Super Committee a Super Disappointment

The Congressional "Super Committee" charged with eliminating $1.4 Trillion in red ink from the Federal Budget announced today that it has failed.  Now, a series of automatic across the board cuts will take place in 2013 if something isn't done to fix our fiscal crisis.  David Gergen wrote an op-ed about the committee and it's failure and what it means for the American People.  He rightly takes Congress and the committee to task for their failure, and points out how dire the consequences are if we do not fix our government.  It is an incredibly articulate and scathing piece.

Have they gone nuts in Washington?

New calls for Hillary to save the Democratic Party

More and more folks are calling on Hillary Clinton to run in the 2012 election.  The most recent pronouncement comes from Patrick Caddell and Douglas Schoen at The Wall Street Journal.  They wrote an op-ed piece today essentially asking President Obama to step aside and allow Secretary Clinton to run as the Democratic nominee.  The reasons presented in the piece are nothing new, but Mr. Caddell and Mr. Schoen are both influential opinion makers in progressive circles, therefore their ideas will be taken seriously.  Add to the fervor the recent polling that showed Clinton performing significantly better than Obama in hypothetical match ups against all the declared Republican candidates.  

Personally, I don't know if it's a good or bad idea.  I am a big fan of both Mr. Caddell and Mr. Schoen, but I am uncertain in regards to the wisdom of such a move, regardless of the political upside.  

Read their Op-Ed Piece for yourself, and see what you think.

Op-Ed: The Hillary Moment

It's Newt!!!

Newt Gingrich has become the new flavor of the month in the Republican presidential field.  New national polling places the former Speaker of the House either tied for first with Herman Cain or Mitt Romney, or well ahead of both.

I suppose it was only a matter of time before Newt made his surge in the polls.  We've seen Bachmann, Perry, and Cain all spike in the polls before being beaten back by increased scrutiny by the media.  The interesting thing about Gingrich is that his whole political career has been on display for decades, making it less likely that some new surprises will pop up.  However, there are a couple of things about Gingrich that I think will make him an unpalatable choice for Republican primary voters.  

Cain Campaign to receive Secret Service Protection

The United States Secret Service confirmed today that the Cain Campaign will receive protective services from the agency.  Mr. Cain is the first Republican candidate to receive protection from the Secret Service this election cycle.  The Secret Service began offering protection for Presidential candidates after Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1968.  Since then, it has become standard for front-runner candidates to receive some protection from the agency.  

Read more in CNN's wire report.

Sexual Harassment becomes Sexual Assault for Cain

Sharon Bialek is the 1st woman to publicly address the sexual harassment claims made against GOP Presidential candidate Herman Cain.  Her accusations, however, go beyond the standards of sexual harassment and, in fact, may be considered sexual assault.

At a press conference, Ms. Bialek alleged that Cain groped her - specifically putting his hand on her thigh and sliding it up her skirt, as well as pushing her head towards his crotch - following a dinner they both attended in 1997.  Ms. Bialek is not one of the women that POLITICO mentioned when the story first broke.  She also has lawyered up, hiring "Girl Power" attorney Gloria Allred.  

Obama: One Year to go

John Avlon, a CNN contributor, wrote an op-ed that compared President Obama's poll standings 1 year from the election with his predecessors, to get a sense of his chances for re-election.  The piece is very interesting.  Avlon looks back at polls going back as far as Nixon.  The comparisons are fascinating, and the speculation is always fun.  I highly recommend reading it.

A year from election, how does Obama measure up?

Rick Perry: The 'Bobblehead'

Rick Perry hasn't been the best debater in the GOP field of presidential candidates, but he has been an effective speech maker throughout his political career.  However, at a speech given in New Hampshire over the weekend, Perry appeared to try a new approach - humor.  In my opinion, this approach failed miserably, but the end result is so bizarre compared to his earlier speeches.  This wasn't just off-the-cuff for a few moments - this was a full half-hour of wonky.  I'd expect this type of behavior from Michele Bachmann's camp, not the Perry camp.

If this is part of his comeback strategy, I don't think there will be much of a comeback.  Watch the video for yourself.

Rick Perry's attempt at humor

Harassment claims harass Cain

POLITICO is reporting that GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain was accused of harassment by 2 former female employees of the National Restaurant Association.  Mr, Cain ran the organization during the 1990's.  Cain and his campaign have flatly denied the accusations, pointing out an internal investigation that did not find substantial evidence of harassment.  The campaign went further, decrying the media for attacking Cain on a personal level.  

I doubt this revelation amounts to an "October Surprise" in politics, but it makes for good reading.  I think Herman Cain is going to have to get used to being scrutinized more closely.  This is what happens when you become the leader in the polls.  Mitt Romney has been attacked for EVERYTHING, from flip-flopping to voter fraud.  We've scrutinized Michele Bachmann and found out her husband runs a clinic that uses therapy to turn gay people straight, among other things.  Rick Perry got attacked for his 'N*****head' ranch and when the rock was actually painted over.  Now we're getting Herman Cain's decades old sexual harassment complaint.

