 |
Google+ makes sharing on the web more like sharing in real life.
|
Circles
Hangouts
Mobile| You received this message because Sean Lewis invited thevirtualtruth.vtsl2@blogger.com to join Google+. Unsubscribe from these emails. |  |
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Sean Lewis added you to his circles and invited you to join Google+
Monday, November 14, 2011
Bailout Timeline: Another Day, Another Bailout
Bailout Timeline: Another Day, Another Bailout
In September 2008, the mounting subprime crisis finally burst into a full-blown financial crisis, leading to the collapse of a number of major financial institutions. In response, the Treasury Department has deployed hundreds of billions in taxpayer dollars.
To shore up the collapsing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the Treasury placed them under conservatorship. Soon after, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 provided the Treasury Department with $700 billion to shore up the broader financial system.
Below is a chronology of major events in the bailouts' lives. It will grow longer as major events continue to occur.
Bailout List
Our bailout recipient list tracks the companies to which Treasury has committed money.
Bailout Map
In the bailout map, we track bailout recipients by state.
2008
October
8 bailouts: $115,000,000,000 (list)
Oct 1 The Senate Passes TARP
The Senate passes a revised version of the bill, stuffed with tax breaks.
Oct 3 The House Passes TARP
The House passes the bill, and the president signs the $700 billion Emergency Economic Stabilization Act into law.
Oct 8 Second AIG Bailout
The government restructures its bailout of AIG. The insurer gets access to $37.8 billion more in loans.
Oct 14 Paulson Rolls Out Bank Investments
The Treasury Department announces that it will invest up to $250 billion in the nation's banks via the Capital Purchase Program, a subcomponent of the TARP, and billed as investments in "healthy banks." Paulson announced nine major banks signed on for a total of $125 billion in investments. (More about the program here.)
Oct 3 Wells Fargo Buys Wachovia
Wachovia, rejecting a previous proposal with Citigroup, agreed to merge with Wells Fargo for $15.4 billion
November
46 bailouts: $90,285,574,000 (list)
Nov 10 Third AIG Bailout
The government restructures its bailout of AIG for the second time. Treasury invests $40 billion in AIG as part of the government’s now-$150 billion effort to keep AIG from collapsing.
Nov 12 Paulson Scraps Original Bailout Plan
Paulson announces that he's scrapping the plan to purchase troubled assets. The capital investments in the banks proved to be a "more powerful" means of boosting the financial system, he said.
Nov 14 Freddie Mac Asks for $13.8 Billion
Freddie Mac reports a net loss of $25.3 billion for the third quarter of 2008. To fill the hole of its losses, the Federal Housing Finance Agency requests $13.8 billion from the Treasury.
Nov 23 Citigroup Bailed Out
The Treasury announces that it will invest $20 billion more in Citigroup; this is in addition to a $25 billion investment in October through the Capital Purchase Program. The government also agrees to use up to $5 billion to help Citi absorb losses from a $301 billion pool of assets.
Nov 25 Fed and Treasury Roll Out Program to Spur Lending (TALF)
The Treasury and Fed announce the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF), a Fed program that will lend up to $200 billion to owners of highly rated asset-backed securities in order to spur consumer lending. Treasury puts up $20 billion to support the effort.
December
166 bailouts: $65,359,391,131 1 revenue payments: $172,000,000 (list)
Dec 19 Auto Bailout Announced
The Treasury announces that it will make loans to General Motors and Chrysler to prevent bankruptcy.
2009
January
150 bailouts: $43,312,893,000 (list)
Jan 15 Senate Votes to Release Second Half of Bailout Funds
Under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, Congress had the power to block the release of the second half of the $700 billion funding authorized by the bill. But after promises by the incoming administration about how it would spend the money, the Senate voted to allow access to the remaining $350 billion.
Jan 16 Bank of America Bailed Out
The Treasury announces a deal with Bank of America similar to the Citi deal. It will invest $20 billion more in Bank of America; this is in addition to a $25 billion investment in October through the Capital Purchase Program. The government also agrees to help Bank of America absorb losses from a $118 billion pool of assets. That agreement, however, is never finalized.
Jan 20 Barack Obama Takes Office
Obama is inaugurated as the 44th president.
Jan 26 Geithner Takes Office
Timothy Geithner is sworn in as Secretary of the Treasury.
February
109 bailouts: $31,335,982,542 (list)
Feb 10 Geithner Pitches New Bailout Plan
Geithner rolls out the Financial Stability Plan. Geithner promises to perform "stress tests" on the nation's biggest banks to determine their health and the necessity of more government investments, announces that the government will form some sort of public-private partnership to buy troubled assets from the banks, says he'll commit an additional $100 billion to boost the TALF and promises the administration will soon introduce its foreclosure prevention plan.
Feb 17 Stimulus Bill Passes, Limiting Exec Bonuses
President Obama signs the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which includes a section limiting the bonuses of the highest earning executives at firms that received bailout money.
Feb 18 Rollout of Mortgage Rescue
The administration announces its broad plan to prevent foreclosures and promote mortgage loan modifications. (More about the program here.)
Feb 18 Treasury Ups Limit for Fannie and Freddie to $200 Billion
Geithner announces that the Treasury is increasing its funding commitment to both Fannie and Freddie from $100 billion to $200 billion.
Feb 25 Stress Tests Begin
Bank regulators begin their stress tests of the nation’s 19 largest banks and promise that they'll be finished by the end of April at the latest. Treasury officials explain that the tests will be used to determine how much more money the banks need to survive a steep economic downturn.
Feb 26 Obama Administration Makes Room for $750 Billion More
The administration's budget blueprint suggests that the Treasury Department might need as much as $750 billion more to stabilize the financial sector.
Feb 26 Fannie Mae Asks for $15.2 Billion
Fannie Mae reports a $25.2 billion loss for the fourth quarter of 2008 and losses for all of 2008 totaling $58.7 billion. To fill the holes of its losses, the Federal Housing Finance Agency requests $15.2 billion from the Treasury.
March
69 bailouts: $82,148,541,000 5 refunds: $353,000,000 2 revenue payments: $395,000,000 (list)
Mar 2 Fourth AIG Bailout
The government restructures its bailout of AIG for the third time. Treasury says it might invest up to $30 billion more. Together, the Fed's and Treasury's commitments add up to $180 billion.
Mar 3 Fed Launches TALF
The Fed and Treasury announce the launch of the TALF.
Mar 4 Administration Launches Homeowner Bailout
The Treasury launches its plan to promote mortgage loan modifications and pledges to spend $75 billion on the effort.
Mar 11 Freddie Mac Asks for $30.8 Billion More
Freddie Mac reports a $23.9 billion net loss for the fourth quarter of 2008 and net losses for 2008 totaling $50.1 billion. To fill the hole of its losses, the Federal Housing Finance Agency requests $30.8 billion from the Treasury, bringing the total bailout to $44.6 billion.
Mar 15 AIG Pays Out Bonuses to Execs
AIG pays out $165 million in retention bonuses to executives who work in the business unit that was primarily responsible for sinking the company.
Mar 16 Treasury Announces Small Biz Program
The Treasury announces a program to spur credit markets for small businesses by purchasing up to $15 billion in securities backed by Small Business Administration loans. The program never gets off the ground.
Mar 19 Treasury Announces Auto Parts Program
The Treasury announces the Auto Supplier Support Program, a plan to provide up to $5 billion in financing to auto parts suppliers. (More about the program here.)
Mar 23 Treasury Announces Toxic Asset Program
Treasury Secretary Geithner rolls out the administration's plan to use government capital and financing to team with private investors to buy up toxic assets. Between $75 billion to $100 billion will be dedicated to the effort. (More about the program here.)
April
50 bailouts: $25,215,363,190 6 refunds: $683,540,000 2 revenue payments: $995,000 (list)
Apr 20 Treasury Trims AIG Aid to Recoup Bonus Payments
AIG and the Treasury Department finalize the agreement to provide AIG up to $30 billion more, but the Treasury trims $165 million from the additional aid and charges a fee for the same amount to recoup the bonuses paid to AIG employees in March.
Apr 30 Chrysler Files for Bankruptcy Protection
Chrysler files for bankruptcy protection, and as part of the restructuring, the Treasury Department agrees to loan Chrysler up to $8 billion more. The Treasury will get an eight percent stake in the company.
May
57 bailouts: $46,699,853,890 9 refunds: $735,320,000 565 revenue payments: $5,918,032,432 (list)
May 7 Federal releases the results of its stress tests
According to the results of the Federal Reserve's "stress tests," 10 of the 19 largest banks will have to raise a total of $74.6 billion in additional capital to withstand a dire economic scenario. Ultimately, all of the banks raise the money privately, with the exception of GMAC.
May 8 Fannie Mae Asks for $19 Billion More
Fannie Mae reports a $23.2 billion loss for the first quarter of 2009. To fill the holes of its losses, the Federal Housing Finance Agency requests $19 billion from the Treasury.
May 12 Freddie Mac Asks for $6.1 Billion More
Freddie Mac reports a $9.9 billion net loss for the first quarter of 2009. To fill the hole of its losses, the Federal Housing Finance Agency requests $6.1 billion from the Treasury, bringing the total bailout to $50.7 billion.
June
43 bailouts: $27,489,035,162 12 refunds: $68,352,729,000 27 revenue payments: $2,310,724,665 (list)
Jun 3 Part of Toxic Asset Program Indefinitely Delayed
FDIC chief Sheila Bair announces that the banks have been so successful in raising private capital that there is no longer sufficient interest in a plan to purchase their troubled loans. The loan program comprises one-half of the Public-Private Investment Program; the other, to buy banks' asset-backed securities, is still in development.
Jun 9 Treasury Approves 10 Banks to Repay $68 Billion
The Treasury Department announces that it has approved 10 banks to repay their TARP funds. The banks are JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, U.S. Bank, Northern Trust, Capital One, BB&T, American Express, Bank of New York Mellon, and State Street. You can see a complete list of the banks that have repaid their TARP funds here.
Jun 1 GM Files for Bankruptcy Protection
GM files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. As part of the restructuring, the U.S. government agrees to provide the company up to $30.1 billion more. In exchange, the U.S. will receive a 60 percent stake in the company when it emerges from bankruptcy.
Jun 10 Chrysler Finalizes Deal with Fiat, Begins Operations as New Company
The new Chrysler announces that it has finalized its alliance with Fiat, and that the new company will begin operations immediately. On June 29, seven Chrysler plants resumed production. Most manufacturing operations had been idle since early May.
July
29 bailouts: $10,296,334,694 5 refunds: $2,189,254,840 17 revenue payments: $2,577,839,497 (list)
Jul 8 Treasury Launches Toxic Securities Program
The Treasury names the nine asset managers who will participate in its program to buy toxic securities and says that up to $30 billion of TARP funds will be invested alongside private investors.
Jul 10 New GM Begins Operations
GM announces that its purchase of the company's good assets (and shedding of the bad) has been finalized and that it can begin operations as a new company.
Jul 30 Treasury Completes Exchange of Citigroup Shares
On July 23 and July 30, Treasury exchanged a total of $25 billion of its preferred shares in Citigroup for common stock. As a result, the Treasury owns 7.7 billion shares of Citi's common stock, a 34% stake in the company.
August
18 bailouts: $14,210,823,866 3 refunds: $140,000,000 598 revenue payments: $3,027,307,235 (list)
Aug 6 Fannie Mae Asks for $10.7 Billion More
Fannie Mae reports a $14.8 billion billion loss for the second quarter of 2009. To fill the holes of its losses, the Federal Housing Finance Agency requests $10.7 billion from the Treasury.
September
32 bailouts: $2,742,616,433 7 refunds: $403,938,000 17 revenue payments: $2,595,463,437 (list)
October
19 bailouts: $12,873,691,974 3 refunds: $88,400,000 12 revenue payments: $609,053,915 (list)
Oct 22 TARP Chief for Exec Compensation Releases Findings
The Special Master for TARP Executive Compensation releases determinations on the compensation packages for the top 25 most highly paid executives at the companies that received "exceptional" assistance -- i.e. those that were bailed out in the strictest sense of the word: AIG, Bank of America, Citigroup, Chrysler, Chrysler Financial, General Motors, and GMAC.
November
18 bailouts: $18,382,838,984 10 refunds: $368,618,000 596 revenue payments: $1,888,403,607 (list)
Nov 4 Fannie Mae Asks for $15 Billion More
Fannie Mae reports a $18.9 billion billion loss for the third quarter of 2009. To fill the holes of its losses, the Federal Housing Finance Agency requests $15 billion from the Treasury.
Nov 1 CIT Files for Bankruptcy, $2.3 Billion Lost
CIT files for bankruptcy protection. A $2.33 billion TARP investment is wiped out.
December
55 bailouts: $7,469,343,008 15 refunds: $91,851,152,000 42 revenue payments: $4,456,280,090 (list)
Dec 1 AIG and Fed Strike Deal to Reduce AIG Debt
AIG announces that it has completed two deals that, together, shave $25 billion off its tab to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, bringing the combined total it owes the Fed and the Treasury to about $62 billion.
Dec 23 Citigroup Returns $20 Billion
Citigroup repays $20 billion to the Treasury.
Dec 23 Citi Also Terminates its Loss-Share Agreement
Citi's $5 billion loss-share agreement with the Treasury is terminated. The Treasury still retains the common stock it received in exchanged for its $25 billion investment, so, together with the $20 billion reimbursement, the total outstanding aid falls to $25 billion from $50 billion.
Dec 9 Bank of America Repays $45 Billion
Bank of America returns all $45 billion to the Treasury.
Dec 23 Wells Fargo Returns $25 Billion
Wells Fargo returns all $25 billion.
Dec 24 Treasury Removes $400 Billion Cap on Fannie, Freddie Aid
The Treasury says that in order to preserve "the continued strength and stability of the mortgage market," it is removing the $400 billion cap ($200 billion for each) the Treasury Department placed on the aid earlier in 2009. For the next three years, the Treasury will cover Fannie and Freddie's losses, no matter how large.
2010
January
5 bailouts: $36,944,733 6 refunds: $448,506,421 23 revenue payments: $126,671,411 (list)
February
2 bailouts: $16,080,200,000 6 refunds: $7,997,020,718 584 revenue payments: $757,697,133 (list)
March
3 bailouts: $30,971,000 9 refunds: $7,206,296,735 9 revenue payments: $4,423,363,748 (list)
April
2 bailouts: $747,807 7 refunds: $6,123,135,420 30 revenue payments: $616,039,366 (list)
May
3 bailouts: $19,000,350,000 3 refunds: $8,086,474,158 550 revenue payments: $1,756,503,502 (list)
June
6 bailouts: $1,516,223,517 6 refunds: $5,445,910,825 30 revenue payments: $3,525,801,156 (list)
July
1 bailouts: $10,189,000 3 refunds: $418,698,000 22 revenue payments: $249,661,415 (list)
August
11 bailouts: $3,940,061,270 4 refunds: $142,318,000 509 revenue payments: $665,113,180 (list)
September
137 bailouts: $14,311,754,025 4 refunds: $6,065,811,117 55 revenue payments: $7,272,642,395 (list)
November
2 bailouts: $2,600,000,000 6 refunds: $13,661,108,108 546 revenue payments: $734,895,335 (list)
December
2 bailouts: $9,899,890 23 refunds: $14,155,268,288 47 revenue payments: $11,076,696,233 (list)
2011
January
1 bailouts: $1,003,227 6 refunds: $111,614,590 28 revenue payments: $461,810,866 (list)
Jan 14 AIG Repayment Plan Executed
In a complex transaction, AIG paid off its outstanding debt to the Fed with the help of the Treasury, which took a large stake in AIG as compensation.
February
2 bailouts: $3,100,000,000 10 refunds: $5,755,875,710 503 revenue payments: $585,515,792 (list)
April
4 bailouts: $2,350,946 6 refunds: $519,409,286 25 revenue payments: $223,707,456 (list)
May
2 bailouts: $8,500,799,991 10 refunds: $11,724,963,652 483 revenue payments: $1,387,655,795 (list)
July
1 bailouts: $200,000 37 refunds: $2,232,293,809 29 revenue payments: $576,625,000 (list)
August
2 bailouts: $6,600,000,000 47 refunds: $2,856,765,883 30 revenue payments: $13,404,042 (list)
November
2 bailouts: $13,800,000,000 3 refunds: $978,113,765 4 revenue payments: $1,360,000 (list)
In September 2008, the mounting subprime crisis finally burst into a full-blown financial crisis, leading to the collapse of a number of major financial institutions. In response, the Treasury Department has deployed hundreds of billions in taxpayer dollars.
To shore up the collapsing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the Treasury placed them under conservatorship. Soon after, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 provided the Treasury Department with $700 billion to shore up the broader financial system.
Below is a chronology of major events in the bailouts' lives. It will grow longer as major events continue to occur.
Bailout List
Our bailout recipient list tracks the companies to which Treasury has committed money.
Bailout Map
In the bailout map, we track bailout recipients by state.
2008
October
8 bailouts: $115,000,000,000 (list)
Oct 1 The Senate Passes TARP
The Senate passes a revised version of the bill, stuffed with tax breaks.
Oct 3 The House Passes TARP
The House passes the bill, and the president signs the $700 billion Emergency Economic Stabilization Act into law.
Oct 8 Second AIG Bailout
The government restructures its bailout of AIG. The insurer gets access to $37.8 billion more in loans.
Oct 14 Paulson Rolls Out Bank Investments
The Treasury Department announces that it will invest up to $250 billion in the nation's banks via the Capital Purchase Program, a subcomponent of the TARP, and billed as investments in "healthy banks." Paulson announced nine major banks signed on for a total of $125 billion in investments. (More about the program here.)
Oct 3 Wells Fargo Buys Wachovia
Wachovia, rejecting a previous proposal with Citigroup, agreed to merge with Wells Fargo for $15.4 billion
November
46 bailouts: $90,285,574,000 (list)
Nov 10 Third AIG Bailout
The government restructures its bailout of AIG for the second time. Treasury invests $40 billion in AIG as part of the government’s now-$150 billion effort to keep AIG from collapsing.
