Julia Duin | Baltimore | Nov 16

Washington Times - Cardinal Francis George, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, defended the bishops' involvement in national health care legislation Monday, saying the church must be "leaven" in the debate.

Speaking at the opening of the bishops' annual business meeting, "to limit our teaching or governing to what the state is not interested in would be to betray both the constitution of our country and, much more importantly, the Lord himself," he said.

Not only did USCCB staff and individual bishops play a vital role in getting abortion restrictions into the recently passed House version of the health care overhaul bill, they served notice Monday they will influence the bill's future.

The announcement of financial overhaul legislation in the U.S. Senate this week smacked of irony as its author, Senator Chris Dodd—the recipient of a sweetheart rate on his own home mortgage—announced a sweeping 1,136 page piece of legislation to “protect consumers.” It appears at this point that the protection consumers and Middle America really need is from this nation’s politicians, who have too long lined their pockets with campaign contributions from big business and who have allowed financial institutions to fleece Middle America.

It wasn’t but a couple of years ago that big business and congress all but eliminated the ability of consumers to effectively discharge their debts in bankruptcy proceedings. At the same time, banks and financial institutions were making loans to borrowers who clearly could not qualify. Banks, financial institutions and credit card companies continued extending generous limits on credit cards and lines of credit to consumers. Now be fair, much of the mortgage activity came from Democrats in congress who believed that everyone had an inalienable right to own a home, evidently whether they could afford it or not. And naturally, Republicans, who long ago sold their soul to big business, positioned their bank and financial institution contributors for all of the mortgage business.

“Disillusioned” is the word that best describes how many Americans feel after eight years of George Bush and the election of Barack Obama a year ago. Republicans had a majority in congress and the presidency, yet achieved little for Middle America. They betrayed voters by inflating the deficit and growing government, sending men and women into nation-building wars whose purposes are still unknown, and created a culture of moral and ethical corruption in Washington D.C. It was under lax and pathetic regulatory oversight that a Republican president and Republican congress allowed corporations to betray shareholders with questionable and highly leveraged credit default swaps, only to be followed by a $700 billion taxpayer bailout created by the Bush administration—so much for limited government. Republicans are a party without a message and without a messenger.

I've written this in reference to Michael Collins's diary post One More Reason to Kill this Bill and some of the confusion over sections and what is in the bill as far as coverage requirements and penalties.

I'm looking here (.pdf file) for the new Health bill and somewhere around here for the IRS Tax Code. Will post more precise links (possibly to other sources) as needed.

1) HR3962 Sec. 501 (p. 297) If you fail to purchase insurance you will pay 2.5% of (modified adjusted gross income - gross income) but, if that value is higher than the “average premium for self-only coverage under a basic plan which is offered in a Health Insurance Exchange…” you will pay that average premium instead. So, there is a cap on the 2.5%, set at the average premium of a plan on the exchange. Not sure how high that average will be. HR3962 Sec. 501 (p.298) This amount is pro-rated based upon the fraction of the year that you go without coverage.

Note that a “basic plan” is outlined in HR3962 Section 303(c) on page 168.

Modified Adjusted Gross Income is defined as adjusted gross income increased by (A) any amount excluded from gross income under section 911 of IRS Code (see the link below) and (B) any amount of interest received or accrued by the taxpayer during the taxable year which is exempt from tax.

2) HR3962 Sec 501 (p.299). For Americans living overseas, you are exempt from paying this tax if you have been living abroad and are a resident of a foreign country for at least one taxable year. Relevant IRS code is here (scroll down a bit to sec. 911(d)(1)). I assume the prorating would apply if you’ve only been living overseas for less than a year.

3) You can apparently file an exemption from the requirement to purchase insurance based upon religious beliefs, though you must document your adherence to a faith that would want this. There’s a bit more in there, starting on HR3962 Sec. 501, pages 299-300.

4) HR3962 Sec 501, p. 304. Seems to state that small lapses in coverage are not going to result in taxes. I would assume this means a few days, but I don’t see any specific numbers. The bill just calls them “de minimis lapses of acceptable coverage.”