God Bless Politics, and all it's craziness.

Cain denies harassment allegations

Tea Party Troubles

David Frum is a conservative contributor to CNN and a former George W. Bush adviser.  He has written an op-ed piece about the Tea Party's negative affects on the GOP.  While I generally disagree with Frum's characterizations of "Liberals" and Progressives, I do feel his commentary on the Tea Party is pretty accurate.  He explains 4 separate scenarios and how the Tea Party affects them.  This is honestly one of the best op-eds I've seen - on any subject - for a while.

I also highly recommend taking a look at Frum Forum, David Frum's political blog.  It is Conservative by nature, but it has logic and reason behind it - as well as lots of C.B.O. statistics, charts, and graphs to prove points made!  I love statistics!

Happy Halloween!!!

How tea party could drive GOP to disaster

The Death of the Perry Campaign

James Carville over at CNN wrote a scathing op-ed piece about why Rick Perry's Presidential campaign is essentially over.  I know Carville is a talking head for the 'Loony-Lefties' but I think his critique of Perry is spot-on.  He doesn't back up the arguments against Perry's ability to govern (a vague swipe at Texas's economic disparities doesn't cur it, Mr. Carville) but the main gist of the argument is that Perry is a lightweight when it comes to Presidential politics.  I think it's a funny, though very partisan, piece.  Despite the partisanship, it is also pretty fair.

Why Rick Perry's presidential bid is toast

Herman Cain: Brought to you by Koch Industries

Herman Cain's meteoric rise to Republican frontrunner has been written about to death.  He performed well in the 1st Republican Debate, fell to the wayside for a while as our attention was diverted to Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry, but he's had a strong resurgence since last month, and continues to dominate the headlines.  His 'outsider' status, 'straight talk' style, private sector experience, and his "9-9-9" tax plan have given the media and the public a lot to look at.  However, some media outlets have begun to look at how Herman Cain's actual campaign is working.  What has been discovered is kind of scary.

Almost everything that is the Herman Cain campaign has been funded by one source - a Political Action Committee called 'Americans For Prosperity.'  Americans For Prosperity is the brain child of Charles and David Koch, the owners of Koch Industries, which is the largest privately held company in the United States.  Together, the Koch brothers are worth approximately $50 Billion.  David Koch was the Vice Presidential Nominee for the Libertarian Party in 1980.  Together, they have used Americans For Prosperity to funnel money towards ultra conservative Republican causes and have pledged to steer over $200 Million to the 2012 election.

Poll says Hillary would win BIG

A new TIME survey showed that if Hillary Clinton were the Democratic nominee for President in 2012, she would fare far better than Barack Obama against the Republican candidates.  Clinton beats Mitt Romney by 17 points, 55% to 38%.  Obama barely tops Romney, 46% to 43%, in the same poll.  Against Rick Perry, Clinton gets 58% to Perry's 32%.  Obama wins with 50% to Perry's 38%.  And against new Republican frontrunner Herman Cain, Clinton gets 56% to Cain's 34%.  Obama gets 49% to Cain's 37%.  

Secretary Clinton is currently the most popular national figure in politics, with an approval rating of 66% in recent polls.  Though she has said again and again that she will not run in 2012 and is highly unlikely to run in 2016 (she'd be 69 on election day 2016, being one of the oldest Presidential nominees in recent history), the national polling clearly shows a desire for Clinton to return to elected politics.  Last month, I mentioned a Bloomberg Poll showing that a lot of Independents and Democrats wished that Hillary Clinton had won the nomination in 2008, saying they thought she could do a better job than Obama has. 

Bachmann Bets the Farm on Iowa

Congresswoman and GOP Presidential hopeful Michele Bachmann must win Iowa.  If she doesn't, her political career may be over.  Her brand as a stalwart conservative and Tea Party darling should resonate with Iowa caucus voters, but political missteps, questionable claims, and downright bizarre accusations have put her at risk.  Also, the meteoric rise of Herman Cain and Rick Perry threaten to split the evangelical vote in Iowa, a situation that could pave the way for a surprise Romney win, despite his near universal hatred among conservatives.

The past week’s sudden resignation of Bachmann’s team in New Hampshire clearly demonstrates her campaign’s vulnerability – she has the adoration of social conservatives, but not the rest of the GOP.  Social conservatives seem to love her irreverent attacks on all things Government – from taxes and social policy to healthcare.  However, her more extreme and wacky pontifications on Abortion, the HPV Vaccine, and other issues have not proven to be very palatable to a large swath of the Republican electorate.  If she cannot prove herself as a viable candidate with a strong showing in Iowa, her presidential run will be over.