Nov 12 Paulson Scraps Original Bailout Plan
Paulson announces that he's scrapping the plan to purchase troubled assets. The capital investments in the banks proved to be a "more powerful" means of boosting the financial system, he said.
Nov 14 Freddie Mac Asks for $13.8 Billion
Freddie Mac reports a net loss of $25.3 billion for the third quarter of 2008. To fill the hole of its losses, the Federal Housing Finance Agency requests $13.8 billion from the Treasury.
Nov 23 Citigroup Bailed Out
The Treasury announces that it will invest $20 billion more in Citigroup; this is in addition to a $25 billion investment in October through the Capital Purchase Program. The government also agrees to use up to $5 billion to help Citi absorb losses from a $301 billion pool of assets.
Nov 25 Fed and Treasury Roll Out Program to Spur Lending (TALF)
The Treasury and Fed announce the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF), a Fed program that will lend up to $200 billion to owners of highly rated asset-backed securities in order to spur consumer lending. Treasury puts up $20 billion to support the effort.
December
166 bailouts: $65,359,391,131 1 revenue payments: $172,000,000 (list)
Dec 19 Auto Bailout Announced
The Treasury announces that it will make loans to General Motors and Chrysler to prevent bankruptcy.
2009
January
150 bailouts: $43,312,893,000 (list)
Jan 15 Senate Votes to Release Second Half of Bailout Funds
Under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, Congress had the power to block the release of the second half of the $700 billion funding authorized by the bill. But after promises by the incoming administration about how it would spend the money, the Senate voted to allow access to the remaining $350 billion.
Jan 16 Bank of America Bailed Out
The Treasury announces a deal with Bank of America similar to the Citi deal. It will invest $20 billion more in Bank of America; this is in addition to a $25 billion investment in October through the Capital Purchase Program. The government also agrees to help Bank of America absorb losses from a $118 billion pool of assets. That agreement, however, is never finalized.
Jan 20 Barack Obama Takes Office
Obama is inaugurated as the 44th president.
Jan 26 Geithner Takes Office
Timothy Geithner is sworn in as Secretary of the Treasury.
February
109 bailouts: $31,335,982,542 (list)
Feb 10 Geithner Pitches New Bailout Plan
Geithner rolls out the Financial Stability Plan. Geithner promises to perform "stress tests" on the nation's biggest banks to determine their health and the necessity of more government investments, announces that the government will form some sort of public-private partnership to buy troubled assets from the banks, says he'll commit an additional $100 billion to boost the TALF and promises the administration will soon introduce its foreclosure prevention plan.
Feb 17 Stimulus Bill Passes, Limiting Exec Bonuses
President Obama signs the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which includes a section limiting the bonuses of the highest earning executives at firms that received bailout money.
Feb 18 Rollout of Mortgage Rescue
The administration announces its broad plan to prevent foreclosures and promote mortgage loan modifications. (More about the program here.)
Feb 18 Treasury Ups Limit for Fannie and Freddie to $200 Billion
Geithner announces that the Treasury is increasing its funding commitment to both Fannie and Freddie from $100 billion to $200 billion.
Feb 25 Stress Tests Begin
Bank regulators begin their stress tests of the nation’s 19 largest banks and promise that they'll be finished by the end of April at the latest. Treasury officials explain that the tests will be used to determine how much more money the banks need to survive a steep economic downturn.
Feb 26 Obama Administration Makes Room for $750 Billion More
The administration's budget blueprint suggests that the Treasury Department might need as much as $750 billion more to stabilize the financial sector.
Feb 26 Fannie Mae Asks for $15.2 Billion
Fannie Mae reports a $25.2 billion loss for the fourth quarter of 2008 and losses for all of 2008 totaling $58.7 billion. To fill the holes of its losses, the Federal Housing Finance Agency requests $15.2 billion from the Treasury.
March
69 bailouts: $82,148,541,000 5 refunds: $353,000,000 2 revenue payments: $395,000,000 (list)
Mar 2 Fourth AIG Bailout
The government restructures its bailout of AIG for the third time. Treasury says it might invest up to $30 billion more. Together, the Fed's and Treasury's commitments add up to $180 billion.
Mar 3 Fed Launches TALF
The Fed and Treasury announce the launch of the TALF.
Mar 4 Administration Launches Homeowner Bailout
The Treasury launches its plan to promote mortgage loan modifications and pledges to spend $75 billion on the effort.
Mar 11 Freddie Mac Asks for $30.8 Billion More
Freddie Mac reports a $23.9 billion net loss for the fourth quarter of 2008 and net losses for 2008 totaling $50.1 billion. To fill the hole of its losses, the Federal Housing Finance Agency requests $30.8 billion from the Treasury, bringing the total bailout to $44.6 billion.
Mar 15 AIG Pays Out Bonuses to Execs
AIG pays out $165 million in retention bonuses to executives who work in the business unit that was primarily responsible for sinking the company.
Mar 16 Treasury Announces Small Biz Program
The Treasury announces a program to spur credit markets for small businesses by purchasing up to $15 billion in securities backed by Small Business Administration loans. The program never gets off the ground.
Mar 19 Treasury Announces Auto Parts Program
The Treasury announces the Auto Supplier Support Program, a plan to provide up to $5 billion in financing to auto parts suppliers. (More about the program here.)
Mar 23 Treasury Announces Toxic Asset Program
Treasury Secretary Geithner rolls out the administration's plan to use government capital and financing to team with private investors to buy up toxic assets. Between $75 billion to $100 billion will be dedicated to the effort. (More about the program here.)
April
50 bailouts: $25,215,363,190 6 refunds: $683,540,000 2 revenue payments: $995,000 (list)
Apr 20 Treasury Trims AIG Aid to Recoup Bonus Payments
AIG and the Treasury Department finalize the agreement to provide AIG up to $30 billion more, but the Treasury trims $165 million from the additional aid and charges a fee for the same amount to recoup the bonuses paid to AIG employees in March.
Apr 30 Chrysler Files for Bankruptcy Protection
Chrysler files for bankruptcy protection, and as part of the restructuring, the Treasury Department agrees to loan Chrysler up to $8 billion more. The Treasury will get an eight percent stake in the company.
May
57 bailouts: $46,699,853,890 9 refunds: $735,320,000 565 revenue payments: $5,918,032,432 (list)
May 7 Federal releases the results of its stress tests
According to the results of the Federal Reserve's "stress tests," 10 of the 19 largest banks will have to raise a total of $74.6 billion in additional capital to withstand a dire economic scenario. Ultimately, all of the banks raise the money privately, with the exception of GMAC.
May 8 Fannie Mae Asks for $19 Billion More
Fannie Mae reports a $23.2 billion loss for the first quarter of 2009. To fill the holes of its losses, the Federal Housing Finance Agency requests $19 billion from the Treasury.
May 12 Freddie Mac Asks for $6.1 Billion More
Freddie Mac reports a $9.9 billion net loss for the first quarter of 2009. To fill the hole of its losses, the Federal Housing Finance Agency requests $6.1 billion from the Treasury, bringing the total bailout to $50.7 billion.
June
43 bailouts: $27,489,035,162 12 refunds: $68,352,729,000 27 revenue payments: $2,310,724,665 (list)
Jun 3 Part of Toxic Asset Program Indefinitely Delayed
FDIC chief Sheila Bair announces that the banks have been so successful in raising private capital that there is no longer sufficient interest in a plan to purchase their troubled loans. The loan program comprises one-half of the Public-Private Investment Program; the other, to buy banks' asset-backed securities, is still in development.
Jun 9 Treasury Approves 10 Banks to Repay $68 Billion
The Treasury Department announces that it has approved 10 banks to repay their TARP funds. The banks are JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, U.S. Bank, Northern Trust, Capital One, BB&T, American Express, Bank of New York Mellon, and State Street. You can see a complete list of the banks that have repaid their TARP funds here.
Jun 1 GM Files for Bankruptcy Protection
GM files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. As part of the restructuring, the U.S. government agrees to provide the company up to $30.1 billion more. In exchange, the U.S. will receive a 60 percent stake in the company when it emerges from bankruptcy.
Jun 10 Chrysler Finalizes Deal with Fiat, Begins Operations as New Company
The new Chrysler announces that it has finalized its alliance with Fiat, and that the new company will begin operations immediately. On June 29, seven Chrysler plants resumed production. Most manufacturing operations had been idle since early May.
July
29 bailouts: $10,296,334,694 5 refunds: $2,189,254,840 17 revenue payments: $2,577,839,497 (list)
Jul 8 Treasury Launches Toxic Securities Program
The Treasury names the nine asset managers who will participate in its program to buy toxic securities and says that up to $30 billion of TARP funds will be invested alongside private investors.
Jul 10 New GM Begins Operations
GM announces that its purchase of the company's good assets (and shedding of the bad) has been finalized and that it can begin operations as a new company.
Jul 30 Treasury Completes Exchange of Citigroup Shares
On July 23 and July 30, Treasury exchanged a total of $25 billion of its preferred shares in Citigroup for common stock. As a result, the Treasury owns 7.7 billion shares of Citi's common stock, a 34% stake in the company.
August
18 bailouts: $14,210,823,866 3 refunds: $140,000,000 598 revenue payments: $3,027,307,235 (list)
Aug 6 Fannie Mae Asks for $10.7 Billion More
Fannie Mae reports a $14.8 billion billion loss for the second quarter of 2009. To fill the holes of its losses, the Federal Housing Finance Agency requests $10.7 billion from the Treasury.
September
32 bailouts: $2,742,616,433 7 refunds: $403,938,000 17 revenue payments: $2,595,463,437 (list)
October
19 bailouts: $12,873,691,974 3 refunds: $88,400,000 12 revenue payments: $609,053,915 (list)
Oct 22 TARP Chief for Exec Compensation Releases Findings
The Special Master for TARP Executive Compensation releases determinations on the compensation packages for the top 25 most highly paid executives at the companies that received "exceptional" assistance -- i.e. those that were bailed out in the strictest sense of the word: AIG, Bank of America, Citigroup, Chrysler, Chrysler Financial, General Motors, and GMAC.
November
18 bailouts: $18,382,838,984 10 refunds: $368,618,000 596 revenue payments: $1,888,403,607 (list)
Nov 4 Fannie Mae Asks for $15 Billion More
Fannie Mae reports a $18.9 billion billion loss for the third quarter of 2009. To fill the holes of its losses, the Federal Housing Finance Agency requests $15 billion from the Treasury.
Nov 1 CIT Files for Bankruptcy, $2.3 Billion Lost
CIT files for bankruptcy protection. A $2.33 billion TARP investment is wiped out.
December
55 bailouts: $7,469,343,008 15 refunds: $91,851,152,000 42 revenue payments: $4,456,280,090 (list)
Dec 1 AIG and Fed Strike Deal to Reduce AIG Debt
AIG announces that it has completed two deals that, together, shave $25 billion off its tab to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, bringing the combined total it owes the Fed and the Treasury to about $62 billion.
Dec 23 Citigroup Returns $20 Billion
Citigroup repays $20 billion to the Treasury.
Dec 23 Citi Also Terminates its Loss-Share Agreement
Citi's $5 billion loss-share agreement with the Treasury is terminated. The Treasury still retains the common stock it received in exchanged for its $25 billion investment, so, together with the $20 billion reimbursement, the total outstanding aid falls to $25 billion from $50 billion.
Dec 9 Bank of America Repays $45 Billion
Bank of America returns all $45 billion to the Treasury.
Dec 23 Wells Fargo Returns $25 Billion
Wells Fargo returns all $25 billion.
Dec 24 Treasury Removes $400 Billion Cap on Fannie, Freddie Aid
The Treasury says that in order to preserve "the continued strength and stability of the mortgage market," it is removing the $400 billion cap ($200 billion for each) the Treasury Department placed on the aid earlier in 2009. For the next three years, the Treasury will cover Fannie and Freddie's losses, no matter how large.
2010
January
5 bailouts: $36,944,733 6 refunds: $448,506,421 23 revenue payments: $126,671,411 (list)
February
2 bailouts: $16,080,200,000 6 refunds: $7,997,020,718 584 revenue payments: $757,697,133 (list)
March
3 bailouts: $30,971,000 9 refunds: $7,206,296,735 9 revenue payments: $4,423,363,748 (list)
April
2 bailouts: $747,807 7 refunds: $6,123,135,420 30 revenue payments: $616,039,366 (list)
May
3 bailouts: $19,000,350,000 3 refunds: $8,086,474,158 550 revenue payments: $1,756,503,502 (list)
June
6 bailouts: $1,516,223,517 6 refunds: $5,445,910,825 30 revenue payments: $3,525,801,156 (list)
July
1 bailouts: $10,189,000 3 refunds: $418,698,000 22 revenue payments: $249,661,415 (list)
August
11 bailouts: $3,940,061,270 4 refunds: $142,318,000 509 revenue payments: $665,113,180 (list)
September
137 bailouts: $14,311,754,025 4 refunds: $6,065,811,117 55 revenue payments: $7,272,642,395 (list)
November
2 bailouts: $2,600,000,000 6 refunds: $13,661,108,108 546 revenue payments: $734,895,335 (list)
December
2 bailouts: $9,899,890 23 refunds: $14,155,268,288 47 revenue payments: $11,076,696,233 (list)
2011
January
1 bailouts: $1,003,227 6 refunds: $111,614,590 28 revenue payments: $461,810,866 (list)
Jan 14 AIG Repayment Plan Executed
In a complex transaction, AIG paid off its outstanding debt to the Fed with the help of the Treasury, which took a large stake in AIG as compensation.
February
2 bailouts: $3,100,000,000 10 refunds: $5,755,875,710 503 revenue payments: $585,515,792 (list)
April
4 bailouts: $2,350,946 6 refunds: $519,409,286 25 revenue payments: $223,707,456 (list)
May
2 bailouts: $8,500,799,991 10 refunds: $11,724,963,652 483 revenue payments: $1,387,655,795 (list)
July
1 bailouts: $200,000 37 refunds: $2,232,293,809 29 revenue payments: $576,625,000 (list)
August
2 bailouts: $6,600,000,000 47 refunds: $2,856,765,883 30 revenue payments: $13,404,042 (list)
November
2 bailouts: $13,800,000,000 3 refunds: $978,113,765 4 revenue payments: $1,360,000 (list)
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Count Down to Armageddon: The Tea Bagger Secret Plan Options
Count Down to Armageddon:
The Tea Bagger Secret Plan
Sean Lewis
July 26, 2011
Fiction?
As a survivalist I would know when Armageddon was near
when I Black man is elected President.
But before that happens the Country must be prepared.
So, first the Major organizations that would oppose the
new age of 'enlightenment must be weakened or eliminated.
Second civil liberties and constitutional rights must be subverted.
Third the unenlightened must be divided and at war with each other.
Fourth the Country's Fiscal and Industrial organizations must be
toppled or greatly reduced.
To do this a populist movement must be created based on fear, hatred
and bigotry but veiled in religious, patriotic and family values.
Once enough key positions in Government, industry and the Press are in
place the dismantling of America can begin.
Class warfare, Race warfare, sexual warfare, religious warfare, all
for one purpose, to destroy the fabric of society and put things back
the way they belong! Back to a simpler time when the right people were
in control and woman knew their places, Where the right God is obeyed.
The Tea Bagger Secret Plan
Sean Lewis
July 26, 2011
Fiction?
As a survivalist I would know when Armageddon was near
when I Black man is elected President.
But before that happens the Country must be prepared.
So, first the Major organizations that would oppose the
new age of 'enlightenment must be weakened or eliminated.
Second civil liberties and constitutional rights must be subverted.
Third the unenlightened must be divided and at war with each other.
Fourth the Country's Fiscal and Industrial organizations must be
toppled or greatly reduced.
To do this a populist movement must be created based on fear, hatred
and bigotry but veiled in religious, patriotic and family values.
Once enough key positions in Government, industry and the Press are in
place the dismantling of America can begin.
Class warfare, Race warfare, sexual warfare, religious warfare, all
for one purpose, to destroy the fabric of society and put things back
the way they belong! Back to a simpler time when the right people were
in control and woman knew their places, Where the right God is obeyed.
The GOP/TeaBaggers got 98% of what they wanted, the Stock market is down 500, and Gold hit's record highs
All the President wanted was for the Debt Ceiling to be raised so the
Country could continue to function.
The GOP/TeaBaggers decided this was a great opportunity to hold
the Country hostage so they could drive through even more of their
absurd legislation. So the world watch as a GOP created crisis
occurred.
The end result is that the GOP/TeaBaggers got 98% of what they wanted
and did not actually lower the Debt by any significant amount over
the next 10 years.
The GOP/TeaBaggers took away more safety nets for working class
America and made life even harder for the poor, elderly, sick, and retired.
The GOP?teaBaggers preserved the healthy tax cuts to the wealthiest
Americans, The world and the Markets immediate reaction was for Gold to rise,
the US market to decline and the Dollar to fall against all other
Currencies.
The GOP/TeaBaggers did what they do best, made a bad situation worst!
Country could continue to function.
The GOP/TeaBaggers decided this was a great opportunity to hold
the Country hostage so they could drive through even more of their
absurd legislation. So the world watch as a GOP created crisis
occurred.
The end result is that the GOP/TeaBaggers got 98% of what they wanted
and did not actually lower the Debt by any significant amount over
the next 10 years.
The GOP/TeaBaggers took away more safety nets for working class
America and made life even harder for the poor, elderly, sick, and retired.
The GOP?teaBaggers preserved the healthy tax cuts to the wealthiest
Americans, The world and the Markets immediate reaction was for Gold to rise,
the US market to decline and the Dollar to fall against all other
Currencies.
The GOP/TeaBaggers did what they do best, made a bad situation worst!