Now, if you don’t pay the tax in point (1) above then you will be subject to normal IRS rules and regulations. I would assume this is where IRS Code sections 7201 and 7203(see links below) come in. They feature up to $25,000 in fines and no more than 1 or 5 years in jail (depending on which is applicable). I’m not sure how these are applied in practice.

So, it looks like no specific penalties are outlined in the bill, but the 2.5% is designed as a tax and so would fall under IRS rules for non-compliance.

IRS Code Section 7201
IRS Code Section 7203

At least two provisions in the House health reform bill are very troubling, the de facto repeal of Roe v. Wade and this. In a powerful post on the Welcome Back to Pottersville, poster Jurassicpork laid it out. This is as clear and logical a statement as I've seen on the utter contempt that Congress has for the people. We're creating a new criminal class, people who can't afford health insurance. The solution - fines and prison. All thanks to the Money Party which has reached depths previously unimaginable. Well worth a read. Michael Collins

Congress Pulls the Trigger

Many people have described what took place in the 23rd district of New York congressional race as an internal struggle within the Republican Party, an internal struggle for the soul of the Republican Party. I find this analogy difficult to accept and understand because how can you fight for something that doesn’t exist? To say the Republicans are fighting over their soul is akin to saying the Civil War was a fight for the soul of America, while poetically it sounds good the truth is somewhat less pleasant. The Civil War was not about the soul of America, it was about the viability of a nation and its dependence on a corrupt regional power structure. What happened in New York was not about the soul of the Republican Party, it was about the viability of a national party and its reliance on a corrupt regional power base.

Harry Reid is expected to announce that the "public option" in current healthcare reform legislation will have a state by state opt out clause. From the Times:

The Senate health care legislation will include a government-run insurance plan, but states would be allowed to “opt out” of it, the majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, will announce officially on Monday afternoon, Senate Democratic aides said.

How would states do this?

Mr. Reid’s office has not released any details. In theory, states that wish to opt out of the public plan would have to adopt a law to do so, which would require agreement between the state legislature and the governor.

I think that is a reasonable hurdle, or to put it another way, an acceptable compromise, because it is a hurdle. It puts the burden on state legislators to justify why they think their state shouldn't be a part of the plan.

That being said, I don't like The National Journal's take on it:

Reid's apparent intent to move ahead with a public option, including an opt-out, has led some Senate aides to suggest Reid is readying a strategy in which he might lose the cloture vote but then quickly bring to the floor a bill with a compromise public option designed to attract more centrists.
That approach would reduce the chance of attacks from liberals by proving that the votes are not there for a more robust public option, an aide to a centrist senator said.

That, on the other hand, doesn't surprise me and would be very typically of the Senator from Nevada. Is it an attempt to water the bill down and sell out progressives? Might very well be.

Dems connect 4 vertebrae, 20 more to go...

All Spin Zone writes:

Joe Wilson (R-SC) played the role of GOP street thug last night. Submitted for your consideration: low level hit men don’t go out and take a whack at the opposition’s “Don” unless the family Capo approves in advance.

Sounds about right to me.

Disgraceful. It's never happened. Until now. Republican vitriol has gone too far. Rep. Wilson should resign. Or Congress should censure him. Period. End. Of. Story.

In response to the question of whether support for any non-laughable health reform bill from "moderate" Republicans like Chuck Grassley was ever a possibility, Lindsay Beyerstein nails it:

"Simple answers to simple questions: No, there was never any realistic prospect of getting Chuck Grassley to support healthcare reform. Grassley is a Republican and, unlike Democrats, Republicans have party discipline. Scuttling health reform is the GOP's number one priority. It should have been clear from the outset that any plan that depended on the cooperation of Republicans was doomed."

When you get beyond the by-now reflexive timidity of most Democrats on hot issues, the Dems' second-biggest mistake is their having confused party discipline with goose-stepping anti-democracy. The two are not the same, and although they sometimes go together, they don't have to.