Perry & Romney - NOT Friends

Mitt Romney and Rick Perry don't like each other.  This fact was on clear display during the last GOP Presidential Debate.  Despite Herman Cain's rising numbers, Romney feels Perry is his only real competition for the Republican Nomination, and Perry has his eye firmly fixed on taking Romney down.

I enjoy a good political battle, but it appears as though the Perry/Romney fight has gotten personal.  The moment Mitt Romney reached out and touched Perry's shoulder, as if to say "Calm Down" was a moment that deftly explained the dynamics in play between the two.  Romney has tired to maintain his "inevitability" as the Republican nominee by remaining above the fray.  He has been excellent as far as not engaging his competition on the more extreme positions they have staked out.  

The Politics of Faith

Four of the GOP Presidential candidates have cited 'God's Will' as one of the reasons they're running for President.  Faith and Religion have played a major role in Republican Primaries for decades - and each year it appears to take a larger and more meaningful role.  I question weather or not it's right to use one's Faith as a campaign strategy - or as a means to attack another candidate.  The Separation of Church and State applies to our laws - not our politics.

LZ Granderson wrote a column for CNN that addresses this very phenomenon.  The blending of Faith and Politics doesn't appear to be restricted to Republicans only - however, the jarring differences in how the two parties use Religion and how far they press agendas with it... well, it's like comparing apples to cephalopods!

Read LZ's column.  It's really good!

Who does God want in the White House?

If it's Inevitable, will the Tea Party accept it?

Gloria Borger at CNN wrote a wonderful op-ed asking the question: If Mitt Romney ends up being the Republican Nominee, will the Tea Party rally behind him?  It's too early to say definitively who the Republican Nominee will be.  Remember, about this time before the last Presidential election, it was certain that it would be Rudy Giuliani versus Hillary Clinton.   However, Romney has consistently been towards the top of the polls, among likely Republican primary voters.  He performs well in debates.  He is also well liked by Independents.  The question is: Will Conservatives embrace him?

Will Tea Party purists back imperfect Romney?

It REALLY is about the economy, Stupid!

Tonight's GOP Debate in New Hampshire will focus on the Economy.  Despite economic issues being the #1 concern amongst voters, the current field of Republican Presidential candidates haven't said much about the economy.  The candidates have spent most of their time slamming President Obama's policies while slamming each other on social issues.  From Perry's immunization program in Texas, to Romney's heath care plans, to Bachmann's plan to put Don't Ask Don't Tell back in place, to Rick Santorum's insistence that the Defense of Marriage Act is essential for National Security - these issues are not exactly economic in nature.

Unemployed or Poor? Herman Cain says it's your own fault.

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, GOP Presidential hopeful, Herman Cain, expressed confusion and bewilderment about the 'Occupy Wall Street' protests.  He didn't understand why they were protesting Wall Street, indicating that their frustration was understandable but misguided. 

"Don't blame Wall Street," Cain said.  "Don't blame the big banks.   If you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself."

Watch the interview below and come to your own conclusions about Mr. Cain.

Palin: Not Running but Not Stupid

Sarah Palin has made it official: She is NOT running for President in 2012.  She also doesn't want to be considered for Vice President... again.  She feels she would be more effective in an advocacy role - assisting Republicans with fundraising and getting out the vote.  Which makes sense, since that is where the money is.

The best part about watching Sarah Palin isn't the inevitable gaffes she will make while speaking, rather the masterful way she manipulates her devotees and the INSANE amount of money she makes while doing it.  Say what you will about her intellect, but Sarah Palin is NOT stupid.  

Absolutely, FOR REAL - He's NOT Running!

New Jersey Governor Chis Christie has stated over and over again that he would not run for the Republican Presidential nomination.  That didn't stop most media outlets and talking heads to salivate over the possibility of a Christie candidacy.  Also, the Republicans have been looking for alternatives to the Romney/Perry choice currently presenting itself.  Major Republican donors had been sitting on the sidelines, waiting for Christie to change his mind and enter the race.  After yesterday's press conference (which occurred at the same time as Apple's iPhone 4S announcement - Christie and Apple CEO Tim Cook shared a split screen on several news networks) people finally have accepted the fact that Gov. Christie isn't going to run.

Why the Republicans can't pick a candidate for 2012

This past week there were dozens of stories across all news outlets about possible new candidates entering race to be the Republican Presidential Nominee in 2012.  Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee were mentioned in many of those stories.  While it isn’t unusual to read about people’s speculations on who will or will not run, it is telling right now, considering that filing deadlines for Iowa and New Hampshire are quickly approaching.

To me, this means that the various factions within the GOP aren’t happy with the current crop of candidates.  I believe that the disarray in the Republican Party could hurt their chances of taking back The White House in 2012.