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
President Obama Accomplishments While Serving Public Office
Appointing two Supreme Court Justices
Passing Universal Healthcare
Financial industry reform
Preventing a 2nd Great Depression
Passed legislation to curb greenhouse gases and improve the environment
Nuclear non-proliferation agreement
Lifted Bush restrictions on embryonic stem cell research
Obama signs technology access bill for disabled
President Obama signs Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010
President Obama Signs Tax Cut Bill Into Law
President Obama Signs DADT Repeal Act
President Obama Signs 9/11 Health Bill
President Obama signs historic food safety law
The Lilly Ledbetter Act for women for equal pay
On Tuesday, January 04, 2011, the President signed into law:
H.R. 81, the “Shark Conservation Act of 2010 and International Fisheries Agreement Clarification Act,” which generally prohibits the removal of shark fins at sea and amends certain laws related to international fisheries;
H.R. 628, which establishes a pilot program regarding the adjudication cases where patent or plant variety protection issues are to be decided;
H.R. 1107, which restates and reorganizes the public contract laws of the United States in Title 41, United Sates Code;
H.R. 1746, the “Predisaster Hazard Mitigation Act of 2010,” which authorizes appropriations for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program for FYs 2011-2013;
H.R. 2142, the “GPRA Modernization Act of 2010,” which amends the Government Performance and Results Act to establish a Federal government performance plan;
H.R. 2751, the “FDA Food Safety Modernization Act,” which modernizes the food safety system to better prevent food-borne illness and better respond to outbreaks;
H.R. 4445, the “Indian Pueblo Cultural Center Clarification Act,” which repeals a restriction on the treatment of certain lands held in trust for Indian Pueblos in New Mexico;
H.R. 4602, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the Emil Bolas Post Office;
H.R. 4748, the “Northern Border Counternarcotics Strategy Act of 2010,” which requires the Office of National Drug Control Policy to develop a Northern Boarder Counternarcotics Strategy;
H.R. 4973, the “National Wildlife Refuge Volunteer Improvement Act of 2010,” which reauthorizes and amends authorities relating to volunteer programs and community partnerships for national wildlife refuges;
H.R. 5116, the “America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science (America COMPETES) Reauthorization Act of 2010,” which reauthorizes various programs intended to strengthen research and education in the United States related to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics;
H.R. 5133, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the Staff Sergeant Frank T. Carvill and Lance Corporal Michael A. Schwarz Post Office Building;
H.R. 5470, which excludes specified external power supplies from certain energy efficiency standards required by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act;
H.R. 5605, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the George C. Marshall Post Office;
H.R. 5606, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the James M. “Jimmy” Stewart Post Office Building;
H.R. 5655, which designates the Little River Branch facility of the United States Postal Service as the Jesse J. McCrary, Jr. Post Office;
H.R. 5809, the “Diesel Emissions Reduction Act of 2010,” which modifies and reauthorizes through FY 2016 the Environmental Protection Agency’s Diesel Emissions Reduction Program;
H.R. 5877, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the Lance Corporal Alexander Scott Arredondo, United States Marine Corps Post Office Building;
H.R. 5901, which authorizes the U.S. Tax Court to appoint employees under a personnel management system that includes the merit system principles and prohibitions on personnel practices;
H.R. 6392, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the Colonel George Juskalian Post Office Building;
H.R. 6400, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the Earl Wilson, Jr. Post Office;
H.R. 6412, the “Access to Criminal History Records for State Sentencing Commissions Act of 2010,” which requires the Department of Justice to exchange records and information with State sentencing commissions;
H.R. 6510, which directs the General Services Administration to convey to the Military Museum of Texas the parcel of real property in Houston, Texas, on which the museum is located;
H.R. 6533, the “Local Community Radio Act of 2010,” which modifies current restrictions on low-power FM radio stations;
S. 118, the “Section 202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly Act of 2010,” which amends financing and project operation requirements for the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s program to allow for increased housing opportunities for low-income seniors;
S. 841, the “Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2010,” regarding pedestrian safety related to motor vehicles;
S. 1481, the “Frank Melville Supportive Housing Investment Act of 2010,” which amends financing and project operation requirements for the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s program for low income individuals with disabilities;
S. 3036, the “National Alzheimer’s Project Act,” which establishes a National Alzheimer’s Project within the Department of Health and Human Services and an advisory council on Alzheimer’s research, care, and services;
S. 3243, the “Anti-Border Corruption Act of 2010,” which requires the Department of Homeland Security to ensure that all applicants for law enforcement positions with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) receive polygraph examinations;
S. 3447, the “Post-9/11 Veterans Education Assistance Improvements Act of 2010,” which amends the Post-9/11 GI Bill, and other educational assistance programs for veterans;
S. 3481, which clarifies the Federal Government’s responsibility to pay reasonable service charges to a State or local government to address stormwater pollution from Federal properties;
S. 3592, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the First Lieutenant Robert Wilson Collins Post Office Building;
S. 3874, the “Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act,” which modifies the Safe Drinking Water Act definition of “lead free” with regard to pipes, pipe fittings, plumbing fittings, and fixtures;
S. 3903, which authorizes 99-year leases on land held in trust for the Ohkay Owingeh Pueblo in the State of New Mexico; and
S. 4036, which amends authorities of the National Credit Union Administration.
Source
President Obama Signs START Treaty Read more here
May 1st, 2011 11:30pm: Osama Bin Laden Is Dead
ETHICS
• Ordered the White House and all federal agencies to respect the Freedom of Information Act and overturned Bush-era limits on accessibility of federal documents (2009)
• Instructed all federal agencies to promote openness and transparency as much as possible (2009)
• Placed limits on lobbyists’ access to the White House (2009)
• Placed limits on White House aides working for lobbyists after their tenure in the administration (2009)
• Signed a measure strengthening registration and reporting requirements for lobbyists (2009)
• Ordered that lobbyists must be removed from and are no longer permitted to serve on federal and White House advisory panels and boards (2009) * Note: After saying he would not hire lobbyists, a few have been hired in the Administration
• Companies and individuals who are delinquent on their taxes or owe back taxes are no longer allowed to bid for federal contracts (2009)
• Initiated the “e-Rulemaking Initiative” (in cooperation with Cornell University) to allow for online public “notice and comment” of federal laws and initiatives (2010)
• Issued the “Open Gov Directive” ordering all Cabinet departments to promote transparency and citizen participation in their policies (2010)
• Signed extensions on banning lobbyists from serving on agency boards (2010)
• Developed the “Don Not Pay List” with data on contractors and recipients of federal funds who are deemed to be ineligible because of fraud and abuse (2010)
GOVERNANCE
• The White House website now provides information on all economic stimulus projects and spending, along with an unprecedented amount of information on our government (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era practice of circumventing established FDA rules for political reasons (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era practice of having White House staff rewrite the findings of scientific and environmental regulations and reports when they disagreed with the results (2009)
• Limited the salaries of senior White House aides (salaries cut to $100,000) (2009)
• Has urged Congress to adopt “Pay-Go” (whereby each dollar of spending is offset by a dollar in cuts or revenues, which was used in the `90s but abandoned in the `00s) (2010)
• Has been holding open meetings with Republican leaders, although they complain of a lack of access and information (2010)
• Signed the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act (2010) * Note: To curb wasteful spending
• Tasked federal agencies to develop plans for disposing of unneeded real estate and then to eliminate unnecessary or non-economical lands, properties, etc. (2010)
NATIONAL SECURITY
• Phasing out the expensive F-22 war plane (which wasn’t even used in Iraq/Afghanistan) and other outdated weapons systems (2009)
• Announced his intention to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay (2009) * Note: The closure has been delayed due to massive opposition but it remains on the agenda.
• Stated his interest in housing terrorists at a new federal “super max” facility in the US (2009) * Note: this has been delayed in the face of massive opposition but it remains on the agenda
• Cut the expensive Reagan era missile defense program, saving $1.4 billion in 2010 (2009)
• Canceled plans to station anti-ballistic missile systems in Poland and the Czech Republic (2009)
• Replacing long-range, expensive missile systems with more efficient smaller systems (2009)
• Increased US Navy patrols off the Somali coast in response to pirating (2009)
• Established a new cyber security office and appointed a cyber security czar (2009)
• Ordered the first nation-wide comprehensive cyber threat assessment (2009)
• Instituted a new Nuclear Posture Review, revising US nuclear deterrence policy to encourage more nations to join the 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (2010) * Note: Components of the policy include: a pledge to stop nuclear testing; a pledge to not build a new generation of nucs; identifying nuclear terrorism, rather than a launch from another nuclear state, as the major threat; a pledge to not use nucs on a non-nuclear state in a conventional conflict; etc.
• Executive orders to block payment, transfers, exports, etc… of individuals and organizations support the regimes of North Korea, Iran, Somali pirates, and other foreign threats (2010)
• Presidential Memorandum to extend certain provisions of The Trading with Enemies Act which was to expire in September 2010 (2010) * Note: This includes freezing assets and banning trade that benefits the Cuban regime; however further efforts at normalizing travel to Cuba are supported
• Signed bill for southwest border security and increased funds and agents on the Mexican border (2010)
• Signed the Comprehensive Sanctions, Accountability and Divestment Act to deal with foreign regimes like Iran and North Korea (2010)
IRAQ & AFGHANISTAN
• Began the phased withdrawal of US troops from Iraq (2009); continuing the withdrawal (2010)
• Changed the US military command in the Afghan conflict (2009)
• Tasked the Pentagon to reorganize US policy in Afghanistan; the new policy includes 30,000 additional troops deployed, priority training of Afghan forces, developing agriculture and infrastructure, limiting aerial bombing, etc. (2009)
• Ordered the Pentagon to send additional helicopters to assist US Marine units and Special Forces in Afghanistan (2009)
• Increased unmanned drone strikes on Taliban and al-Qaeda targets in Afghanistan (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era “stop-loss” policy that kept soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan longer than their enlistment date (2009)
MILITARY & VETERANS
• Ordered the Pentagon to cover expenses of families of fallen soldiers if they wish to be on site when the body arrives back in the US (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era “blackout” imposed on media coverage of the return of fallen US soldiers (2009) * Note: The media is now permitted to cover the story pending adherence to respectful rules and with the approval of the fallen soldier’s family
• Ended the Bush-era “black out” policy on media coverage of war casualties (2009) * Note: Full information is now released for the first time in the War on Terror
• Ordered better body armor to be procured for US troops (2009)
• Funding new Mine Resistant Ambush Vehicles (2009) * Note: The old Hummers were very vulnerable to roadside explosives and an alarming percentage of our soldiers lost in Iraq were on account of IEDs
• Working to increase pay and benefits for military personnel (2009)
• Improving housing for military personnel (2009)
• Initiating a new policy to promote federal hiring of military spouses (2009)
• Ordered that conditions at Walter Reed Military Hospital and other neglected military hospitals be improved (2009)
• Beginning the process of reforming and restructuring the military to a post-Cold War, modern fighting force (2009) * Note: Bush announced in 2001 his intention to do this but backed off the reforms after 9/11, which include: new procurement policies; increasing the size of Special Ops units; deploying new technologies; creating new cyber security units; etc.
• Ended the Bush-era practice of awarding “no-bid” defense contracts (2009)
• Improving benefits for veterans as well as VA staffing, information systems, etc. (2009)
• Authorized construction of additional health centers to care for veterans (2009)
• Suspended the Bush-era decision to purchase a fleet of Marine One helicopters from suppliers in favor of American made helicopters (2009)
• Ordered a review of the existing “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays in the military (2010)
• New GI Bill for returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan (2009)
• Signed bill providing assistance for caregivers of veterans wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan (2010) * Note: The omnibus bill does the following: Training, funding, and counseling for caregivers; promoting pilot childcare programs for women vets under treatment at the VA; independent oversight to prevent abuse; readjustment counseling for National Guard and reservist units; etc.
• Eliminated co-payments for veterans who are catastrophically disabled (2010)
• Fulfilled campaign promise to have combat troops (90,000) out of Iraq by August 31, 2010 (2010)
• Established a new inter agency task force to assist veterans owning small businesses (2010) * Note: The efforts include promoting federal contract opportunities, improve access to loans and capital, mentor assistance programs, etc.
• Signed The Families of Fallen Heroes Act, which covers the moving costs of immediate family members of those lost in service (military, intelligence, and security personnel) (2010)
FOREIGN POLICY
• Closed the Bush-era “secret detention” facilities in Eastern Europe (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era policy allowing “enhanced interrogation” (torture); the US is again in compliance with Geneva Convention standards (2009) * Note: Obama has permitted some controversial interrogation techniques to continue
• Restarted international nuclear non-proliferation talks and reestablished international nuclear inspection protocols (2009) * Note: Bush withdrew from non-proliferation talks and dismantled the inspection infrastructure
• Reengaged in the treaties/agreements to protect the Antarctic (2009) * Note: These were suspended under Bush
• Reengaged in the agreements/talks on global warming and greenhouse gas emissions (2009) * Note: These were suspended under Bush
• Visited more countries and met with more world leaders than any president in his first six months in office (2009)
• Banned the export of cluster bombs (2009)
• Overturned Bush-era plans to increase the US nuclear arsenal (2009)
• Authorized the Navy SEALS operation that freed by force the US shipping captain held by Somali pirates (2009)
• Restored the US commitment to the UN population fund for family planning; overturned the ban on providing funds internationally for family planning (2009) * Note: The family planning efforts were suspended under Bush
• Instituted a new policy on Cuba, allowing Cuban families to return “home” to visit families (2009)
• Extended an offer of engagement (free from sanctions and penalties) to Iran through December 31, 2009 (Iran did not accept the offer) (2009)
• Sent envoys to the Middle East and other parts of the world, reengaging in multilateral and bilateral talks and diplomacy (2009)
• Authorized discussions with North Korea and the private mission by former president, Bill Clinton, to secure the release of two Americans held in prisons (2009)
• Authorized discussions with Myanmar and the mission by Senator Jim Web to secure the release of an American held captive (2009)
• Renewed loan guarantees for Israel (2009)
• Signed the USIFTA trade agreement with/for Israel (2009)
• Authorized a $550m advance for Israel (six months prior to the scheduled date) in order to accommodate Israeli’s economic and financial needs (2009)
• Continued agreements with Israel for cultural exchanges, immigration, etc. (2009)
• Spoke on Arab television, spoke at an Egyptian university, and met with Arab leaders in an effort to change the tone of US-Arab relations (2009)
• Ordered the US to finally pay its dues to the United Nations (2009)
• Attended the Summit of America’s meeting in Trinidad and Tobago (2010)
• Dispatched several envoys and initiated talks with numerous nations (2010)
• Signed a nuclear limitation treaty with Russia (2010) * Note: The agreement calls for both countries to reduce their nucs by one-third (1,500) and launch systems by half (800)
• Hosted nuclear non-proliferation summit for several nations (2010)
• Executive Order to establish support offices in the State Department to assist the governments of Pakistan and Afghanistan (2010)
• Presidential Memoranda to continue drug interdiction support with Columbia (2010)
ECONOMY
• Increased infrastructure spending (roads, bridges, power plants…) (2009) * Note: Bush was the first president since Herbert Hoover to not make infrastructure a priority
• Authorized the US auto industry rescue plan and two GMAC rescue packages (2009)
• Authorized the housing rescue plan and new FHA residential housing guarantees (2009)
• Authorized a $789 billion economic stimulus plan (2009) * Note: 1/3 in tax cuts for working-class families; 1/3 to states for infrastructure projects; 1/3 to states to prevent the layoff of police officers, teachers, etc. at risk of losing their jobs because of state budget shortfalls
• Instituted a new rule allowing the public to meet with federal housing insurers to refinance (in as quickly as one day) a mortgage if they are having trouble paying (2009)
• Authorized a continuation of the US financial and banking rescue plans initiated at the end of the Bush administration and authorized TARP funds to buy “toxic assets” from failing financial institutions (2009)
• Authorized the “Cash for Clunkers” program that stimulated auto sales and removed old, inefficient, polluting cars from the road (2009)
• Convened a “jobs summit” to bring experts together to develop ideas for creating jobs (2009)
• Ordered the FDIC to beef up deposit insurance (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era policy of protecting credit card companies (2009) * Note: In place of the old policy, new consumer protections were instituted and the industry’s predatory practices were banned
• Authorized the federal government to make more loans available to small businesses and ordered lower rates for federal loans to small businesses (2009)
• Placed a 35% tariff on Chinese tires and a few other products such as pipes after China was found to be illegally “dumping” exports below cost (2009) * Note: Clinton, Bush I, and Reagan all refused to “get tough” on China’s predatory trade practices; Bush II refused four times during his presidency
• In November 2009, Obama extended unemployment benefits for one million workers
and expanded coverage for some existing homeowners who are buying again (2009)
• Called on Congress to deliver a “Jobs bill” (2010)
• Credit card companies are prohibited from raising rates without advance notification or arbitrarily if customers are paying bills on time (2010)
• Signed a bill to extend unemployment benefits set to expire (2010)
• Signed historic Wall Street reform bill (2010) * Note: Designed to reregulate and end abusive practices and promote consumer protections
• Signed the HIRE Act to stimulate the economic recovery (2010) * Note: The bill includes: tax cuts for small businesses who hire someone unemployed for at least two months; small businesses can write off their investments in equipment this year; etc.