For instance: ironclad party discipline in the service of a dishonest war or the smearing of a popular idea such as a public health care option is indeed anti-democratic discipline. It is the closing of ranks to sabotage the public will or the public interest. But ironclad party discipline to hold together the votes needed for a bill that will give a majority of Americans the choice they want in health care is pro-democratic discipline. It is the force required to fend off reactionary opposition to giving non-wealthy Americans a slightly fairer shake. Stern party unity for the sake of greater social or economic equality is not a vice. It is a virtue.

Rep. John Conyers | Washington | July 17

Huffington Post - Today witnessed the landmark passage of the States Single Payer Amendment which would remove federal barriers to implementation of a single payer health care system at the state level. This bipartisan vote signifies the prominence of the single payer solution as the plan favored by a majority of Americans.

The amendment introduced by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) during the Education and Labor Committee's consideration the health reform bill -- H.R. 3200 -- passed by a bipartisan margin of 25-19. The amendment would free states from Employer Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) regulations that have been used by insurance companies to tie down states with litigation, preventing them from implementing progressive health care solutions.

Washington, DC | July 9

BBC - CIA Director Leon Panetta has admitted that his agency regularly misled Congress, six members of the House Intelligence Committee have alleged.

The claims are echoed in a letter from the committee's Democratic chairman, Sylvestre Reyes.

Fredreka Schouten & Paul Overberg | Washington | June 8

USA TODAY - On a mild evening last September, Citigroup lobbyists mingled with South Carolina Rep. James Clyburn at a rooftop reception — complete with miniature putting greens — as the company hosted a party to honor the third most powerful Democrat in the House and raise money for one of his favorite golf charities.

Health insurers and hospitals, meanwhile, are donating millions to help build an institute in Boston to celebrate the career of Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., who is attempting to overhaul the nation's health care system.

Despite a ban on gifts to lawmakers and limits on campaign contributions, lobbyists and groups that employ them can spend unlimited money to honor members of Congress or donate to non-profits connected to them or their relatives. The public — until now — had little insight into the scope of this largely hidden world of special-interest influence.

Under ethics rules passed in 2007, lobbyists for the first time last year had to report any payment made for an event or to a group connected to a lawmaker and other top federal officials.

USA TODAY undertook the first comprehensive analysis of the lobbying reports and found 2,759 payments, totaling $35.8 million, were made in 2008. The money went to honor 534 current and former lawmakers, almost 250 other federal officials and more than 100 groups, many of which count lawmakers among their members. h/t Susie at Crooks & Liars

Staff Reports | Albany, NY | April 24, 2009

Albany Times Union - The race in the 20th Congressional District has ended: Republican Jim Tedisco has conceded the contest more than three weeks after election day.

Just before 4 p.m., Tedisco called Democrat Scott Murphy to concede, and Murphy has declared victory.

"This was a closely contested election that perhaps lasted a little longer than anyone may have expected or wanted," Tedisco said in a just-released press statement. "But it was important for our electoral process and for the hard-working people of upstate New York that it be resolved fairly and decisively."

This is explosive news:

Rep. Jane Harman , the California Democrat with a longtime involvement in intelligence issues, was overheard on an NSA wiretap telling a suspected Israeli agent that she would lobby the Justice Department reduce espionage-related charges against two officials of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, the most powerful pro-Israel organization in Washington.

Harman was recorded saying she would “waddle into” the AIPAC case “if you think it’ll make a difference,” according to two former senior national security officials familiar with the NSA transcript.

In exchange for Harman’s help, the sources said, the suspected Israeli agent pledged to help lobby Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif., then-House minority leader, to appoint Harman chair of the Intelligence Committee after the 2006 elections, which the Democrats were heavily favored to win.

Read the entire article. It's beyond sordid. And then ask yourself if you feel this is appropriate behavior from a nation we call 'an Ally.'

I would also add that there seems to be a lot of anti-AIPAC/Israel news coming out lately as well. First the leak about Rahm's conversations, then the note from Mitchel that Israel's demands were unacceptable and now this? Seems like a trend to me. It also looks like there is a lot of pressure being put on AIPAC and its supporters to fall in line behind and support Obama for the already pre-ordained confrontation between Obama and Bibi.