Divided America - It's Our Fault

CNN has been asking its contributors to answer the question: "Why is our government so broken?"  Yesterday, I posted an op-ed by LZ Granderson who places a great deal of the blame on us - the voters.  Today, David Gergen presents a similar, though slightly more circumspect, argument that the American People do deserve some of the blame for the current dysfunction, and have the power to fix it.

The Dysfunction in Washington can be blamed on the Voters

LZ Granderson has written an Op-Ed piece that tries to answer the question: "Why is our government so broken?"  His answer: It's broken because of "stupid voters."  His scathing attack on an uninterested, uneducated, lazy, easily manipulated electorate I found both humorous and necessary in order to convey his point.  Now, I don't assign as much blame to the voters as Mr. Granderson, but I do agree his argument has a lot of merit.


Stupid Voters Enable Broken Government

Palin is still out there - and rising in the polls

A new McClatchy Poll out shows that Sarah Palin is down by only 4 points in a match up against President Obama in 2012.  The gap has closed significantly since June, when she was down 26 points.  She also managed to snag a majority of Independent voters in the poll.  Despite the fact that Republicans and Independents - at a 3-1 margin - do not want her to run, Palin hasn't ruled out jumping into the race though no official decision has been made.  However, she will probably be forced to make a decision soon - several states have a November deadline for candidates to get their names on primary ballots.

Republican Strategy for 2012 - Change the Rules

The 2012 Election is going to be close, regardless who ends up being the Republican nominee and regardless how bad the economy is. Americans are upset about the economy, but they are also not impressed with the field of Republican candidates. I believe the GOP has known this for a while, and has been quietly organizing to help ensure a Republican victory next year.

Poll Romanticizes Clinton Administration

Bloomberg released a poll today that says Hillary Clinton is the most popular national political figure in America. Two-thirds of Americans hold a favorable view of Secretary Clinton, that's the highest approval rating of any national figure. Add to that, 1/3 of Americans think the country would be better off had Hillary won in 2008. The poll suggests that there's quite a bit of buyer's remorse on the part of liberals and independents.

Weinergate = Republican Seat

Disgraced former Democratic Congressman Anthony Weiner resigned over a personal scandal involving lewd photos he sent of himself to several young women over Twitter. A special election was held in the New York 9th Congressional district to replace him and despite the huge Democratic majority of voters in the district, Republican Bob Turner won with 54% of the vote. Political analysts believe that Turner's surprise win could foreshadow a referendum on Democrats and President Obama in 2012.

Pass the Jobs, Please

President Obama's "American Jobs Act" is essentially Stimulus 2.0. He's asking for roughly $450 Billion to be used for infrastructure projects (plus the Infrastructure 'Bank'), tax cuts, extensions of unemployment benefits, and local government aid. The emphasis hasn't changed much - like the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act before it (Stimulus 1.0), over half of the proposal is dedicated to tax cuts.

Romney vs. Perry: Debate Recap

The only thing to take from last nights Republican debate is this: Watching Mitt Romney and Rick Perry insult each other was A LOT of fun!!! Mitt challenged Rick's record in Texas, his comments about the Social Security "Ponzi Scheme" and a host of other things. Rick attacked Mitt on 'RomneyCare", the quality of his business experience, and the lack of substance during his time as Massachusetts Governor. A funny moment: When Rick was touting that he had created 1 million jobs in Texas as Governor, Mitt reminded him that he had advantages like a state with no income tax and large oil and natural gas reserves. Mitt said crediting Rick with all of that would be similar to saying Al Gore 'invented' the internet.

Want Civil Politics? Reform the Primaries

Marcus Siegel, a partner in Locke Lord Strategies,and former executive director of the Democratic National Committee from 1974 to 1977, wrote a fantastic Op-Ed for the Washington Post about improving the political discourse in this country by changing our 2-Party Primary system. It is a fascinating read, and does not come across as partisan at all!

How closed primaries further polarize our politics

Does Density = Jobs?

The New York Times posted an adapted essay by Ryan Avent, an economics correspondent for The Economist and author of the Kindle Single “The Gated City.” He offers a suggestion on how to create more & better jobs - make cities denser. Before you say "What does this have to do with politics," think about all of the political hay that's been made from "Urban Sprawl." Think about all of the politicians who have fought for or against certain types of developments. Look at where you live and what types of jobs are available, then look at your area's government representative - weather a Mayor, State Legislator, or Congressperson. Urban Development, Sprawl, Jobs - they're all Political. Read this article!

One Path to Better Jobs: More Density in Cities

Political Sex Scandal? There's an App for that!

As constant as the Wind, political sex scandals are always happening. There was a bit of a lull after the Anthony Weiner scandal, but summer is nearly over and we needed a new one. This one comes from our friends in Puerto Rico.

