clear Congress next week. It will write rules on checking accounts, credit cards and mortgages. It will field complaints from the public about lending practices. It will enforce its rules across the economy, from big banks to credit counselors—though not auto dealers, which won’t fall under the agency’s supervision, after much lobbying.
The president’s choice of a director, subject to Senate confirmation, is almost certain to be controversial, given the power of the position and the fight over whether to create the agency in the first place.
Like Joseph Kennedy Sr., the first chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the new director will shape the powerful agency’s public image, initial priorities and starting lineup.
Democratic leaders in Congress say their top pick for the post is Elizabeth Warren, the high-profile Harvard law professor and an outspoken critic of what she sees as a too-cozy relationship between government and bankers.
Some of the candidates mentioned are:
Michael Barr, a Treasury assistant secretary and University of Michigan law professor; Attorneys general Martha Coakley of Massachusetts, Lisa Madigan of Illinois and Lori Swanson of Minnesota; Susan Wachter of the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School; and Nicolas Retsinas of Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing studies.
Elizabeth Warren is the ONLY choice.
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
Thurgood Marshall Jr. recently penned a op-ed in favor of Elena Kagan’s confirmation to the Supreme Court of the United States.
A debate this week about judicial activism seems to have revealed only one thing: One person’s activism is another’s adherence to constitutional principle. And to my ear, a progressive jurist sounds far more desirable than a regressive one. But the Kagan hearing is not the proper forum to rehash my father’s work.
Elena Kagan is her own person. If she is confirmed, that is precisely how she will serve her country as an associate justice. I have worked closely with her and know well that she has far too much respect for the rule of law and for the Supreme Court to render decisions by seeking to channel anyone else. Her intellect and integrity are impeccable.
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
For those who have forgotten the Health Care Reform battle that went on for months some of the fruits of that labor come to bear today. Starting today those who have been denied health care insurance or are considered uninsurable by the insurance industry can begin the process of obtaining insurance beginning today. This administration and Congress’ high risk insurance pools are being made available to consumers starting today. If you have been denied health insurance due to a pre-existing condition and have been uninsured for at least six months go to healthcare.govto determine whether you qualify for the high risk insurance currently being offered as a result of the health care reform bill. This is the temporary measure designed to enable the “uninsurable” to obtain health insurance until health care reform takes full effect in 2014. There is a limit to the amount of people who can obtain the insurance due to the limit on funds available so if you are interested then you should sign us as soon as possible so as to not miss the opportunity.
Also just in time for the new development some more good news. The polls are improving as Americans understand the benefits of health care reform.
The Kaiser Family Foundation is the latest survey outlet to see positive movement on the health-care reform bill. In their May poll, 41 percent approved of the bill and 44 percent didn’t. Their June poll has flipped to 48 percent approval and 41 percent disapproval. That’s the fourth poll in a row to show improving numbers for the legislation: The AP and Gallup polls both flipped from plurality disapproval to plurality approval, and the NBC/WSJ poll registered a slight (2 percent, which is within the margin of error) improvement in the bill’s numbers, but remained at plurality disapproval.
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
When people tell you how they are BELIEVE THEM! Rep. John Boehner was interviewed recently where he gave a couple of not surprising tidbits about Social Security, Wall Street Reform, etc:
Ensuring there’s enough money to pay for the war will require reforming the country’s entitlement system, Boehner said. He said he’d favor increasing the Social Security retirement age to 70 for people who have at least 20 years until retirement, tying cost-of-living increases to the consumer price index rather than wage inflation and limiting payments to those who need them.
“We need to look at the American people and explain to them that we’re broke,” Boehner said. “If you have substantial non-Social Security income while you’re retired, why are we paying you at a time when we’re broke? We just need to be honest with people.
Wall Street reform bill currently moving through Congress is comparable to “killing an ant with a nuclear weapon.”
Boehner seems to forget that the nation’s financial system nearly went off a cliff into the abyss just 18-months ago.
Attorney barred in the District of Columbia and California currently looking for opportunities in the private and government sectors. Specializes in ediscovery/litigation efficiency project management but can do straight litigation or litigation management. Feel free to contact me with opportunities at progress@progresspolitics.com