Nota bene: The always readable and excellent Cheryl Rofer at WhirledView is coming to the same conclusions as well.

Congress is spending nearly a trillion dollars on the stimulus bill. That’s about $3,000 for every man, woman and child in America, $12,000 for a family of four. This is on top of that family’s $126,000 share of the existing federal deficit, a debt of 3 times the median family income. The interest paid on that debt is money that cannot be used to fund college or vocational training, safe streets or a secure retirement. We are told that taking on this new debt will cure the economy, that if people spend their tax reductions on toys and the government spends on roads everything will be good once more. But some time in 2010 the toys will be in the trash and the road builders will be laid off again. What then? Another trillion? For the last decade our economy has been built on debt. Will our government now do anything to stimulate real organic growth, or will it perpetuate policies that stifle demand and maintain our dependence on artificial stimulants?

More after the jump.

Cliff Hanger in a Sea of Blue

California's 4th Congressional District, Republican since 1992, combines
vast regions, sparsely populated, and growing suburbs and exurbs.

Charlie Brown (D) Refuses to Give up in California's
4th Congressional District

Michael Collins
"Scoop" Independent News

California turned blue with a vengeance in the 2008 presidential election. President-elect Obama's 61% majority plus a 78% turnout rate statewide were enough to strip the Republicans of all but one county with a significant population.

The "blue tsunami" started in San Diego County at the southern tip of the state and flowed up the Pacific coastal counties through Mendocino. The only county with a major population that remained loyal to the Republicans was Orange County, the former center of right wing politics in the Golden State, and that was by a mere 2.6% McCain margin.

Yet, the 4th Congressional District is still counting votes with a too-close-to-call election. John T. Doolittle (R) retired this year after holding the seat since 1992. Democrat Charlie Brown took a second run for the seat, having lost to Doolittle in 2006 by just 3 points. In 2008, Brown received nationwide support from high profile veterans and veteran's groups and was well funded from a variety of sources.

His opponent, Tom McClintock (R), hoped to maintain Republican dominance. McClintock was considered one of the most conservative members of the California legislature. His main issue in the campaign was fencing the border to keep out illegal workers.

On election night McClintock had less than a 1,000 vote lead with thousands of uncounted ballots. Rather than surrender, Brown issued the following statement on Nov. 5:

"We understand that there are still more than 40,000 ballots remaining to be processed, and we will not know the outcome of this election until all of those votes are counted.

More from Chris Nelson on the 'politics' of the bailout. Needless to say I disagree with him on his remarks about Pelosi (and Hoyer). The Democrats have a chance to bury the Republicans for a decade here and they aren't taking it. They can defy the president to veto a good bill and get Obama on board and win a smashing victory in November. But they just lack leadership, as Nelson says (albeit in a different context).

Here's Nelson's take:

SUMMARY: the only thing EVERY one agrees on today is that the US is suffering from a lack of leadership, and if that continues, the world will suffer also.

Paul Kane & Lori Montgomery | Sept 29

WaPo - In a narrow vote, the House today rejected the most sweeping government intervention into the nation's financial markets since the Great Depression, refusing to grant the Treasury Department the power to purchase up to $700 billion in the troubled assets that are at the heart of the U.S. financial crisis.

The 228-205 vote amounted to a stinging rebuke to the Bush administration and Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., and was sure to sow massive anxiety in world markets. Even during the Just 11 days ago, Paulson urged congressional leaders to urgently approve the bailout. He warned that inaction would lead to a seizure of credit markets and a virtual halt to the lending that allows Americans to acquire mortgages and other types of loans.

As it became apparent that the measure was heading to defeat, stock markets took a steep dive. The Dow Jones industrial average fell more than 600 points but then rebounded a bit.

Numerian posted this letter in the comment thread of another post, but I think it needs a full front page post. So here it is:

Dear Senator Obama-

Chances are most if not all of the major commercial and investment banks are insolvent. Not one of them is opting out of the do-not-short list, and they don't seem to have the confidence in their survival to opt out of the L3 asset swap program Secretary Paulson is proposing.