Ignore Early Polling: It's Usually Wrong

Ed Hornic from CNN wrote a little blurb about how all of the early polling for the Republican Presidential nomination is pretty much useless, since pre-primary polling is almost always wrong. Right now, the world (i.e., the media) is all about Governor Rick Perry, who has catapulted to GOP front-runner in the most recent Gallup Poll. However, if you look at polling taken around the same time before the primaries for both parties, who was leading in the polls doesn't match up with who ended up winning the nomination.

Early Presidential Polls No Indication of Eventual Outcome

It's Perry Time!

Texas Governor Rick Perry topped a recent Gallup survey of Republican Presidential candidates by a wide margin - beating former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney by double digits. It appears that the Rick Perry movement is gaining some serious momentum in Republican circles. I don't want to speculate, since it is still 4+ months until the first caucuses of the 2012 election, but Perry could very well end up being the one to beat for the Republican Nomination.

Gallop Survey Results

Perry vs. Bush via Jeanne Moos

I've seen far too many articles comparing Rick Perry to George W. Bush. However, Jeanne Moos's take on the comparison is hilarious, relevant, and entertaining! Take a look at the video below.

Why the Presidential Selection Process is Broken

I'm using the image of Rick Perry being touted as a potential front-runner for the Republican nominee to illustrate a point: Our Presidential Selection process is broken. Not to disparage Gov. Perry - he has a decent record in Texas and seems to be a genuinely nice person. However, on a political level, the idea of a Perry Presidency is hilarious. Another Texas Governor - a good ol' boy with a drawl in his voice - pandering to social conservatives and winking sympathetically at the majority of the electorate. Does this not look familiar?

Government to Citizens - Gone Fishing!

America’s economy is struggling. The jobs picture is bleak. The stock market is in chaos. What is Washington’s prescription: a vacation?

The House & Senate went on vacation shortly after the debt ceiling crisis was averted. Now, President Obama is taking some R&R. What the White House dubs as a “Working Vacation”, it appears that our elected officials have exhausted themselves so much that they are taking a break from work – until after Labor Day.

In the mean time, our Nation’s unemployment rate hovers around 9.2%. Economic output is down overall. European debt issues and uncertainty in the U.S. have caused wild gesticulations in the stock market. There is a lack of confidence in our elected officials. CNN’s latest polling shows that a majority of Americans will not re-elect their current congressional representatives – the first time that has happened since the question was first asked 20 years ago. I would guess that this extended vacation won’t help.

I do not want to complain too much about Congress and The White House taking a break. It is common for the legislature and executive branch to take vacations. If people recall the summer of 2009, when Congress took its vacation there were all those town hall meetings of people screaming about the President’s Health Care Plan. These vacations generally give our elected officials the chance to meet with their constituents at home. However, this doesn’t appear to be THAT type of vacation.

As the country teetered near the brink of default, Congress and the President battled it out over spending cuts. What emerged is a half-hearted plan that may help limit the growth of our debt, but won’t do ANYTHING to pay down the existing debt. Interest on our existing debt is the single largest expense of the Federal Government – more than defense, Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, or anything else. Congress is taking a break because it achieved something that doesn’t solve the problem?

However, there appears to be some news from The White House. President Obama will be making a speech after Labor Day to unveil his plan for job creation and fixing the current economic picture. From the parts that have been leaked to the press, it appears to be a hodgepodge of things the President has already requested: an Infrastructure Bank, extensions of unemployment benefits, job-training assistance, payroll tax holidays for workers and businesses – things that were negotiated away in last minute budget deals with Republicans in the House.

While I applaud the President for not giving up on these ideas, it seems to me to be “Too Little, Too Late.” Not to mention, politically impossible.

An Infrastructure Bank is an idea that has been tossed around for a while. In theory, it would be an extension of what was started in the Stimulus bill – money set aside for rebuilding America’s infrastructure with an emphasis on things that can be started right away. The Bank would be funded by closing some loopholes in the Federal Tax Code, thus not adding to the deficit. An initial $50 Billion dollar investment would get the ball rolling, with continual funding of $30-70 Billion a year as the taxes collected from the loophole closures fluctuate over time.

Not a bad idea, but the political will to close enough loopholes to raise $50 Billion a year doesn’t exist on the Republican side of the aisle. This would amount to a 50 Billion dollar tax increase – something I believe will not garner ANY Republican support.

The President is also expected to push for another extension of unemployment benefits. The Republicans will only agree to an extension if it is accompanied by cuts of equal or greater value. Depending on how long of an extension the President pushes for, it could cost anywhere between $10-70 Billion. It isn’t clear where the Republicans would request the cuts to be made, but I would guess they would go after the budgets for the new Consumer Protections Bureau (which they openly hate) or Medicare and Medicaid (which they openly want to end).

A payroll tax holiday is something the Republicans would be willing to support. However, the President will more than likely request that the holiday be paid for by increasing revenues elsewhere in the tax code, specifically ending some corporate deductions that are wildly popular with the oil and natural gas industries. Republicans have and will continue to block any attempts at raising revenue through corporate taxes, and therefore this idea will likely be dead on arrival.