• National Export Initiative established to enhance federal support (technical assistance, training, trade missions, etc.) and coordination efforts to help US businesses export products and services (2010)
• Initiatives to promote a “Wireless Broadband Revolution” (2010) * Note: Among other things, broadband is finally being considered as necessary infrastructure, with efforts to expand use, access, and spectrum…
• Expanded agricultural credit to farmers during current economic crisis (2010)
• Signed bill – US Manufacturing Enhancement Act (2010)
• Signed bill – Single Family Housing Mortgage Insurance (2010)
TAXES
• Negotiated a deal with Swiss banks to permit the US government to gain access to records of tax evaders and criminals (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era policy of offering tax benefits to corporations who outsource American jobs (2009) * Note: The new policy promotes in-sourcing investments to brings jobs back to the US
• Signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act which provides small tax cuts for 95% of “working families” (2009) * Note: The tax cuts were not as big as was suggested during the 2008 campaign
• Convened an advisory board that is looking into simplifying the tax code (2009)
• Ordered the closing of offshore tax safe havens (for individual and business tax evaders) (2009)
• Reduced taxes for some small businesses to stimulate the economic recovery (2009)
• Extended the Home Buyers Credit for first-time home buyers (2009)
• Proposed doubling the child tax credit (2010)
• Called for the repeal of the capital gains tax for small businesses (2010)
• Proposed rolling back the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans (2010) * Note: This would be for families earning over $250,000/year and would return their tax rates to the 1990’s level
BUDGETING
• Ordered all federal agencies to undertake a study and make recommendations for ways to cut federal spending (2009)
• Ordered a review of all federal operations to identify wasteful spending and practices (2009)
• Established a National Performance Officer charged with saving the federal government money and making federal operations more efficient (2009)
• Overturned the Bush-era practice of not listing certain federal programs in the federal budget (2009) (2010) * Note: Bush did this (so did Reagan) in an effort to hide programs and make the budget look smaller; such “off budget” items are now included in the annual budget
• Full appropriations for war are now included in the budget (2009) (2010) * Note: Bush did not list many of the appropriations for Iraq, Afghanistan, and War on Terror
• Funds for emergency appropriations are now included in the budget (2009) (2010)
• Proposed a three-year freeze on federal discretionary spending beginning in 2011 (2010)
• Is in the process of cutting 120 federal programs identified as either wasteful or unnecessary (2010)
• Established a bipartisan commission on fiscal responsibility, staffed by House and Senate members and private citizens, tasked with submitting proposals to balance the budget (2010) * Note: In the face of Republican opposition, the powers of the commission were watered down
• Established a bipartisan commission on the future of Social Security, tasked with submitting proposals to preserve and strengthen Social Security (2010) * Note: In the face of Republican opposition, the powers of the commission were watered down
• Cut $20 billion from federal budget and has pledged to cut at least this much every year (2010)
• Ultimately decided to cancel planned new presidential helicopter fleet and stick with marine One (2010)
• Freezing all discretionary spending for next three years, except on national security (2010)
• Presidential Memoranda to freeze discretionary awards, bonuses, etc. for federal political appointees (2010)
• Beginning to use “Pay-As-You-Go” (Pay-Go) to offset budget expenditures with budget cuts or revenue enhancements (2010)
HEALTHCARE
• Removed Bush era restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research (2009)
• Federal support for stem-cell and new biomedical research (2009)
• Expanded the SCHIP program to cover health care for 4 million more children (2009)
• Established an independent commission to make recommendations on slowing the costs of Medicare (2009)
• Reversed some of the Bush-era restrictions that prevented Medicare from negotiating with pharmaceutical firms for cheaper drugs, allowing government to again competitively bid (2009) * Note: Obama had promised to lift all restrictions but, while he did negotiate with drug companies for them to lower their costs the deal only lifted some restrictions
• Expanding government vaccination programs (2009)
• Issued new disease prevention guidelines and priorities for the CDC (2009)
• Authorized the FDA to finally begin regulating tobacco (2009)
• Tasked federal labs to prioritize research on and deployment of H1N1 vaccines (2009)
• Asked multiple congressional committees to bring forward a healthcare reform bill; held dozens of public hearings and town halls on the issue (2009) (2010)
• Established a new council on National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health to be chaired by Surgeon General and charged with promoting healthy lifestyles and integrative healthcare (2010)
• When accusations to the contrary arose, an Executive Order was signed to reaffirm that federal funds are not to be used for abortion services (2010)
• Historic healthcare reform bill signed – $940 billion over 10 years (2010) * Note: 32 million additional Americans will receive healthcare coverage and costs will be lowered for most Americans, but many of the goals are phased in over four years
Components of the bill
- Prevents insurance companies from denying coverage to individuals/family members with pre-existing health conditions; a temporary plan is being developed to cover high-risk individuals with pre-existing conditions until the full reforms go into effect in 2014
- Prevents insurance companies from placing lifetime limits on benefits
- Bans “rescission” so insurance companies can’t cancel coverage if individuals keep their policies current or if they become ill
- An individual’s out-of-pocket healthcare expenses are capped
- Closes the “donut hole” (Part D) for Medicare prescription drug coverage (under Bush, Medicare helped pay for drugs up to $2,600 and above $4,550, but individuals had to pay 100% of the costs in between these amounts); now Medicare helps cover costs irrespective of the amount – seniors will now pay only 25% of drug costs up to $4,550 and only 5% of drug costs above that amount
- In 2010, an emergency provision will offer seniors a $250 rebate on the costs incurred within the “donut hole”
- Individuals living at or below the poverty line were eligible for healthcare under Medicaid, but by 2014 individuals/families living slightly above (making up to $14,404/$29,327) the poverty line will also be eligible for benefits
- Individuals/families making less than $43,320/$88,200 per year will qualify for government subsidies to help purchase health insurance
- All individuals must have health insurance or face a government fine; all large (over 50 employees) employers must offer health insurance to employees or pay a fine
- Small businesses can get a tax credit if they offer health care
- There are hardship exemptions if individuals can’t afford health insurance
- Families can keep their children in college on their plans through age 26
- Promotes health insurance “exchanges” so consumers can buy “wholesale”
- Creates consumer assistance offices to help consumers file complaints or appeal decisions from insurance companies; beginning in 2011, insurance companies can no longer make excessive rate hikes without justification and approval, and those doing so may be barred from participating in new health insurance exchanges
Funding sources:
- Large employers (over 50 workers) that don’t offer health benefits will be charged a $2,000/worker fee; if the employer offers coverage but employees instead purchase federally subsidized insurance the fee is $3,000/worker receiving federal subsidies or $750/worker (whichever is lower)
- Annual fees on pharmaceutical companies ($27 billion), health insurance companies ($60 billion), and medical device-makers ($20 billion)
- Annual penalties on individuals who do not have health insurance (up to a maximum of $695/person)
- Increase in the Medicare payroll tax from 1.45% to 2.35% for individuals making $200,000+ and families making $250,000+
- 3.8% tax on unearned income for millionaires
- Insurance companies will be subject to a tax on each high-end insurance plan (so-called “Cadillac” plans) they offer
Miscellaneous:
- Illegal immigrants are not eligible for insurance or subsidies
- By Executive Order, such federal funding can’t be used for abortion
- The federal government will assist states by covering all of the increased expenses of expanding Medicaid coverage (90% of costs after 2020)
ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT
• Removed a ruling that now allows individual states to enact automotive fuel efficiency standards above federal standards (2009)
• Offered attractive tax write-offs for those who buy hybrid automobiles (2009)
• Overturned Bush-era rule that weakened the Endangered Species Act (2009)
• Announced plans to purchase fuel efficient American-made fleet for the federal government (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era policy of not regulating and labeling carbon dioxide emissions (2009)
• Signed a measure requiring energy producing plants to begin producing 15% of their energy from renewable sources (2009)
• Announced that the federal government would reengage in the long-delayed effort to clean up “Superfund” toxic waste sites (2009)
• Announced the long-term development of a national energy grid with renewable sources and cleaner, efficient energy production (2009) * Note: Much of Obama’s energy reform was killed by Senate Republicans
• Proposed a new refuge for wild mustangs (2009)
• Cancelled several Bush-era mountain-top removal and mining permits (2009)
• Reengaged in international treaties and agreements to protect the Antarctic (2009)
* Note: Bush had withdrawn from such efforts
• Asked Congress for an energy reform and “cap and trade” bill (2009) * Note: The Congress failed to pass such a bill
• Developing plan to lease US coastal waters for wind and water-current energy production (2009)
• Overturned Bush-era policies that allowed uranium mining near national parks such as the Grand Canyon (2009)
• Expanded the Petrified Forest National Park (2009)
• Signed the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act that protects millions of acres of scenic, historic, and recreational lands and trails (2009)
• Requiring that government buildings and facilities be retrofitted to save energy costs (2009) * Note: These green retrofits are moving very slowly
• Authorized studies in several western states to determine how to support large-scale solar installations (2009)
• Attended the Copenhagen talks and, after the talks were stalled, negotiated an international (voluntary) agreement on reducing carbon emissions and raising funds to assist developing nations in offsetting carbon emissions (2009)
• Banned importation of pythons in response to a growing population of pythons damaging the Florida Everglades (2009)
• Committing the federal government to increasing research and use of renewable, clean energy sources such as wind, biomass, etc. (2009)
• Executive orders establishing a federal initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in all federal operations (2009) (2010)
• Called for exploring the possibility of additional off-shore oil drilling in the Gulf, Atlantic, and off Alaska (but not in ANWR) (2010)
• Agreed to consider increases in nuclear energy production and requested a study on the feasibility of nuclear power plant construction (2010) * Note: Nearly all energy initiatives were defeated by Republican opposition in Congress
• Increased investment in clean energy projects (2010)
• Executive Order to develop a new strategy for and commitment to ocean and lake resources, and for scientific research on water quality (2010)
RIGHTS
• Instituted enforcements for equal pay for women (Lilly Ledbetter Bill) (2009)
• Appointed Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina, to the Supreme Court (2009)
• Held the first Seder in White House (2009)
• Appointed a diverse Cabinet and diverse White House staff (2009)
• Spoke at the annual dinner of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights organization (2009)
• Signed the first major piece of federal gay rights legislation that includes acts of violence against gays under the list of federal hate crimes (2009)
• Reversed the Bush-era practice of politicizing Justice Department investigations and prosecutions against political opponents (2009)
• Pushing for some of the 9/11 perpetrators to be tried in federal court (2009) * Note: The process has moved at a snail’s pace and, in the face of opposition, Obama has remained quiet
• Signed an extension of the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Bill to provide federal research and support for treating the disease (2009)
• Allowed the State Department of offer same-sex benefits for employees (2009)
• Proposed that the Pentagon repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy; placed a “freeze” on current efforts to remove alleged homosexuals from the military (2009)
• After eight years of neglect, the Justice Department and EEOC are again enforcing employment discrimination laws (2009)
• Convened the White House Tribal Nations Conference, inviting representatives from 564 federally-recognized Indian tribes (2009)
• Provided increased school projects for Indian lands and increased funds for the Indian Health Service (2009)
• Signed an Executive Order mandating that his Cabinet develop plans to work with and consult Indian tribes on issues impacting Indian lands (2009)
• Commissioned a study to develop alternatives to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (2010)
• Called for federal agencies to look into recognizing gay partnerships in terms of benefits (2010)
• Signed an Executive Order for the President’s Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities (2010)
• Increased funding for Historically Black Colleges and Universities (2010)
• Signed Executive Order to promote the federal government as a “model employer” when it comes to hiring the disabled (2010) * Note: This includes new efforts to increase the recruitment, hiring, and training for the disabled
• Programs to assist Spanish speakers with the US Census (2010)
• Elena Kagen appointed to Supreme Court (2010)
• Tasked all federal agencies to develop new strategies to address HIV/AIDS (2010)
• After organizing studies on the topic in 2009, tasked the Pentagon to eliminate “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (2010)
• Signed Fair Sentencing Act (2010) * Note: The Administration continues to deescalate marijuana interdiction and raids; increased dramatically the amount of cocaine one must possess to be sentenced to jail; eliminated mandatory sentencing for first-time drug abusers and simple possession
EDUCATION
• Authorized construction funds for high-speed, broadband Internet access in K-12 public schools (2009)
• Increased funding for school construction (2009)
• Increased funding available for student loans (2009)
• Expanded the national youth service program (2009)
• Streamlined the federal student loan process to save $87 billion over the next 10 years (2009)
• Changed the rule to allow students struggling to make college loan payments to refinance their loans (2009)
• Beginning discussions with Congress for education reform (2009) * Note: Much of Obama’s education reform has been sidelined by opposition in Congress
• Initiated a “Race to the Top” competitive federal grant program for states who develop innovative policies (2009)
• Instituted a “judgment review” allowing families with student loans to petition to have their current financial status determine the loan rather than the previous year’s finances (2009)
• Launched “Educate to Innovate,” a public/private partnership making $236 million available for science, mathematics, and technology education programs (2009)
• Proposed capping the maximum amount students must pay on student loans (as percentage of their income) (2010)
• Proposed reducing student loan obligations for individuals going to work in community and public service jobs (2010)
• The federal government will offer direct student loans, cutting out the cost of private banks (“middle man”) who increase the costs in order to make a profit (2010)
• Increased investment in technologies for schools/education (2010)
DISASTER RESPONSE
• Ordered a review of hurricane and natural disaster preparedness (2009)
• FEMA once again reports directly to the president (2009) * Note: Bush removed FEMA (prior to the Hurricane Katrina disaster) from this status
• Demonstrated an immediate and efficient response to the floods in North Dakota and other natural disasters (2009)
• Ordered that funds be released and red tape be streamlined for the ongoing Hurricane Katrina recovery effort in the Gulf Coast (2009)
• Timely and massive relief effort in response to the January 2010 earthquake and ensuing humanitarian crisis (2010)
Components of the response:
- The FBI’s National Center for Disaster Fraud was tasked to look into possible fraud with organizations soliciting funds for relief
- Announced the Clinton-Bush Haiti Fund
- Established an emergency Haiti Task Force in the State Department
- Established a website with information, resources, and a posting of a “person finder” online to help families and friends to locate loved ones
- Joint aid and relief planning with the U.K.
- Sponsored a resolution in the UN Security Council for additional security and police forces in Haiti
- Dispatched the US Navy floating hospital (USNS Comfort) and, within 5 days, 9 naval and relief ships, 5 Coast Guard cutters, 8 Coast Guard aircraft, and 12,000 US military personnel
- Initial dispatch of several ships and cargo planes full of humanitarian aid and supplies, 6 search/rescue teams (500 personnel), and 265 Department of Health & Human Services personnel for emergency medical and aid support
- Established a mobile US air traffic control center at the destroyed airport in Port-au-Prince
• After the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, a freeze was placed on new deep water projects (2010)
• Executive Order to establish new security measures to minimize accidental release of bio and chemical agents; new strategies for public health and bioterrorism response (2010)
• Established a national commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon spill to examine facts and report a plan of action; new efforts to prevent offshore spills (2010)
• After a slow start in responding to the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the White House is promoting a long-term plan to reconstruct the damaged Gulf and negotiated with BP the establishment of a multi-billion dollar trust fund for victims of the spill (2010)
• Extended national flood insurance program for those in need during current economic crisis (2010)
OTHER INITIATIVES
• New federal funding for science and research labs (2009)
• Signed national service legislation; expanded national youth service program (2009)
• Increasing opportunities in AmeriCorps program (2009)
• Instituted a new focus on mortgage fraud (2009)
• Ordered the DEA to stop raids on medical marijuana usage (2009)
• Ordered a review of existing “mandatory minimum” prison sentencing (2009)
• Signed an order to limit airport tarmac delays and the time passengers had to sit in the plane/on the tarmac during delays (2009)
• Restored the EPA to “Cabinet level” status (2009) * Note: Bush removed the EPA from this status
• Beginning discussions with Congress for comprehensive immigration reform (2010)
* Note: Much of Obama’s immigration reform had been stalled by opposition in Congress
• Commissioned expert panels and reports from NASA; announced a new direction for human space flight that involves funding a new heavy lift-launcher and jettisoning the Ares 1 program; boosting NASA’s budget by $1 billion in 2011 (2010)
• Ordered a ban on text-messaging for all commercial truck and bus drivers (2010)
• Signed bill – FAA Air Transportaiton Modernizatin and Safety Improvement Act (2010)
P.S. IN CASE YOU WERE WONDERING…
• The Obamas paid for the renovations of the private living quarters in the White House with their own money rather than using the funds provided to all new first families (2009)
• The Obamas reused many Christmas ornaments from previous White House trees rather than buy new ones (2009)
• The Obamas used LED energy-saving lights on White House Christmas tree (2009)
• Awarded the Nobel Peace Prize; donated the award money for the prize to several charities (2009)
• Planted a garden for the White House’s vegetables and flowers (2009)
• Installed a swing set/playground for the Obama daughters and children of White House employees (2009)
• Held over 150 public town halls, press conferences, interviews, etc. in first year in office (2009) * Note: Official numbers are not available on such things, but this seems to be a new record high
• Less vacation days than Bush in first year in office (2009)
Thank You Mr. President !
Print It as a reminder for your references for President Obama accomplishments.