It is also very likely that acutely dangerous systemic risk already exists, not merely from direct lines of credit among the banks, but especially from credit default swaps, which if activated by more than one large bank default would probably bring down many others. Remember, though, that this systemic risk is highly concentrated in the top 25 or so banks in the world, and does not jeopardize the 6,000 other community banks in the U.S.

Third, it is also highly probable that as this recession worsens, and as housing values continue to sink, forcing more foreclosures, the large banks will be even closer to collapse.

Having worked for many years in the banking industry and been closely involved with risk management and derivatives, I can tell you that it looks like catastrophe is already here.

More after the jump.

In the last five years, the media has become the stomping ground for corporate mouthpieces that not only own most of the media outlets, but also control the advertising revenues that keep these television, radio and newspapers afloat. This is a direct result of the “fairness doctrine” being scrapped by the FCC and also the placement of Michael Powell (the son of Colin Powell) to head the agency. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 also added fuel to the fire. According to Network:

The Telecommunications Act of 1996. Under the 1934 Communications Act, everything was clear and precise - there was NO option but to regulate - and the Commission did what the Act instructed it to do. The 1996 Act, however, introduced the so-called forbearance doctrine, where the Commission could, on its own initiative, refrain from regulating an industry segment. That's when things began to collapse. In its haste to create local exchange competition, the FCC went either too far or not far enough in the early days. Three methods of local competition were introduced: (1) Local resale, but the discounts were not deep enough and so hardly anyone chose that option; (2) Unbundled Network Elements (UNEs), where discounts were probably too deep, so everyone jumped in; and (3) Facilities based competition, which has not taken off because of the UNE discounts. Chairman Powell, who strongly favors facilities-based competition decided to "fix" the problem by moving too far too fast in the opposite direction by essentially deregulating UNE price regulation for the Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers. The result: Policy disarray and chaos!

M.R. Kropko | East Cleveland, Ohio | August 20

Associated Press - Democratic U.S. Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, the first black woman to represent Ohio in Congress and a strong critic of the Iraq war, died Wednesday after a brain hemorrhage, a hospital spokeswoman said.

Tubbs Jones, 58, died Wednesday evening of a brain hemorrhage caused by an aneurysm that burst and left her with limited brain function, said Eileen Sheil, a spokeswoman for the Cleveland Clinic, which owns the Huron Hospital in East Cleveland where Tubbs Jones died.

"Throughout the course of the day and into this evening, Congresswoman Tubbs Jones' medical condition declined," Sheil said in a statement from the clinic and Tubbs Jones' family.

Good news: Pressure from Rep. Waxman to enforce Dr. Kaye Whitley's subpoena to testify on how the DOD is preventing and responding to incidents of sexual assault in the military have paid off: after first blocking her from attending a House committee's hearing, the Pentagon is allowing Whitley to testify. Bad news: the DOD continues to ignore a very specific responsibility they have been tasked with in order to fully address this issue.

I expect that people find it hard to deal with emotionally sensitive issues. I may even expect that many people would want to shield themselves from it.

But I won't tolerate elected and appointed officials who run and hide when they not only have the power to do something about it, they have the explicit responsibility of doing something about it.

And when that issue concerns protecting women in the military from sexual assault, it should be absolutely unacceptable for the Defense Department's Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office (SAPRO), to shirk their responsibilities of doing all they can to address what is a very serious issue, which includes participating in a congressional hearing on why so many alarming reports have been surfacing about the sexual assault rate in the military.

The answer of Federal District Court Judge John D. Bates to the Bushies argument for why Karl Rove, Harriet Miers et al. can blow off a subpoena to appear before Congress can be condensed as such:

"The Executive presents a litany of contrary arguments, all of which are unavailing."

Last June, Congress subpoenaed former Bush legal counsel Harriet Miers to answer questions about the political retribution firings of numerous United States Attorneys in the Justice Department. Even though Miers had left the Bush administration and was a private citizen, she said she was told by Bush that she could not testify before Congress. On what grounds? That the President had deciderered that all senior presidential staff have absolute immunity to refuse to testify before Congress -- forevah.