There may be more to the President’s plan than has currently come to light. However, given the current political climate, it is doubtful that the President’s plan will become law – at least not in its current form. The gridlock that plagues Washington is constant, but over the past few election cycles we’ve seen an almost cult-like atmosphere of ideological entrenchment.

I’m all for party loyalty, but not at the expense of the well-being of our Nation. Republicans are going to have to accept that taxes will have to go up. Democrats have to accept that entitlement programs need to be reformed. The two sides of our political spectrum need to meet in the middle, instead of pulling and pulling until the “middle” is closer to their side.

The random and unnecessary partisan bickering over false crises has distracted too long from our larger problems. People need jobs. We need to grow the economy. We need to deal with our long term structural debt. These are the issues we need to focus on as a Nation, and our leaders need to work diligently in order to address them.

After Labor Day, any additional vacation time will not be tolerated until we have a plan.

The Omaha Oracle Speaks: Is He Right?

Warren Buffett, that financial genius and investment guru extraordinaire, wrote an op-ed piece for The New York Times on Sunday that has caused some controversy. He is advocating higher taxes on the "Super Rich" - specifically creating new tax brackets for ALL income over $1 Million and $10 Million. It's a bold plan, especially since it's being proposed by one of the wealthiest men in the world (Buffett paid nearly $7 Million dollars in Federal Income Tax last year). However, the current state of the Republican Party would sooner nominate Fred Karger for President than support a tax increase of any kind.

Two respected columnists have written response pieces to Mr. Buffett's op-ed. Jeffrey Miron is senior lecturer and director of undergraduate studies at Harvard University and Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute. He is the author of "Libertarianism, from A to Z." He wrote a piece against Buffett's argument - stating that the resulting tax increases would stifle job creation, and not actually net much revenue for the United States. William G. Gale is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and co-director of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. He wrote in support of Mr. Buffett's argument - citing historical patterns in how government spending and taxes have fluctuated over decades, pointing out when government shrinks and when taxes are raised.

Both sides make a compelling argument, and both sides views are worth a look.

Jeffrey Miron's Op-Ed Piece: Why Warren Buffett is wrong

William G. Gale's Op-Ed Piece: Buffett is right - raise taxes on the wealthy

Ames, Iowa GOP Debate - It was Fun?

I missed the Republican Debate last night, but I am going to watch it today and give my take on it. In the mean time, pundits from all sides are posting their re-caps of the debate. I came across this one from Todd Graham. He is the director of Debate at Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. He has coached his teams to national championships, and has been honored with the Ross K. Smith national debate coach of the year award. He wrote a short blurb about how he thought the recent debate was "fun."

Debate Coach on GOP: Fun dust ups, missed opportunities.

Apparently, we Hate Congress

CNN has released a poll taken in the wake of the debt ceiling debate. Apparently, a majority of Americans now believe that their congressional representatives should NOT be re-elected. This is the first time a majority of Americans have felt that way about their specific congresspeople since the question was first asked 20 years ago. It also shows that the GOP and the Tea Party have fallen out of favor with a majority of the American Public, while the Democrats have managed to maintain their standing - now 14 points higher than any other group. If you're a statistics geek, like me, you'll enjoy reading the poll!

CNN/ORC Poll Results (Aug. 9th, 2011)

Taxes Suck (but we need them anyway)

Liberals are always talking about how the wealthy need to pay their “fair share” of income taxes in this country. I consider myself to be a liberal, but this argument is a stretch, to say the least. The wealthy DO, in fact, pay their fair share. Those in the upper echelon of income earners pay a substantially larger chunk of income in taxes than the rest of us. As of 2010, the top 5% of wage earners in this country pay 40% of the income taxes collected in this country. The average multi-millionaire pays nearly $1.5 million in income taxes each year – more than 150 times the amount the average American pays. And, this is counting all of those sweet deductions that the wealthy get to take advantage of.

That being said, I still believe that the wealthiest among us should pay more in taxes because they can afford to. For me, it isn’t about the percentage of income that is a deciding factor – it is the actual available income, after taking into account real life expenses.

For an example, we’ll look at the 2010 federal income tax and compare a family of four making $60,000 a year and another family of four making $2,000,000 a year.

The middle class family, at $60,000 a year in joint income (Schedule Y-1), will be in the 15% bracket. They will pay a total of $8,165 in federal income taxes. Not an insurmountable amount, but that is only part of the overall financial burden. According to the Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD), the average middle-class American family spends roughly 35% of pre-tax earnings on housing (rent or mortgage, insurance, utilities, etc). That means our middle class family will be spending $21,000 on housing costs for the year. That lowers their available income to $39,000 a year. Add to that the $8,165 in federal income taxes, their total available funds drop to $30,835. Of this amount, roughly 28% (according to the Department of Commerce) - will go to the “other” taxes, state, local, property taxes, sales taxes, etc. – that’s $8,634. Now, the middle class family has $22,201 left. Factor in food, car payments, 2 dependent children, trying to save for the children’s college education and for the parents’ retirement, and you’re looking at a pretty tight financial situation.