President Obama Accomplishments While Serving Public Office
Passing Universal Healthcare
Financial industry reform
Preventing a 2nd Great Depression
Passed legislation to curb greenhouse gases and improve the environment
Nuclear non-proliferation agreement
Lifted Bush restrictions on embryonic stem cell research
Obama signs technology access bill for disabled
President Obama signs Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010
President Obama Signs Tax Cut Bill Into Law
President Obama Signs DADT Repeal Act
President Obama Signs 9/11 Health Bill
President Obama signs historic food safety law
The Lilly Ledbetter Act for women for equal pay
On Tuesday, January 04, 2011, the President signed into law:
H.R. 81, the “Shark Conservation Act of 2010 and International Fisheries Agreement Clarification Act,” which generally prohibits the removal of shark fins at sea and amends certain laws related to international fisheries;
H.R. 628, which establishes a pilot program regarding the adjudication cases where patent or plant variety protection issues are to be decided;
H.R. 1107, which restates and reorganizes the public contract laws of the United States in Title 41, United Sates Code;
H.R. 1746, the “Predisaster Hazard Mitigation Act of 2010,” which authorizes appropriations for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program for FYs 2011-2013;
H.R. 2142, the “GPRA Modernization Act of 2010,” which amends the Government Performance and Results Act to establish a Federal government performance plan;
H.R. 2751, the “FDA Food Safety Modernization Act,” which modernizes the food safety system to better prevent food-borne illness and better respond to outbreaks;
H.R. 4445, the “Indian Pueblo Cultural Center Clarification Act,” which repeals a restriction on the treatment of certain lands held in trust for Indian Pueblos in New Mexico;
H.R. 4602, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the Emil Bolas Post Office;
H.R. 4748, the “Northern Border Counternarcotics Strategy Act of 2010,” which requires the Office of National Drug Control Policy to develop a Northern Boarder Counternarcotics Strategy;
H.R. 4973, the “National Wildlife Refuge Volunteer Improvement Act of 2010,” which reauthorizes and amends authorities relating to volunteer programs and community partnerships for national wildlife refuges;
H.R. 5116, the “America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science (America COMPETES) Reauthorization Act of 2010,” which reauthorizes various programs intended to strengthen research and education in the United States related to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics;
H.R. 5133, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the Staff Sergeant Frank T. Carvill and Lance Corporal Michael A. Schwarz Post Office Building;
H.R. 5470, which excludes specified external power supplies from certain energy efficiency standards required by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act;
H.R. 5605, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the George C. Marshall Post Office;
H.R. 5606, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the James M. “Jimmy” Stewart Post Office Building;
H.R. 5655, which designates the Little River Branch facility of the United States Postal Service as the Jesse J. McCrary, Jr. Post Office;
H.R. 5809, the “Diesel Emissions Reduction Act of 2010,” which modifies and reauthorizes through FY 2016 the Environmental Protection Agency’s Diesel Emissions Reduction Program;
H.R. 5877, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the Lance Corporal Alexander Scott Arredondo, United States Marine Corps Post Office Building;
H.R. 5901, which authorizes the U.S. Tax Court to appoint employees under a personnel management system that includes the merit system principles and prohibitions on personnel practices;
H.R. 6392, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the Colonel George Juskalian Post Office Building;
H.R. 6400, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the Earl Wilson, Jr. Post Office;
H.R. 6412, the “Access to Criminal History Records for State Sentencing Commissions Act of 2010,” which requires the Department of Justice to exchange records and information with State sentencing commissions;
H.R. 6510, which directs the General Services Administration to convey to the Military Museum of Texas the parcel of real property in Houston, Texas, on which the museum is located;
H.R. 6533, the “Local Community Radio Act of 2010,” which modifies current restrictions on low-power FM radio stations;
S. 118, the “Section 202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly Act of 2010,” which amends financing and project operation requirements for the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s program to allow for increased housing opportunities for low-income seniors;
S. 841, the “Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2010,” regarding pedestrian safety related to motor vehicles;
S. 1481, the “Frank Melville Supportive Housing Investment Act of 2010,” which amends financing and project operation requirements for the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s program for low income individuals with disabilities;
S. 3036, the “National Alzheimer’s Project Act,” which establishes a National Alzheimer’s Project within the Department of Health and Human Services and an advisory council on Alzheimer’s research, care, and services;
S. 3243, the “Anti-Border Corruption Act of 2010,” which requires the Department of Homeland Security to ensure that all applicants for law enforcement positions with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) receive polygraph examinations;
S. 3447, the “Post-9/11 Veterans Education Assistance Improvements Act of 2010,” which amends the Post-9/11 GI Bill, and other educational assistance programs for veterans;
S. 3481, which clarifies the Federal Government’s responsibility to pay reasonable service charges to a State or local government to address stormwater pollution from Federal properties;
S. 3592, which designates a facility of the United States Postal Service as the First Lieutenant Robert Wilson Collins Post Office Building;
S. 3874, the “Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act,” which modifies the Safe Drinking Water Act definition of “lead free” with regard to pipes, pipe fittings, plumbing fittings, and fixtures;
S. 3903, which authorizes 99-year leases on land held in trust for the Ohkay Owingeh Pueblo in the State of New Mexico; and
S. 4036, which amends authorities of the National Credit Union Administration.
Source
President Obama Signs START Treaty Read more here
May 1st, 2011 11:30pm: Osama Bin Laden Is Dead
ETHICS
• Ordered the White House and all federal agencies to respect the Freedom of Information Act and overturned Bush-era limits on accessibility of federal documents (2009)
• Instructed all federal agencies to promote openness and transparency as much as possible (2009)
• Placed limits on lobbyists’ access to the White House (2009)
• Placed limits on White House aides working for lobbyists after their tenure in the administration (2009)
• Signed a measure strengthening registration and reporting requirements for lobbyists (2009)
• Ordered that lobbyists must be removed from and are no longer permitted to serve on federal and White House advisory panels and boards (2009) * Note: After saying he would not hire lobbyists, a few have been hired in the Administration
• Companies and individuals who are delinquent on their taxes or owe back taxes are no longer allowed to bid for federal contracts (2009)
• Initiated the “e-Rulemaking Initiative” (in cooperation with Cornell University) to allow for online public “notice and comment” of federal laws and initiatives (2010)
• Issued the “Open Gov Directive” ordering all Cabinet departments to promote transparency and citizen participation in their policies (2010)
• Signed extensions on banning lobbyists from serving on agency boards (2010)
• Developed the “Don Not Pay List” with data on contractors and recipients of federal funds who are deemed to be ineligible because of fraud and abuse (2010)
GOVERNANCE
• The White House website now provides information on all economic stimulus projects and spending, along with an unprecedented amount of information on our government (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era practice of circumventing established FDA rules for political reasons (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era practice of having White House staff rewrite the findings of scientific and environmental regulations and reports when they disagreed with the results (2009)
• Limited the salaries of senior White House aides (salaries cut to $100,000) (2009)
• Has urged Congress to adopt “Pay-Go” (whereby each dollar of spending is offset by a dollar in cuts or revenues, which was used in the `90s but abandoned in the `00s) (2010)
• Has been holding open meetings with Republican leaders, although they complain of a lack of access and information (2010)
• Signed the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act (2010) * Note: To curb wasteful spending
• Tasked federal agencies to develop plans for disposing of unneeded real estate and then to eliminate unnecessary or non-economical lands, properties, etc. (2010)
NATIONAL SECURITY
• Phasing out the expensive F-22 war plane (which wasn’t even used in Iraq/Afghanistan) and other outdated weapons systems (2009)
• Announced his intention to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay (2009) * Note: The closure has been delayed due to massive opposition but it remains on the agenda.
• Stated his interest in housing terrorists at a new federal “super max” facility in the US (2009) * Note: this has been delayed in the face of massive opposition but it remains on the agenda
• Cut the expensive Reagan era missile defense program, saving $1.4 billion in 2010 (2009)
• Canceled plans to station anti-ballistic missile systems in Poland and the Czech Republic (2009)
• Replacing long-range, expensive missile systems with more efficient smaller systems (2009)
• Increased US Navy patrols off the Somali coast in response to pirating (2009)
• Established a new cyber security office and appointed a cyber security czar (2009)
• Ordered the first nation-wide comprehensive cyber threat assessment (2009)
• Instituted a new Nuclear Posture Review, revising US nuclear deterrence policy to encourage more nations to join the 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (2010) * Note: Components of the policy include: a pledge to stop nuclear testing; a pledge to not build a new generation of nucs; identifying nuclear terrorism, rather than a launch from another nuclear state, as the major threat; a pledge to not use nucs on a non-nuclear state in a conventional conflict; etc.
• Executive orders to block payment, transfers, exports, etc… of individuals and organizations support the regimes of North Korea, Iran, Somali pirates, and other foreign threats (2010)
• Presidential Memorandum to extend certain provisions of The Trading with Enemies Act which was to expire in September 2010 (2010) * Note: This includes freezing assets and banning trade that benefits the Cuban regime; however further efforts at normalizing travel to Cuba are supported
• Signed bill for southwest border security and increased funds and agents on the Mexican border (2010)
• Signed the Comprehensive Sanctions, Accountability and Divestment Act to deal with foreign regimes like Iran and North Korea (2010)
IRAQ & AFGHANISTAN
• Began the phased withdrawal of US troops from Iraq (2009); continuing the withdrawal (2010)
• Changed the US military command in the Afghan conflict (2009)
• Tasked the Pentagon to reorganize US policy in Afghanistan; the new policy includes 30,000 additional troops deployed, priority training of Afghan forces, developing agriculture and infrastructure, limiting aerial bombing, etc. (2009)
• Ordered the Pentagon to send additional helicopters to assist US Marine units and Special Forces in Afghanistan (2009)
• Increased unmanned drone strikes on Taliban and al-Qaeda targets in Afghanistan (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era “stop-loss” policy that kept soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan longer than their enlistment date (2009)
MILITARY & VETERANS
• Ordered the Pentagon to cover expenses of families of fallen soldiers if they wish to be on site when the body arrives back in the US (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era “blackout” imposed on media coverage of the return of fallen US soldiers (2009) * Note: The media is now permitted to cover the story pending adherence to respectful rules and with the approval of the fallen soldier’s family
• Ended the Bush-era “black out” policy on media coverage of war casualties (2009) * Note: Full information is now released for the first time in the War on Terror
• Ordered better body armor to be procured for US troops (2009)
• Funding new Mine Resistant Ambush Vehicles (2009) * Note: The old Hummers were very vulnerable to roadside explosives and an alarming percentage of our soldiers lost in Iraq were on account of IEDs
• Working to increase pay and benefits for military personnel (2009)
• Improving housing for military personnel (2009)
• Initiating a new policy to promote federal hiring of military spouses (2009)
• Ordered that conditions at Walter Reed Military Hospital and other neglected military hospitals be improved (2009)
• Beginning the process of reforming and restructuring the military to a post-Cold War, modern fighting force (2009) * Note: Bush announced in 2001 his intention to do this but backed off the reforms after 9/11, which include: new procurement policies; increasing the size of Special Ops units; deploying new technologies; creating new cyber security units; etc.
• Ended the Bush-era practice of awarding “no-bid” defense contracts (2009)
• Improving benefits for veterans as well as VA staffing, information systems, etc. (2009)
• Authorized construction of additional health centers to care for veterans (2009)
• Suspended the Bush-era decision to purchase a fleet of Marine One helicopters from suppliers in favor of American made helicopters (2009)
• Ordered a review of the existing “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays in the military (2010)
• New GI Bill for returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan (2009)
• Signed bill providing assistance for caregivers of veterans wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan (2010) * Note: The omnibus bill does the following: Training, funding, and counseling for caregivers; promoting pilot childcare programs for women vets under treatment at the VA; independent oversight to prevent abuse; readjustment counseling for National Guard and reservist units; etc.
• Eliminated co-payments for veterans who are catastrophically disabled (2010)
• Fulfilled campaign promise to have combat troops (90,000) out of Iraq by August 31, 2010 (2010)
• Established a new inter agency task force to assist veterans owning small businesses (2010) * Note: The efforts include promoting federal contract opportunities, improve access to loans and capital, mentor assistance programs, etc.
• Signed The Families of Fallen Heroes Act, which covers the moving costs of immediate family members of those lost in service (military, intelligence, and security personnel) (2010)
FOREIGN POLICY
• Closed the Bush-era “secret detention” facilities in Eastern Europe (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era policy allowing “enhanced interrogation” (torture); the US is again in compliance with Geneva Convention standards (2009) * Note: Obama has permitted some controversial interrogation techniques to continue
• Restarted international nuclear non-proliferation talks and reestablished international nuclear inspection protocols (2009) * Note: Bush withdrew from non-proliferation talks and dismantled the inspection infrastructure
• Reengaged in the treaties/agreements to protect the Antarctic (2009) * Note: These were suspended under Bush
• Reengaged in the agreements/talks on global warming and greenhouse gas emissions (2009) * Note: These were suspended under Bush
• Visited more countries and met with more world leaders than any president in his first six months in office (2009)
• Banned the export of cluster bombs (2009)
• Overturned Bush-era plans to increase the US nuclear arsenal (2009)
• Authorized the Navy SEALS operation that freed by force the US shipping captain held by Somali pirates (2009)
• Restored the US commitment to the UN population fund for family planning; overturned the ban on providing funds internationally for family planning (2009) * Note: The family planning efforts were suspended under Bush
• Instituted a new policy on Cuba, allowing Cuban families to return “home” to visit families (2009)
• Extended an offer of engagement (free from sanctions and penalties) to Iran through December 31, 2009 (Iran did not accept the offer) (2009)
• Sent envoys to the Middle East and other parts of the world, reengaging in multilateral and bilateral talks and diplomacy (2009)
• Authorized discussions with North Korea and the private mission by former president, Bill Clinton, to secure the release of two Americans held in prisons (2009)
• Authorized discussions with Myanmar and the mission by Senator Jim Web to secure the release of an American held captive (2009)
• Renewed loan guarantees for Israel (2009)
• Signed the USIFTA trade agreement with/for Israel (2009)
• Authorized a $550m advance for Israel (six months prior to the scheduled date) in order to accommodate Israeli’s economic and financial needs (2009)
• Continued agreements with Israel for cultural exchanges, immigration, etc. (2009)
• Spoke on Arab television, spoke at an Egyptian university, and met with Arab leaders in an effort to change the tone of US-Arab relations (2009)
• Ordered the US to finally pay its dues to the United Nations (2009)
• Attended the Summit of America’s meeting in Trinidad and Tobago (2010)
• Dispatched several envoys and initiated talks with numerous nations (2010)
• Signed a nuclear limitation treaty with Russia (2010) * Note: The agreement calls for both countries to reduce their nucs by one-third (1,500) and launch systems by half (800)
• Hosted nuclear non-proliferation summit for several nations (2010)
• Executive Order to establish support offices in the State Department to assist the governments of Pakistan and Afghanistan (2010)
• Presidential Memoranda to continue drug interdiction support with Columbia (2010)
ECONOMY
• Increased infrastructure spending (roads, bridges, power plants…) (2009) * Note: Bush was the first president since Herbert Hoover to not make infrastructure a priority
• Authorized the US auto industry rescue plan and two GMAC rescue packages (2009)
• Authorized the housing rescue plan and new FHA residential housing guarantees (2009)
• Authorized a $789 billion economic stimulus plan (2009) * Note: 1/3 in tax cuts for working-class families; 1/3 to states for infrastructure projects; 1/3 to states to prevent the layoff of police officers, teachers, etc. at risk of losing their jobs because of state budget shortfalls
• Instituted a new rule allowing the public to meet with federal housing insurers to refinance (in as quickly as one day) a mortgage if they are having trouble paying (2009)
• Authorized a continuation of the US financial and banking rescue plans initiated at the end of the Bush administration and authorized TARP funds to buy “toxic assets” from failing financial institutions (2009)
• Authorized the “Cash for Clunkers” program that stimulated auto sales and removed old, inefficient, polluting cars from the road (2009)
• Convened a “jobs summit” to bring experts together to develop ideas for creating jobs (2009)
• Ordered the FDIC to beef up deposit insurance (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era policy of protecting credit card companies (2009) * Note: In place of the old policy, new consumer protections were instituted and the industry’s predatory practices were banned
• Authorized the federal government to make more loans available to small businesses and ordered lower rates for federal loans to small businesses (2009)
• Placed a 35% tariff on Chinese tires and a few other products such as pipes after China was found to be illegally “dumping” exports below cost (2009) * Note: Clinton, Bush I, and Reagan all refused to “get tough” on China’s predatory trade practices; Bush II refused four times during his presidency
• In November 2009, Obama extended unemployment benefits for one million workers
and expanded coverage for some existing homeowners who are buying again (2009)
• Called on Congress to deliver a “Jobs bill” (2010)
• Credit card companies are prohibited from raising rates without advance notification or arbitrarily if customers are paying bills on time (2010)
• Signed a bill to extend unemployment benefits set to expire (2010)
• Signed historic Wall Street reform bill (2010) * Note: Designed to reregulate and end abusive practices and promote consumer protections
• Signed the HIRE Act to stimulate the economic recovery (2010) * Note: The bill includes: tax cuts for small businesses who hire someone unemployed for at least two months; small businesses can write off their investments in equipment this year; etc.
• National Export Initiative established to enhance federal support (technical assistance, training, trade missions, etc.) and coordination efforts to help US businesses export products and services (2010)
• Initiatives to promote a “Wireless Broadband Revolution” (2010) * Note: Among other things, broadband is finally being considered as necessary infrastructure, with efforts to expand use, access, and spectrum…
• Expanded agricultural credit to farmers during current economic crisis (2010)
• Signed bill – US Manufacturing Enhancement Act (2010)
• Signed bill – Single Family Housing Mortgage Insurance (2010)
TAXES
• Negotiated a deal with Swiss banks to permit the US government to gain access to records of tax evaders and criminals (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era policy of offering tax benefits to corporations who outsource American jobs (2009) * Note: The new policy promotes in-sourcing investments to brings jobs back to the US
• Signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act which provides small tax cuts for 95% of “working families” (2009) * Note: The tax cuts were not as big as was suggested during the 2008 campaign
• Convened an advisory board that is looking into simplifying the tax code (2009)
• Ordered the closing of offshore tax safe havens (for individual and business tax evaders) (2009)
• Reduced taxes for some small businesses to stimulate the economic recovery (2009)
• Extended the Home Buyers Credit for first-time home buyers (2009)
• Proposed doubling the child tax credit (2010)
• Called for the repeal of the capital gains tax for small businesses (2010)
• Proposed rolling back the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans (2010) * Note: This would be for families earning over $250,000/year and would return their tax rates to the 1990’s level
BUDGETING
• Ordered all federal agencies to undertake a study and make recommendations for ways to cut federal spending (2009)
• Ordered a review of all federal operations to identify wasteful spending and practices (2009)
• Established a National Performance Officer charged with saving the federal government money and making federal operations more efficient (2009)
• Overturned the Bush-era practice of not listing certain federal programs in the federal budget (2009) (2010) * Note: Bush did this (so did Reagan) in an effort to hide programs and make the budget look smaller; such “off budget” items are now included in the annual budget
• Full appropriations for war are now included in the budget (2009) (2010) * Note: Bush did not list many of the appropriations for Iraq, Afghanistan, and War on Terror
• Funds for emergency appropriations are now included in the budget (2009) (2010)
• Proposed a three-year freeze on federal discretionary spending beginning in 2011 (2010)
• Is in the process of cutting 120 federal programs identified as either wasteful or unnecessary (2010)
• Established a bipartisan commission on fiscal responsibility, staffed by House and Senate members and private citizens, tasked with submitting proposals to balance the budget (2010) * Note: In the face of Republican opposition, the powers of the commission were watered down
• Established a bipartisan commission on the future of Social Security, tasked with submitting proposals to preserve and strengthen Social Security (2010) * Note: In the face of Republican opposition, the powers of the commission were watered down
• Cut $20 billion from federal budget and has pledged to cut at least this much every year (2010)
• Ultimately decided to cancel planned new presidential helicopter fleet and stick with marine One (2010)
• Freezing all discretionary spending for next three years, except on national security (2010)
• Presidential Memoranda to freeze discretionary awards, bonuses, etc. for federal political appointees (2010)
• Beginning to use “Pay-As-You-Go” (Pay-Go) to offset budget expenditures with budget cuts or revenue enhancements (2010)
HEALTHCARE
• Removed Bush era restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research (2009)
• Federal support for stem-cell and new biomedical research (2009)
• Expanded the SCHIP program to cover health care for 4 million more children (2009)
• Established an independent commission to make recommendations on slowing the costs of Medicare (2009)
• Reversed some of the Bush-era restrictions that prevented Medicare from negotiating with pharmaceutical firms for cheaper drugs, allowing government to again competitively bid (2009) * Note: Obama had promised to lift all restrictions but, while he did negotiate with drug companies for them to lower their costs the deal only lifted some restrictions
• Expanding government vaccination programs (2009)
• Issued new disease prevention guidelines and priorities for the CDC (2009)
• Authorized the FDA to finally begin regulating tobacco (2009)
• Tasked federal labs to prioritize research on and deployment of H1N1 vaccines (2009)
• Asked multiple congressional committees to bring forward a healthcare reform bill; held dozens of public hearings and town halls on the issue (2009) (2010)
• Established a new council on National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health to be chaired by Surgeon General and charged with promoting healthy lifestyles and integrative healthcare (2010)
• When accusations to the contrary arose, an Executive Order was signed to reaffirm that federal funds are not to be used for abortion services (2010)
• Historic healthcare reform bill signed – $940 billion over 10 years (2010) * Note: 32 million additional Americans will receive healthcare coverage and costs will be lowered for most Americans, but many of the goals are phased in over four years
Components of the bill
- Prevents insurance companies from denying coverage to individuals/family members with pre-existing health conditions; a temporary plan is being developed to cover high-risk individuals with pre-existing conditions until the full reforms go into effect in 2014
- Prevents insurance companies from placing lifetime limits on benefits
- Bans “rescission” so insurance companies can’t cancel coverage if individuals keep their policies current or if they become ill
- An individual’s out-of-pocket healthcare expenses are capped
- Closes the “donut hole” (Part D) for Medicare prescription drug coverage (under Bush, Medicare helped pay for drugs up to $2,600 and above $4,550, but individuals had to pay 100% of the costs in between these amounts); now Medicare helps cover costs irrespective of the amount – seniors will now pay only 25% of drug costs up to $4,550 and only 5% of drug costs above that amount
- In 2010, an emergency provision will offer seniors a $250 rebate on the costs incurred within the “donut hole”
- Individuals living at or below the poverty line were eligible for healthcare under Medicaid, but by 2014 individuals/families living slightly above (making up to $14,404/$29,327) the poverty line will also be eligible for benefits
- Individuals/families making less than $43,320/$88,200 per year will qualify for government subsidies to help purchase health insurance
- All individuals must have health insurance or face a government fine; all large (over 50 employees) employers must offer health insurance to employees or pay a fine
- Small businesses can get a tax credit if they offer health care
- There are hardship exemptions if individuals can’t afford health insurance
- Families can keep their children in college on their plans through age 26
- Promotes health insurance “exchanges” so consumers can buy “wholesale”
- Creates consumer assistance offices to help consumers file complaints or appeal decisions from insurance companies; beginning in 2011, insurance companies can no longer make excessive rate hikes without justification and approval, and those doing so may be barred from participating in new health insurance exchanges
Funding sources:
- Large employers (over 50 workers) that don’t offer health benefits will be charged a $2,000/worker fee; if the employer offers coverage but employees instead purchase federally subsidized insurance the fee is $3,000/worker receiving federal subsidies or $750/worker (whichever is lower)
- Annual fees on pharmaceutical companies ($27 billion), health insurance companies ($60 billion), and medical device-makers ($20 billion)
- Annual penalties on individuals who do not have health insurance (up to a maximum of $695/person)
- Increase in the Medicare payroll tax from 1.45% to 2.35% for individuals making $200,000+ and families making $250,000+
- 3.8% tax on unearned income for millionaires
- Insurance companies will be subject to a tax on each high-end insurance plan (so-called “Cadillac” plans) they offer
Miscellaneous:
- Illegal immigrants are not eligible for insurance or subsidies
- By Executive Order, such federal funding can’t be used for abortion
- The federal government will assist states by covering all of the increased expenses of expanding Medicaid coverage (90% of costs after 2020)
ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT
• Removed a ruling that now allows individual states to enact automotive fuel efficiency standards above federal standards (2009)
• Offered attractive tax write-offs for those who buy hybrid automobiles (2009)
• Overturned Bush-era rule that weakened the Endangered Species Act (2009)
• Announced plans to purchase fuel efficient American-made fleet for the federal government (2009)
• Ended the Bush-era policy of not regulating and labeling carbon dioxide emissions (2009)
• Signed a measure requiring energy producing plants to begin producing 15% of their energy from renewable sources (2009)
• Announced that the federal government would reengage in the long-delayed effort to clean up “Superfund” toxic waste sites (2009)
• Announced the long-term development of a national energy grid with renewable sources and cleaner, efficient energy production (2009) * Note: Much of Obama’s energy reform was killed by Senate Republicans
• Proposed a new refuge for wild mustangs (2009)
• Cancelled several Bush-era mountain-top removal and mining permits (2009)
• Reengaged in international treaties and agreements to protect the Antarctic (2009)
* Note: Bush had withdrawn from such efforts
• Asked Congress for an energy reform and “cap and trade” bill (2009) * Note: The Congress failed to pass such a bill
• Developing plan to lease US coastal waters for wind and water-current energy production (2009)
• Overturned Bush-era policies that allowed uranium mining near national parks such as the Grand Canyon (2009)
• Expanded the Petrified Forest National Park (2009)
• Signed the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act that protects millions of acres of scenic, historic, and recreational lands and trails (2009)
• Requiring that government buildings and facilities be retrofitted to save energy costs (2009) * Note: These green retrofits are moving very slowly
• Authorized studies in several western states to determine how to support large-scale solar installations (2009)
• Attended the Copenhagen talks and, after the talks were stalled, negotiated an international (voluntary) agreement on reducing carbon emissions and raising funds to assist developing nations in offsetting carbon emissions (2009)
• Banned importation of pythons in response to a growing population of pythons damaging the Florida Everglades (2009)
• Committing the federal government to increasing research and use of renewable, clean energy sources such as wind, biomass, etc. (2009)
• Executive orders establishing a federal initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in all federal operations (2009) (2010)
• Called for exploring the possibility of additional off-shore oil drilling in the Gulf, Atlantic, and off Alaska (but not in ANWR) (2010)
• Agreed to consider increases in nuclear energy production and requested a study on the feasibility of nuclear power plant construction (2010) * Note: Nearly all energy initiatives were defeated by Republican opposition in Congress
• Increased investment in clean energy projects (2010)
• Executive Order to develop a new strategy for and commitment to ocean and lake resources, and for scientific research on water quality (2010)
RIGHTS
• Instituted enforcements for equal pay for women (Lilly Ledbetter Bill) (2009)
• Appointed Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina, to the Supreme Court (2009)
• Held the first Seder in White House (2009)
• Appointed a diverse Cabinet and diverse White House staff (2009)
• Spoke at the annual dinner of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights organization (2009)
• Signed the first major piece of federal gay rights legislation that includes acts of violence against gays under the list of federal hate crimes (2009)
• Reversed the Bush-era practice of politicizing Justice Department investigations and prosecutions against political opponents (2009)
• Pushing for some of the 9/11 perpetrators to be tried in federal court (2009) * Note: The process has moved at a snail’s pace and, in the face of opposition, Obama has remained quiet
• Signed an extension of the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Bill to provide federal research and support for treating the disease (2009)
• Allowed the State Department of offer same-sex benefits for employees (2009)
• Proposed that the Pentagon repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy; placed a “freeze” on current efforts to remove alleged homosexuals from the military (2009)
• After eight years of neglect, the Justice Department and EEOC are again enforcing employment discrimination laws (2009)
• Convened the White House Tribal Nations Conference, inviting representatives from 564 federally-recognized Indian tribes (2009)
• Provided increased school projects for Indian lands and increased funds for the Indian Health Service (2009)
• Signed an Executive Order mandating that his Cabinet develop plans to work with and consult Indian tribes on issues impacting Indian lands (2009)
• Commissioned a study to develop alternatives to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (2010)
• Called for federal agencies to look into recognizing gay partnerships in terms of benefits (2010)
• Signed an Executive Order for the President’s Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities (2010)
• Increased funding for Historically Black Colleges and Universities (2010)
• Signed Executive Order to promote the federal government as a “model employer” when it comes to hiring the disabled (2010) * Note: This includes new efforts to increase the recruitment, hiring, and training for the disabled
• Programs to assist Spanish speakers with the US Census (2010)
• Elena Kagen appointed to Supreme Court (2010)
• Tasked all federal agencies to develop new strategies to address HIV/AIDS (2010)
• After organizing studies on the topic in 2009, tasked the Pentagon to eliminate “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (2010)
• Signed Fair Sentencing Act (2010) * Note: The Administration continues to deescalate marijuana interdiction and raids; increased dramatically the amount of cocaine one must possess to be sentenced to jail; eliminated mandatory sentencing for first-time drug abusers and simple possession
EDUCATION
• Authorized construction funds for high-speed, broadband Internet access in K-12 public schools (2009)
• Increased funding for school construction (2009)
• Increased funding available for student loans (2009)
• Expanded the national youth service program (2009)
• Streamlined the federal student loan process to save $87 billion over the next 10 years (2009)
• Changed the rule to allow students struggling to make college loan payments to refinance their loans (2009)
• Beginning discussions with Congress for education reform (2009) * Note: Much of Obama’s education reform has been sidelined by opposition in Congress
• Initiated a “Race to the Top” competitive federal grant program for states who develop innovative policies (2009)
• Instituted a “judgment review” allowing families with student loans to petition to have their current financial status determine the loan rather than the previous year’s finances (2009)
• Launched “Educate to Innovate,” a public/private partnership making $236 million available for science, mathematics, and technology education programs (2009)
• Proposed capping the maximum amount students must pay on student loans (as percentage of their income) (2010)
• Proposed reducing student loan obligations for individuals going to work in community and public service jobs (2010)
• The federal government will offer direct student loans, cutting out the cost of private banks (“middle man”) who increase the costs in order to make a profit (2010)
• Increased investment in technologies for schools/education (2010)
DISASTER RESPONSE
• Ordered a review of hurricane and natural disaster preparedness (2009)
• FEMA once again reports directly to the president (2009) * Note: Bush removed FEMA (prior to the Hurricane Katrina disaster) from this status
• Demonstrated an immediate and efficient response to the floods in North Dakota and other natural disasters (2009)
• Ordered that funds be released and red tape be streamlined for the ongoing Hurricane Katrina recovery effort in the Gulf Coast (2009)
• Timely and massive relief effort in response to the January 2010 earthquake and ensuing humanitarian crisis (2010)
Components of the response:
- The FBI’s National Center for Disaster Fraud was tasked to look into possible fraud with organizations soliciting funds for relief
- Announced the Clinton-Bush Haiti Fund
- Established an emergency Haiti Task Force in the State Department
- Established a website with information, resources, and a posting of a “person finder” online to help families and friends to locate loved ones
- Joint aid and relief planning with the U.K.
- Sponsored a resolution in the UN Security Council for additional security and police forces in Haiti
- Dispatched the US Navy floating hospital (USNS Comfort) and, within 5 days, 9 naval and relief ships, 5 Coast Guard cutters, 8 Coast Guard aircraft, and 12,000 US military personnel
- Initial dispatch of several ships and cargo planes full of humanitarian aid and supplies, 6 search/rescue teams (500 personnel), and 265 Department of Health & Human Services personnel for emergency medical and aid support
- Established a mobile US air traffic control center at the destroyed airport in Port-au-Prince
• After the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, a freeze was placed on new deep water projects (2010)
• Executive Order to establish new security measures to minimize accidental release of bio and chemical agents; new strategies for public health and bioterrorism response (2010)
• Established a national commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon spill to examine facts and report a plan of action; new efforts to prevent offshore spills (2010)
• After a slow start in responding to the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the White House is promoting a long-term plan to reconstruct the damaged Gulf and negotiated with BP the establishment of a multi-billion dollar trust fund for victims of the spill (2010)
• Extended national flood insurance program for those in need during current economic crisis (2010)
OTHER INITIATIVES
• New federal funding for science and research labs (2009)
• Signed national service legislation; expanded national youth service program (2009)
• Increasing opportunities in AmeriCorps program (2009)
• Instituted a new focus on mortgage fraud (2009)
• Ordered the DEA to stop raids on medical marijuana usage (2009)
• Ordered a review of existing “mandatory minimum” prison sentencing (2009)
• Signed an order to limit airport tarmac delays and the time passengers had to sit in the plane/on the tarmac during delays (2009)
• Restored the EPA to “Cabinet level” status (2009) * Note: Bush removed the EPA from this status
• Beginning discussions with Congress for comprehensive immigration reform (2010)
* Note: Much of Obama’s immigration reform had been stalled by opposition in Congress
• Commissioned expert panels and reports from NASA; announced a new direction for human space flight that involves funding a new heavy lift-launcher and jettisoning the Ares 1 program; boosting NASA’s budget by $1 billion in 2011 (2010)
• Ordered a ban on text-messaging for all commercial truck and bus drivers (2010)
• Signed bill – FAA Air Transportaiton Modernizatin and Safety Improvement Act (2010)
P.S. IN CASE YOU WERE WONDERING…
• The Obamas paid for the renovations of the private living quarters in the White House with their own money rather than using the funds provided to all new first families (2009)
• The Obamas reused many Christmas ornaments from previous White House trees rather than buy new ones (2009)
• The Obamas used LED energy-saving lights on White House Christmas tree (2009)
• Awarded the Nobel Peace Prize; donated the award money for the prize to several charities (2009)
• Planted a garden for the White House’s vegetables and flowers (2009)
• Installed a swing set/playground for the Obama daughters and children of White House employees (2009)
• Held over 150 public town halls, press conferences, interviews, etc. in first year in office (2009) * Note: Official numbers are not available on such things, but this seems to be a new record high
• Less vacation days than Bush in first year in office (2009)
Thank You Mr. President !
Print It as a reminder for your references for President Obama accomplishments.
President Obama Accomplishments While Serving Public Office
Monday, August 22, 2011
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Disapproval Rate for Congress at Record 82% After Debt Talks
*****All told, 72 percent disapproved of the way Republicans in
Congress handled the negotiations, while 66 percent disapproved of the
way Democrats in Congress handled negotiations.***********
Disapproval Rate for Congress at Record 82% After Debt Talks
The debate over raising the debt ceiling, which brought the nation to
the brink of default, has sent disapproval of Congress to its highest
level on record and left most Americans saying that creating jobs
should now take priority over cutting spending, according to the
latest New York Times/CBS News
A record 82 percent of Americans now disapprove of the way Congress is
handling its job — the most since The Times first began asking the
question in 1977, and even more than after another political stalemate
led to a shutdown of the federal government in 1995.
More than four out of five people surveyed said that the recent debt-
ceiling debate was more about gaining political advantage than about
doing what is best for the country. Nearly three-quarters said that
the debate had harmed the image of the United States in the world.
Republicans in Congress shoulder more of the blame for the
difficulties in reaching a debt-ceiling agreement than President Obama
and the Democrats, the poll found.
The Republicans compromised too little, a majority of those polled
said. All told, 72 percent disapproved of the way Republicans in
Congress handled the negotiations, while 66 percent disapproved of the
way Democrats in Congress handled negotiations.
The public was more evenly divided about how Mr. Obama handled the
debt ceiling negotiations: 47 percent disapproved and 46 percent
approved.
The public’s opinion of the Tea Party movement has soured in the wake
of the debt-ceiling debate. The Tea Party is now viewed unfavorably by
40 percent of the public and favorably by just 20 percent, according
to the poll. In mid-April 29 percent of those polled viewed the
movement unfavorably, while 26 percent viewed it favorably. And 43
percent of Americans now think the Tea Party has too much influence on
the Republican Party, up from 27 percent in mid-April.
“I’m real disappointed in Congress,” Ron Raggio, 54, a florist from
Vicksburg, Miss., said in a follow-up interview. “They can’t sit down
and agree about what’s best for America. It’s all politics.”
There were signs that the repeated Republican calls for more spending
cuts were resonating with the public: 44 percent of those polled said
the cuts in the debt-ceiling agreement did not go far enough, 29
percent said they were about right and only 15 percent said they went
too far. More than a quarter of the Democrats polled said that the
cuts in the agreement did not go far enough.
But by a ratio of more than two to one, Americans said that creating
jobs should be a higher priority than spending cuts.
Though Republicans prevented tax increases from being included in the
debt-ceiling deal, half of those polled said the agreement should have
included increased tax revenue, while 44 percent said it should have
relied on cuts alone. That issue is likely to be revisited soon:
Congress is preparing to appoint a special committee to recommend ways
to reduce the deficit. Sixty-three percent of those polled said that
they supported raising taxes on households that earn more than
$250,000 a year, as Mr. Obama has sought to do — including majorities
of Democrats (80 percent), independents (61 percent) and Republicans
(52 percent).