The wealthy family, at $2,000,000 a year in joint income (Schedule Y-1), will be in the 35% bracket. They will pay a total of $765,582 in federal income taxes. That is A LOT of money, but considering the total income, they are still sitting pretty with over $1.2 million dollars which makes the next part VERY disappointing. HUD estimates that the average total housing costs for people who make over $1,000,000 in this country hovers between 1-8% of pre-tax earnings, generally because folks with this much money can buy their homes outright. No mortgage payment = lower overall costs. We’ll slap this family with the 8% number and they’ll be paying $160,000 in housing expenses. They’re still over $1,000,000 in available funds. Also, the average in “other taxes” the Dept. of Commerce says those who make over $1,000,000 pay out of their remaining total: 5%. Our wealthy family has $1,074,418 after federal taxes and housing costs. Subtract 5% of that – which is $53,721 – and they are left with $1,020,697 for everything else.

Now, this is a very simplistic comparison, and doesn’t take into account the multitude of federal tax breaks and incentives both families are able to take advantage of. My point with this comparison is to explain how the current tax system is easier for the wealthy to handle than it is for the middle class.

There is a lot of discussion in Washington about reforming America’s tax code. Many have argued that, in exchange for the elimination of most tax incentives and loopholes, we would be able to lower the overall tax rate to 25% or less, only use 3 tiers, and still generate more revenue. I believe that could work, and make the system fairer overall.

I would institute a 3-tiered tax rate that started at the poverty level, plus 25% (as of 2010, that would be $13,952 for individuals or $27,195 for a family of four). Anyone at that level or lower would pay no federal income tax. From that level to $100,000 for individuals or $250,000 for a family, an income tax of 10% would be levied. From $100,001 for individuals or $250,001 for a family to $1,000,000 for individuals or $2,500,000 for a family, an income tax of 17.5% would be levied. And for all income over $1,000,001 for individuals or $2,500,001 for a family, an income tax of 25% would be levied.

No deductions would exist for the top bracket and the upper half of the middle bracket. The lowest bracket and the lower half of the middle bracket would be allowed to make some deductions, especially for big ticket items like college, mortgage interest, etc. Also, things like capital gains and estate inheritance would be rolled into general income – without any special tax. So, if Aunt Mildred dies and leaves you $10,000 or you cash out $300,000 in stock options – simply add that amount to your year’s earnings and whatever bracket you land in, that’s what you’ll pay. To me, this seems like a much more predictable and fair way to levy taxes than our current system.

Of course, there are a host of things to consider. And, this issue is so complex that it needs and fully deserves a long, thoughtful, and thorough debate in Congress and with the American public. Both sides have legitimate ideas about the tax code, and both sides should be granted the right for their ideas to be discussed and debated.

Taxes are a burden, but a necessary one. The more we can do to make the system fairer and more effective, the better off we will be as a nation.

S&P's Political Miscalculation

Adam Sorensen at TIME wrote a quick blurb about S&P's rationale for lowering the U.S. government's credit rating. Specifically, he found fault in the political argument S&P made for its decision. While in the long run most economists feel that the downgrade in America's credit rating will have little effect, short term consequences are unclear, and Sorensen wonders weather or not an attack on America's political system by Standard & Poor's will result in anything positive. He also questions the validity of the argument - is the hyperpartisanship permeating out of Washington anything new? His blurb is a fascinating read! And, there's a chart!

S&P's Political Miscalculation

Default Averted. Now, where are the damn jobs?

Now that the debt ceiling “crisis” has been averted, I thought that Washington would FINALLY start talking about jobs. Instead, we are greeted with word that Congress is going on vacation – for A MONTH! They are going, despite the fact that unemployment is still over 9%, the economy is still sluggish (anyone notice the nearly 800 point slide on the Dow this week), and despite record profits at most major corporations, no one is hiring.

I never intended to use this blog as a place to vent frustrations – rather, I wanted to openly discuss the politics of the day in a fair way. However, I am finding it increasingly difficult not to scream at the top of my lungs at some of the big political players in Washington. In order to maintain some semblance of sanity, I would like to talk to the big DC players in this drama.

First, I would like to say something to House Speaker, John Boehner (R-OH).

Mr. Speaker, when you were elevated to this position, you said that the mid-term elections showed that the public was upset with the economy. You said the stimulus didn’t work, and you and the Republican majority in the House were going to focus “like a laser” on jobs so Americans can get back to work.