The poll found that Mr. Obama was emerging from the crisis less
bruised than the Republicans in Congress.
The president’s overall job approval rating remained relatively
stable, with 48 percent approving of the way he handles his job as
president and 47 percent disapproving — down from the bump up he
received in the spring after the killing of Osama bin Laden, but in
line with how he has been viewed for nearly a year. By contrast,
Speaker John A. Boehner, an Ohio Republican, saw his disapproval
rating shoot up 16 points since April: 57 percent of those polled now
disapprove of the way he is handling his job, while only 30 percent
approve.
Americans said that they trusted Mr. Obama to make the right decisions
about the economy more than the Republicans in Congress, by 47 percent
to 33 percent. They were evenly divided on the question of whether he
showed “strong qualities of leadership” during the negotiations, with
49 percent saying he did and 48 percent saying he did not. And they
were still more likely to blame President George W. Bush for the bulk
of the nation’s deficit: 44 percent said that the deficit was mostly
caused by the Bush administration, 15 percent said it was mostly
caused by the Obama administration and 15 percent blamed Congress.
The growing fears about the economy — amid a sinking stock market and
warnings that the nation risks sliding back into recession — were
reflected in the nationwide telephone poll, which was conducted
Tuesday and Wednesday with 960 adults and has a margin of sampling
error of plus or minus three percentage points.
The number of Americans who rated the economy “very bad” was the
highest it had been in a year. But there was uncertainty about whether
the debt-ceiling deal would help or hurt the economy: nearly half said
it would have no effect, while 24 percent said it would make the
economy worse and 22 percent said it would improve it.
Americans were evenly divided on the parameters of the debt-ceiling
deal, in which Congress agreed to allow the federal government to
borrow the money needed to pay its current obligations and avoid
default on the condition that it reduce the deficit by at least $2.1
trillion over the next 10 years. Over all, 46 percent of those polled
approved of the deal, while 45 percent disapproved of it.
Most of those polled said that the spending cuts included either did
not go far enough or were about right. But with the nation’s
unemployment rate at a stubborn 9.2 percent, 62 percent of those
polled said that creating jobs should be the priority.
“Cutting spending is important, but getting people back to work is
more important,” said Diane Sherrell, 56, a Republican from Erwin,
N.C. “If people are working, they are more productive. There is less
crime, there is less depression, there is less divorce. There are less
hospital and medical bills. If you put people back to work, you are
cutting spending.”
Stanley Oland, 62, a Republican from Kalispell, Mont., said that the
government needed new jobs to generate the economic activity and the
revenue it requires.
“That revenue supports the basic foundation for the economy, creates
more jobs and stimulates the economy,” he said. “Unless you have
working people you don’t have revenue from taxes. If you cut spending,
jobs will be eliminated and you won’t get any revenue. Every dollar
spent creates jobs.”
Marjorie Connelly, Allison Kopicki and Marina Stefan contributed
reporting.
Congress handled the negotiations, while 66 percent disapproved of the
way Democrats in Congress handled negotiations.***********
Disapproval Rate for Congress at Record 82% After Debt Talks
The debate over raising the debt ceiling, which brought the nation to
the brink of default, has sent disapproval of Congress to its highest
level on record and left most Americans saying that creating jobs
should now take priority over cutting spending, according to the
latest New York Times/CBS News
A record 82 percent of Americans now disapprove of the way Congress is
handling its job — the most since The Times first began asking the
question in 1977, and even more than after another political stalemate
led to a shutdown of the federal government in 1995.
More than four out of five people surveyed said that the recent debt-
ceiling debate was more about gaining political advantage than about
doing what is best for the country. Nearly three-quarters said that
the debate had harmed the image of the United States in the world.
Republicans in Congress shoulder more of the blame for the
difficulties in reaching a debt-ceiling agreement than President Obama
and the Democrats, the poll found.
The Republicans compromised too little, a majority of those polled
said. All told, 72 percent disapproved of the way Republicans in
Congress handled the negotiations, while 66 percent disapproved of the
way Democrats in Congress handled negotiations.
The public was more evenly divided about how Mr. Obama handled the
debt ceiling negotiations: 47 percent disapproved and 46 percent
approved.
The public’s opinion of the Tea Party movement has soured in the wake
of the debt-ceiling debate. The Tea Party is now viewed unfavorably by
40 percent of the public and favorably by just 20 percent, according
to the poll. In mid-April 29 percent of those polled viewed the
movement unfavorably, while 26 percent viewed it favorably. And 43
percent of Americans now think the Tea Party has too much influence on
the Republican Party, up from 27 percent in mid-April.
“I’m real disappointed in Congress,” Ron Raggio, 54, a florist from
Vicksburg, Miss., said in a follow-up interview. “They can’t sit down
and agree about what’s best for America. It’s all politics.”
There were signs that the repeated Republican calls for more spending
cuts were resonating with the public: 44 percent of those polled said
the cuts in the debt-ceiling agreement did not go far enough, 29
percent said they were about right and only 15 percent said they went
too far. More than a quarter of the Democrats polled said that the
cuts in the agreement did not go far enough.
But by a ratio of more than two to one, Americans said that creating
jobs should be a higher priority than spending cuts.
Though Republicans prevented tax increases from being included in the
debt-ceiling deal, half of those polled said the agreement should have
included increased tax revenue, while 44 percent said it should have
relied on cuts alone. That issue is likely to be revisited soon:
Congress is preparing to appoint a special committee to recommend ways
to reduce the deficit. Sixty-three percent of those polled said that
they supported raising taxes on households that earn more than
$250,000 a year, as Mr. Obama has sought to do — including majorities
of Democrats (80 percent), independents (61 percent) and Republicans
(52 percent).
The poll found that Mr. Obama was emerging from the crisis less
bruised than the Republicans in Congress.
The president’s overall job approval rating remained relatively
stable, with 48 percent approving of the way he handles his job as
president and 47 percent disapproving — down from the bump up he
received in the spring after the killing of Osama bin Laden, but in
line with how he has been viewed for nearly a year. By contrast,
Speaker John A. Boehner, an Ohio Republican, saw his disapproval
rating shoot up 16 points since April: 57 percent of those polled now
disapprove of the way he is handling his job, while only 30 percent
approve.
Americans said that they trusted Mr. Obama to make the right decisions
about the economy more than the Republicans in Congress, by 47 percent
to 33 percent. They were evenly divided on the question of whether he
showed “strong qualities of leadership” during the negotiations, with
49 percent saying he did and 48 percent saying he did not. And they
were still more likely to blame President George W. Bush for the bulk
of the nation’s deficit: 44 percent said that the deficit was mostly
caused by the Bush administration, 15 percent said it was mostly
caused by the Obama administration and 15 percent blamed Congress.
The growing fears about the economy — amid a sinking stock market and
warnings that the nation risks sliding back into recession — were
reflected in the nationwide telephone poll, which was conducted
Tuesday and Wednesday with 960 adults and has a margin of sampling
error of plus or minus three percentage points.
The number of Americans who rated the economy “very bad” was the
highest it had been in a year. But there was uncertainty about whether
the debt-ceiling deal would help or hurt the economy: nearly half said
it would have no effect, while 24 percent said it would make the
economy worse and 22 percent said it would improve it.
Americans were evenly divided on the parameters of the debt-ceiling
deal, in which Congress agreed to allow the federal government to
borrow the money needed to pay its current obligations and avoid
default on the condition that it reduce the deficit by at least $2.1
trillion over the next 10 years. Over all, 46 percent of those polled
approved of the deal, while 45 percent disapproved of it.
Most of those polled said that the spending cuts included either did
not go far enough or were about right. But with the nation’s
unemployment rate at a stubborn 9.2 percent, 62 percent of those
polled said that creating jobs should be the priority.
“Cutting spending is important, but getting people back to work is
more important,” said Diane Sherrell, 56, a Republican from Erwin,
N.C. “If people are working, they are more productive. There is less
crime, there is less depression, there is less divorce. There are less
hospital and medical bills. If you put people back to work, you are
cutting spending.”
Stanley Oland, 62, a Republican from Kalispell, Mont., said that the
government needed new jobs to generate the economic activity and the
revenue it requires.
“That revenue supports the basic foundation for the economy, creates
more jobs and stimulates the economy,” he said. “Unless you have
working people you don’t have revenue from taxes. If you cut spending,
jobs will be eliminated and you won’t get any revenue. Every dollar
spent creates jobs.”
Marjorie Connelly, Allison Kopicki and Marina Stefan contributed
reporting.
Tea Party’s heyday could be nearing end, say political experts
Tea Party’s heyday could be nearing end, say political experts
By Alexander Bolton - 08/14/11 02:57 PM ET
The reign of the Tea Party may be coming to an end in Washington, according to academic political experts who say polls show a backlash against the conservative movement.
Two national polls released this month by CNN and The New York Times in conjunction with CBS News showed the Tea Party’s unfavorable rating at an all-time high.
Political scientists say the data shows a backlash of independent voters against conservative lawmakers who have taken a hard line against bipartisan compromise in Washington.
These experts say independent voters who make up the swing bloc of the electorate typically pay less attention to politics than staunch Republican and Democratic voters.
The contentious debate in Congress over the debt limit gave the Tea Party new prominence to many of these casual observers of Washington.
Reid: Tea Party will fade away in time
And many independents were not happy with what they saw over the last several weeks: a contentious debate in which conservatives threatened to force a national default; the failure of President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) to reach a grand bargain to reduce the deficit; a sharp rebuke of the political system by Standard & Poor’s causing havoc on Wall Street.
They note Obama’s public approval also dipped but observe public opinion of the Tea Party has fallen faster.
The CNN poll showed the Tea Party’s favorable/unfavorable rating grew from 37 percent in October 2010 to 51 percent in August 2011.
The Times poll, conducted Aug. 2 to 4, showed the movement’s popularity at 20 percent and unpopularity at 40 percent. The unpopularity rating was 14 points higher than in October of 2010.
“If you were paying attention to the coverage, the characterization of people resistant to raising the debt ceiling was they were Tea Party supporters or members of the Tea Party caucus,” said Charles Franklin, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin and a polling specialist. “That characterization is an element in the current apparent decline in Tea party popularity."
Franklin said surveys show most independent voters want political leaders of different parties to bridge their differences to solve the nation’s problems. They did not see that happen during the debt-limit debate, when leaders hashed out an unpopular last-minute compromise to avoid a national default.
“What we saw in all the polling, and it’s very consistent, is people favored some sort of compromise and did not know why the deadlock was there,” said Franklin. “The Tea Party, in some eyes, was blamed for the deadlock.”
Terry Madonna, director of the Center for Politics and Public Affairs at Franklin and Marshall College, said independent voters, who make up a fast-growing portion of the electorate, want more compromise.
He said independent voters generally agree with the Tea Party that federal deficits need to shrink and government should be more accountable. But these voters are turned off by brinksmanship.
“They want a government that works together, a government that gets along,” he said. “What they’re upset about is intransigence toward compromise. What came through to voters is they saw the Tea Party as a hindrance to compromise.”
A Senate Republican political strategist agreed with that assessment.
The strategist, who declined to speak on the record because he didn’t want his comments to reflect on his clients, said Tea Party lawmakers have taken a principled stand against what they view as mushy compromises but come across to independent voters as merely obstructionist.
Independent voters tended to focus on the partisan conflict and the lack of progress as the deadline to avert a national default approached. They did not appreciate the nuanced arguments of principle made by Tea Party lawmakers, specifically the only way to prevent future Congresses from running up massive deficits is to pass a balanced-budget amendment.
“The whole notion that Congress had weeks and months and nothing got done until the last minute is very infuriating. Then independents look at why that’s happening and see it’s the guys in the Tea Party,” said the GOP strategist.
Independent voters, who tend not to pay attention to politics until shortly before Election Day, followed the debt-limit standoff in Washington because it threatened to cause what senior Obama administration officials described as an economic catastrophe.
Bruce Cain, a professor of political science at the University of California and director of UC’s Washington Center, said the debt-limit debate hurt the Tea Party among independent voters.
He said the debt-limit debate “was so dramatic it had a wide audience.”
“It definitely made the Tea Party a more visible figure,” he said. “The people who pay attention the least are the independent swing voters. This is the first time they got an idea of what the Tea Party is trying to do.”
A second GOP strategist said he thought the Tea Party has appeared “strident” and uncompromising to independent voters.
He endorsed the analyses by Franklin, Madonna and Cain.
“There’s truth to that,” he said.
“The Tea Party looks at this and fully believes Washington is a waste of money and unaccountable money. Then there’s talk of a compromise and they say ‘Why do I want to run up all these debts? I want Washington to stop spending. I don’t want to raise the debt limit,’” said the strategist. “That can look strident to people whether independents or others.”
Many Tea Party voters did not see a national default as worse than continuing the present rate of deficit spending, said the strategist.
“Then there was a validation of the fact that compromise wasn’t very effective,” said the strategist, noting the debt-limit deal, which many Tea-Party lawmakers opposed, did not avert a credit downgrade.
Democratic lawmakers repeatedly made the argument that they had gone more than halfway to meet Republicans demands.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) offered a deficit-reduction plan that cut more than $2 trillion and did not raise any taxes, but Republicans argued it included a $1 trillion budget gimmick.
White House officials leaked stories to the press that Obama was willing to cut entitlement programs as part of a broader deal.
“At several points during the debt-ceiling negotiations, we purposely made a point of bending over backward to show we were willing to meet Republicans more than half way,” said a senior Democratic aide.
Early polling shows the message appears to have resonated, say academic political experts.
The notion that Republicans are not willing to compromise with Democrats on taxes was underscored Thursday during the GOP presidential debate in Iowa. Every candidate on stage said he or she would not accept a deficit-reduction deal with a 10-to-1 ratio of spending cuts to tax increases.
Dick Armey, the chairman of FreedomWorks, a group that works closely with the Tea Party, argues that Tea Party lawmakers and activists have been unfairly blamed.
He said in a recent CNN interview that Standard & Poor’s validated their concerns over the national debt when it downgraded the nation’s credit rating. He said Tea Party activists and voters simply want Congress to move aggressively to avert the economic fallout that will come if the current rate of federal spending continues.
Fairly or not, the emerging consensus is that the Tea Party has taken a hit from the debt-limit debate and its public image was further damaged by S&P’s action. Democrats have made a concerted effort to present it as a “Tea Party downgrade.”
Whit Ayres, a Republican pollster, acknowledged that Obama’s efforts to blame the Tea Party for the fractious negotiations has hurt the movement’s popularity but he argued the effect would be temporary.
“What I think has happened is the Obama administration has used the bully pulpit to demonize them and divert attention from his own irresponsible spending,” said Ayres.
“They would rather blame the Tea Party than explain why the U.S. government debt is out of control and spending is out of control. This is classic defensive politics,” he added.
Ayres said Obama will not get the same bounce from the debt-limit standoff that former President Bill Clinton got from the government shutdown of the mid-90s.
“It bears no resemblance. We didn’t shut down the government,’ he said. “Republican leaders were consistent in saying the country will not default. The country will pay its bills.”
Source:
http://thehill.com/homenews/news/176799-tea-partys-heyday-may-be-coming-to-an-end-say-political-experts
The contents of this site are © 2011 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc.
By Alexander Bolton - 08/14/11 02:57 PM ET
The reign of the Tea Party may be coming to an end in Washington, according to academic political experts who say polls show a backlash against the conservative movement.
Two national polls released this month by CNN and The New York Times in conjunction with CBS News showed the Tea Party’s unfavorable rating at an all-time high.
Political scientists say the data shows a backlash of independent voters against conservative lawmakers who have taken a hard line against bipartisan compromise in Washington.
These experts say independent voters who make up the swing bloc of the electorate typically pay less attention to politics than staunch Republican and Democratic voters.
The contentious debate in Congress over the debt limit gave the Tea Party new prominence to many of these casual observers of Washington.
Reid: Tea Party will fade away in time
And many independents were not happy with what they saw over the last several weeks: a contentious debate in which conservatives threatened to force a national default; the failure of President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) to reach a grand bargain to reduce the deficit; a sharp rebuke of the political system by Standard & Poor’s causing havoc on Wall Street.
They note Obama’s public approval also dipped but observe public opinion of the Tea Party has fallen faster.
The CNN poll showed the Tea Party’s favorable/unfavorable rating grew from 37 percent in October 2010 to 51 percent in August 2011.
The Times poll, conducted Aug. 2 to 4, showed the movement’s popularity at 20 percent and unpopularity at 40 percent. The unpopularity rating was 14 points higher than in October of 2010.
“If you were paying attention to the coverage, the characterization of people resistant to raising the debt ceiling was they were Tea Party supporters or members of the Tea Party caucus,” said Charles Franklin, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin and a polling specialist. “That characterization is an element in the current apparent decline in Tea party popularity."
Franklin said surveys show most independent voters want political leaders of different parties to bridge their differences to solve the nation’s problems. They did not see that happen during the debt-limit debate, when leaders hashed out an unpopular last-minute compromise to avoid a national default.
“What we saw in all the polling, and it’s very consistent, is people favored some sort of compromise and did not know why the deadlock was there,” said Franklin. “The Tea Party, in some eyes, was blamed for the deadlock.”
Terry Madonna, director of the Center for Politics and Public Affairs at Franklin and Marshall College, said independent voters, who make up a fast-growing portion of the electorate, want more compromise.
He said independent voters generally agree with the Tea Party that federal deficits need to shrink and government should be more accountable. But these voters are turned off by brinksmanship.
“They want a government that works together, a government that gets along,” he said. “What they’re upset about is intransigence toward compromise. What came through to voters is they saw the Tea Party as a hindrance to compromise.”
A Senate Republican political strategist agreed with that assessment.
The strategist, who declined to speak on the record because he didn’t want his comments to reflect on his clients, said Tea Party lawmakers have taken a principled stand against what they view as mushy compromises but come across to independent voters as merely obstructionist.