Well, I still don’t see any jobs. I’d also like to point out that the first 10 bills the House took up (H.R.1 to H.R.10) had NOTHING to do with jobs! H.R.1 was a procedural budget bill. H.R.2 was a symbolic attempt to repeal Obama’s heath care reform bill from the previous year. H.R.3 was an anti-abortion bill. H.R.4 was a Tax Bill that adjusted the rules of the 1099 form. Do I need to go on? Where are the jobs?

The only thing you’ve said about jobs is that Government needs to get out of the private sector’s way - i.e., lower taxes and less regulation – and the jobs will come. Corporate taxes are lower now than they were under Reagan and corporations are reporting record profits in almost every industry, so the regulations don’t seem to be hurting. Corporate America is sitting on hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars – cash – and still no jobs. Your plan isn’t working.

You make a point of saying how much you want to work with the President. I believe YOU want to, but I don’t believe a lot of folks in your caucus do. The Tea Party folks essentially have you in a full-nelson headlock, and you continue to placate them versus doing what lawmakers are supposed to do: work with the other party and compromise so a solution can be found. You and the President are Statesmen. The folks of the Tea Party Express are not. Don’t play this game with our Nation – because in the end – you will lose, and so will your party.

Second, I would like to say something to Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid (D-NV).

You are the Charlie Brown of Political Compromise. The Senate Republicans are Lucy. If it isn’t clear to you now that all of the supposed deals, Gangs of Six, and any other cockamamie idea for compromise Senate Republicans have proposed are false hope on arrival, you should resign. Each of your attempts at an equitable deal between Senate Republicans and Democrats has failed in a spectacular fashion. I understand that you lost several members of your caucus during the mid-terms, but you should not be so naïve as to believe you can build a coalition with Republicans in their current form.

Why aren’t you and the Democratic MAJORITY writing legislation to your standards, and then shopping it around to the few moderate Republicans there are left in the Senate? I know they won’t sign on to anything, but you can at least find 7 Republicans to allow a procedural vote to end a filibuster, right? And if not that, isn’t there some “Pork” you could bribe them with?

Each time I read about another bipartisan “Gang of” whatever – I cringe. I know you’re trying to be optimistic, but the time for optimism is over. Why? Because, it’s not working!!! Voters like to see courage. They like to see guts. They don’t like to see weakness. Each time you agree to one of these bipartisan talks and each time it ends up blowing up in your face, it makes you appear weak. You need to come from a place of strength – actual or perceived – and then fight for your principles. Compromise some, but not on EVERYTHING. Otherwise, what do you stand for?

And, finally, I would like to say something to President Obama.

Mr. President. I voted for you, but I am pretty dissatisfied by your performance. I cannot blame you for the actions of Congress, but I can criticize you for your lack of a message.

You pushed through the Stimulus, the auto bailout, Healthcare Reform, Financial Reform, an extension of the Bush Tax Cuts, the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’, and a host of other things. On most of these, you stated your position, and then let Congress take the lead. Frankly, I don’t understand why – especially now.

The Executive Branch has a unique position in Government: It has the ability to set and drive the agenda. For better or for worse, people will stop and listen if you speak – it takes a bit more for the House and Senate to get everyone’s attention. Why aren’t you out there fighting for jobs? You talk about things you’d like to see. I like the Infrastructure Bank you’ve mentioned. Why aren’t you on TV every day telling us about it? You talk about Rebuilding America’s Infrastructure but you don’t explain how we’ll do it. You don’t adequately explain why it’s important. You don’t ‘sell’ your ideas in a compelling way. For such an eloquent speaker – you as Executive should have complete control over our national conversation. But, for some reason, you’ve been rendered mute.

You continue to reach out for compromise with Republicans. It’s admirable, but at this point, it should be painfully clear that their interest is to take your job away. I understand that’s the nature of politics, but why don’t you get it? I voted for Hillary Clinton during the Democratic Primary in my state because I felt she could handle the swampland that is DC. I didn’t think you could handle it. You may believe you are staying “above the fray” by taking a back seat during the negotiation process, but you are coming across as detached, aloof, and indecisive.

You need to find that inner strength you had during the 2008 campaign. If you can’t rally people, there’s no way anything will get done. The President has the ability to lead like no one else. If you don’t use that ability as effectively as possible, you will lose it forever.

All three of these men have a responsibility to the American People to govern effectively. If they all fail to do so, we all suffer. This isn’t specifically about ideology or party affiliation, it’s about Governing. Our elected officials are elected to Govern. When they fail to do that, we get rid of them.

Over 14 Million People are unemployed right now. That is 50% more people than the margin of votes between Obama and McCain in the 2008 election. If those 14 Million People don’t see a light at the end of this dismal economic tunnel, or at the very least, see our lawmakers diligently working to create that light…

The term MASSIVE UPHEAVAL comes to mind.