Independent voters tended to focus on the partisan conflict and the lack of progress as the deadline to avert a national default approached. They did not appreciate the nuanced arguments of principle made by Tea Party lawmakers, specifically the only way to prevent future Congresses from running up massive deficits is to pass a balanced-budget amendment.
“The whole notion that Congress had weeks and months and nothing got done until the last minute is very infuriating. Then independents look at why that’s happening and see it’s the guys in the Tea Party,” said the GOP strategist.
Independent voters, who tend not to pay attention to politics until shortly before Election Day, followed the debt-limit standoff in Washington because it threatened to cause what senior Obama administration officials described as an economic catastrophe.
Bruce Cain, a professor of political science at the University of California and director of UC’s Washington Center, said the debt-limit debate hurt the Tea Party among independent voters.
He said the debt-limit debate “was so dramatic it had a wide audience.”
“It definitely made the Tea Party a more visible figure,” he said. “The people who pay attention the least are the independent swing voters. This is the first time they got an idea of what the Tea Party is trying to do.”
A second GOP strategist said he thought the Tea Party has appeared “strident” and uncompromising to independent voters.
He endorsed the analyses by Franklin, Madonna and Cain.
“There’s truth to that,” he said.
“The Tea Party looks at this and fully believes Washington is a waste of money and unaccountable money. Then there’s talk of a compromise and they say ‘Why do I want to run up all these debts? I want Washington to stop spending. I don’t want to raise the debt limit,’” said the strategist. “That can look strident to people whether independents or others.”
Many Tea Party voters did not see a national default as worse than continuing the present rate of deficit spending, said the strategist.
“Then there was a validation of the fact that compromise wasn’t very effective,” said the strategist, noting the debt-limit deal, which many Tea-Party lawmakers opposed, did not avert a credit downgrade.
Democratic lawmakers repeatedly made the argument that they had gone more than halfway to meet Republicans demands.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) offered a deficit-reduction plan that cut more than $2 trillion and did not raise any taxes, but Republicans argued it included a $1 trillion budget gimmick.
White House officials leaked stories to the press that Obama was willing to cut entitlement programs as part of a broader deal.
“At several points during the debt-ceiling negotiations, we purposely made a point of bending over backward to show we were willing to meet Republicans more than half way,” said a senior Democratic aide.
Early polling shows the message appears to have resonated, say academic political experts.
The notion that Republicans are not willing to compromise with Democrats on taxes was underscored Thursday during the GOP presidential debate in Iowa. Every candidate on stage said he or she would not accept a deficit-reduction deal with a 10-to-1 ratio of spending cuts to tax increases.
Dick Armey, the chairman of FreedomWorks, a group that works closely with the Tea Party, argues that Tea Party lawmakers and activists have been unfairly blamed.
He said in a recent CNN interview that Standard & Poor’s validated their concerns over the national debt when it downgraded the nation’s credit rating. He said Tea Party activists and voters simply want Congress to move aggressively to avert the economic fallout that will come if the current rate of federal spending continues.
Fairly or not, the emerging consensus is that the Tea Party has taken a hit from the debt-limit debate and its public image was further damaged by S&P’s action. Democrats have made a concerted effort to present it as a “Tea Party downgrade.”
Whit Ayres, a Republican pollster, acknowledged that Obama’s efforts to blame the Tea Party for the fractious negotiations has hurt the movement’s popularity but he argued the effect would be temporary.
“What I think has happened is the Obama administration has used the bully pulpit to demonize them and divert attention from his own irresponsible spending,” said Ayres.
“They would rather blame the Tea Party than explain why the U.S. government debt is out of control and spending is out of control. This is classic defensive politics,” he added.
Ayres said Obama will not get the same bounce from the debt-limit standoff that former President Bill Clinton got from the government shutdown of the mid-90s.
“It bears no resemblance. We didn’t shut down the government,’ he said. “Republican leaders were consistent in saying the country will not default. The country will pay its bills.”
Source:
http://thehill.com/homenews/news/176799-tea-partys-heyday-may-be-coming-to-an-end-say-political-experts
The contents of this site are © 2011 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc.
Friday, July 29, 2011
71% of national debt happened during GOP presidencies; 28% under Dem presidents
71% of national debt happened during GOP presidencies; 28% under Dem presidents
GOP Presidents Dem Presidents
$9.5 trillion $3.8 trillion
Total debt is $14.3 trillion.
$1 trillion of debt comes from before Reagan (NYT doesn't make clear who created that debt).
$13.3 trillion accumulated from Reagan to Obama.
71% of the $13.3 trillion was under GOP presidents.
28% of the $13.3 trillion was under Dem presidents.
(Source: NYT pieced together data from Treasury, OMB, Federal Reserve Bank of NY, and more)
PS And before anyone says "you have to look at who controlled Congress," I don't recall the Republicans worrying about that fact when they blamed Obama for the deficit and the national debt.
What's more, I also don't recall any Republican presidents vetoing the debt ceiling increase during their tenure. In fact, many of the biggest causes of the national debt were GOP presidential initiatives, such as:
* Reagan defense budgets and tax cuts
* George HW Bush gulf war
* George W Bush tax cuts, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
As for Democratic Presidents, you have Bill Clinton who actually put us in a surplus - which George Bush immediately blew on a... wait for it... tax cut - and Barack Obama who inherited the biggest economic downturn since the Great Depression (thus you can't blame him for that, just as I don't include the three Bush recessions or the Reagan recession in the early 80s)
GOP Presidents Dem Presidents
$9.5 trillion $3.8 trillion
Total debt is $14.3 trillion.
$1 trillion of debt comes from before Reagan (NYT doesn't make clear who created that debt).
$13.3 trillion accumulated from Reagan to Obama.
71% of the $13.3 trillion was under GOP presidents.
28% of the $13.3 trillion was under Dem presidents.
(Source: NYT pieced together data from Treasury, OMB, Federal Reserve Bank of NY, and more)
PS And before anyone says "you have to look at who controlled Congress," I don't recall the Republicans worrying about that fact when they blamed Obama for the deficit and the national debt.
What's more, I also don't recall any Republican presidents vetoing the debt ceiling increase during their tenure. In fact, many of the biggest causes of the national debt were GOP presidential initiatives, such as:
* Reagan defense budgets and tax cuts
* George HW Bush gulf war
* George W Bush tax cuts, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
As for Democratic Presidents, you have Bill Clinton who actually put us in a surplus - which George Bush immediately blew on a... wait for it... tax cut - and Barack Obama who inherited the biggest economic downturn since the Great Depression (thus you can't blame him for that, just as I don't include the three Bush recessions or the Reagan recession in the early 80s)
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
How the Deficit Got This Big
How the Deficit Got This Big
By TERESA TRITCH
With President Obama and Republican leaders calling for cutting the budget by trillions over the next 10 years, it is worth asking how we got here — from healthy surpluses at the end of the Clinton era, and the promise of future surpluses, to nine straight years of deficits, including the $1.3 trillion shortfall in 2010. The answer is largely the Bush-era tax cuts, war spending in Iraq and Afghanistan, and recessions.
Despite what antigovernment conservatives say, non-
defense discretionary spending on areas like foreign aid, education and food safety was not a driving factor in creating the deficits. In fact, such spending, accounting for only 15 percent of the budget, has been basically flat as a share of the economy for decades. Cutting it simply will not fill the deficit hole.
The first graph shows the difference between budget projections and budget reality. In 2001, President George W. Bush inherited a surplus, with projections by the Congressional Budget Office for ever-increasing surpluses, assuming continuation of the good economy and President Bill Clinton’s policies. But every year starting in 2002, the budget fell into deficit. In January 2009, just before President Obama took office, the budget office projected a $1.2 trillion deficit for 2009 and deficits in subsequent years, based on continuing Mr. Bush’s policies and the effects of recession. Mr. Obama’s policies in 2009 and 2010, including the stimulus package, added to the deficits in those years but are largely temporary.
The second graph shows that under Mr. Bush, tax cuts and war spending were the biggest policy drivers of the swing from projected surpluses to deficits from 2002 to 2009. Budget estimates that didn’t foresee the recessions in 2001 and in 2008 and 2009 also contributed to deficits. Mr. Obama’s policies, taken out to 2017, add to deficits, but not by nearly as much.
A few lessons can be drawn from the numbers. First, the Bush tax cuts have had a huge damaging effect. If all of them expired as scheduled at the end of 2012, future deficits would be cut by about half, to sustainable levels. Second, a healthy budget requires a healthy economy; recessions wreak havoc by reducing tax revenue. Government has to spur demand and create jobs in a deep downturn, even though doing so worsens the deficit in the short run. Third, spending cuts alone will not close the gap. The chronic revenue shortfalls from serial tax cuts are simply too deep to fill with spending cuts alone. Taxes have to go up.
In future decades, when rising health costs with an aging population hit the budget in full force, deficits are projected to be far deeper than they are now. Effective health care reform, and a willingness to pay more taxes, will be the biggest factors in controlling those deficits.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Remarks of President Barack Obama – As Prepared for Delivery The Country We Believe In
Remarks of President Barack Obama – As Prepared for Delivery
The Country We Believe In
The George Washington University
Washington, D.C.
April 13, 2011
As Prepared for Delivery—
Good afternoon. It’s great to be back at GW. I want you to know that one of the reasons I kept the government open was so I could be here today with all of you. I wanted to make sure you had one more excuse to skip class. You’re welcome.
Of course, what we’ve been debating here in Washington for the last few weeks will affect your lives in ways that are potentially profound. This debate over budgets and deficits is about more than just numbers on a page, more than just cutting and spending. It’s about the kind of future we want. It’s about the kind of country we believe in. And that’s what I want to talk about today.
From our first days as a nation, we have put our faith in free markets and free enterprise as the engine of America’s wealth and prosperity. More than citizens of any other country, we are rugged individualists, a self-reliant people with a healthy skepticism of too much government.
But there has always been another thread running throughout our history – a belief that we are all connected; and that there are some things we can only do together, as a nation. We believe, in the words of our first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, that through government, we should do together what we cannot do as well for ourselves. And so we’ve built a strong military to keep us secure, and public schools and universities to educate our citizens. We’ve laid down railroads and highways to facilitate travel and commerce. We’ve supported the work of scientists and researchers whose discoveries have saved lives, unleashed repeated technological revolutions, and led to countless new jobs and entire industries. Each of us has benefitted from these investments, and we are a more prosperous country as a result.
Part of this American belief that we are all connected also expresses itself in a conviction that each one of us deserves some basic measure of security. We recognize that no matter how responsibly we live our lives, hard times or bad luck, a crippling illness or a layoff, may strike any one of us. “There but for the grace of God go I,” we say to ourselves, and so we contribute to programs like Medicare and Social Security, which guarantee us health care and a measure of basic income after a lifetime of hard work; unemployment insurance, which protects us against unexpected job loss; and Medicaid, which provides care for millions of seniors in nursing homes, poor children, and those with disabilities. We are a better country because of these commitments. I’ll go further – we would not be a great country without those commitments.
For much of the last century, our nation found a way to afford these investments and priorities with the taxes paid by its citizens. As a country that values fairness, wealthier individuals have traditionally born a greater share of this burden than the middle class or those less fortunate. This is not because we begrudge those who’ve done well – we rightly celebrate their success. Rather, it is a basic reflection of our belief that those who have benefitted most from our way of life can afford to give a bit more back. Moreover, this belief has not hindered the success of those at the top of the income scale, who continue to do better and better with each passing year.
Now, at certain times – particularly during periods of war or recession – our nation has had to borrow money to pay for some of our priorities. And as most families understand, a little credit card debt isn’t going to hurt if it’s temporary.
But as far back as the 1980s, America started amassing debt at more alarming levels, and our leaders began to realize that a larger challenge was on the horizon. They knew that eventually, the Baby Boom generation would retire, which meant a much bigger portion of our citizens would be relying on programs like Medicare, Social Security, and possibly Medicaid. Like parents with young children who know they have to start saving for the college years, America had to start borrowing less and saving more to prepare for the retirement of an entire generation.
To meet this challenge, our leaders came together three times during the 1990s to reduce our nation’s deficit. They forged historic agreements that required tough decisions made by the first President Bush and President Clinton; by Democratic Congresses and a Republican Congress. All three agreements asked for shared responsibility and shared sacrifice, but they largely protected the middle class, our commitments to seniors, and key investments in our future.
As a result of these bipartisan efforts, America’s finances were in great shape by the year 2000. We went from deficit to surplus. America was actually on track to becoming completely debt-free, and we were prepared for the retirement of the Baby Boomers.
But after Democrats and Republicans committed to fiscal discipline during the 1990s, we lost our way in the decade that followed. We increased spending dramatically for two wars and an expensive prescription drug program – but we didn’t pay for any of this new spending. Instead, we made the problem worse with trillions of dollars in unpaid-for tax cuts – tax cuts that went to every millionaire and billionaire in the country; tax cuts that will force us to borrow an average of $500 billion every year over the next decade.
To give you an idea of how much damage this caused to our national checkbook, consider this: in the last decade, if we had simply found a way to pay for the tax cuts and the prescription drug benefit, our deficit would currently be at low historical levels in the coming years.
Of course, that’s not what happened. And so, by the time I took office, we once again found ourselves deeply in debt and unprepared for a Baby Boom retirement that is now starting to take place. When I took office, our projected deficit was more than $1 trillion. On top of that, we faced a terrible financial crisis and a recession that, like most recessions, led us to temporarily borrow even more. In this case, we took a series of emergency steps that saved millions of jobs, kept credit flowing, and provided working families extra money in their pockets. It was the right thing to do, but these steps were expensive, and added to our deficits in the short term.
So that’s how our fiscal challenge was created. This is how we got here. And now that our economic recovery is gaining strength, Democrats and Republicans must come together and restore the fiscal responsibility that served us so well in the 1990s. We have to live within our means, reduce our deficit, and get back on a path that will allow us to pay down our debt. And we have to do it in a way that protects the recovery, and protects the investments we need to grow, create jobs, and win the future.
Now, before I get into how we can achieve this goal, some of you might be wondering, “Why is this so important? Why does this matter to me?”
Here’s why. Even after our economy recovers, our government will still be on track to spend more money than it takes in throughout this decade and beyond. That means we’ll have to keep borrowing more from countries like China. And that means more of your tax dollars will go toward paying off the interest on all the loans we keep taking out. By the end of this decade, the interest we owe on our debt could rise to nearly $1 trillion. Just the interest payments.
Then, as the Baby Boomers start to retire and health care costs continue to rise, the situation will get even worse. By 2025, the amount of taxes we currently pay will only be enough to finance our health care programs, Social Security, and the interest we owe on our debt. That’s it. Every other national priority – education, transportation, even national security – will have to be paid for with borrowed money.
Ultimately, all this rising debt will cost us jobs and damage our economy. It will prevent us from making the investments we need to win the future. We won’t be able to afford good schools, new research, or the repair of roads and bridges – all the things that will create new jobs and businesses here in America. Businesses will be less likely to invest and open up shop in a country that seems unwilling or unable to balance its books. And if our creditors start worrying that we may be unable to pay back our debts, it could drive up interest rates for everyone who borrows money – making it harder for businesses to expand and hire, or families to take out a mortgage.
The good news is, this doesn’t have to be our future. This doesn’t have to be the country we leave to our children. We can solve this problem. We came together as Democrats and Republicans to meet this challenge before, and we can do it again.
But that starts by being honest about what’s causing our deficit. You see, most Americans tend to dislike government spending in the abstract, but they like the stuff it buys. Most of us, regardless of party affiliation, believe that we should have a strong military and a strong defense. Most Americans believe we should invest in education and medical research. Most Americans think we should protect commitments like Social Security and Medicare. And without even looking at a poll, my finely honed political skills tell me that almost no one believes they should be paying higher taxes.
Because all this spending is popular with both Republicans and Democrats alike, and because nobody wants to pay higher taxes, politicians are often eager to feed the impression that solving the problem is just a matter of eliminating waste and abuse –that tackling the deficit issue won’t require tough choices. Or they suggest that we can somehow close our entire deficit by eliminating things like foreign aid, even though foreign aid makes up about 1% of our entire budget.
So here’s the truth. Around two-thirds of our budget is spent on Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and national security. Programs like unemployment insurance, student loans, veterans’ benefits, and tax credits for working families take up another 20%. What’s left, after interest on the debt, is just 12 percent for everything else. That’s 12 percent for all of our other national priorities like education and clean energy; medical research and transportation; food safety and keeping our air and water clean.
Up until now, the cuts proposed by a lot of folks in Washington have focused almost exclusively on that 12%. But cuts to that 12% alone won’t solve the problem. So any serious plan to tackle our deficit will require us to put everything on the table, and take on excess spending wherever it exists in the budget. A serious plan doesn’t require us to balance our budget overnight – in fact, economists think that with the economy just starting to grow again, we will need a phased-in approach – but it does require tough decisions and support from leaders in both parties. And above all, it will require us to choose a vision of the America we want to see five and ten and twenty years down the road.
One vision has been championed by Republicans in the House of Representatives and embraced by several of their party’s presidential candidates. It’s a plan that aims to reduce our deficit by $4 trillion over the next ten years, and one that addresses the challenge of Medicare and Medicaid in the years after that.
Those are both worthy goals for us to achieve. But the way this plan achieves those goals would lead to a fundamentally different America than the one we’ve known throughout most of our history.
A 70% cut to clean energy. A 25% cut in education. A 30% cut in transportation. Cuts in college Pell Grants that will grow to more than $1,000 per year. That’s what they’re proposing. These aren’t the kind of cuts you make when you’re trying to get rid of some waste or find extra savings in the budget. These aren’t the kind of cuts that Republicans and Democrats on the Fiscal Commission proposed. These are the kind of cuts that tell us we can’t afford the America we believe in. And they paint a vision of our future that’s deeply pessimistic.
It’s a vision that says if our roads crumble and our bridges collapse, we can’t afford to fix them. If there are bright young Americans who have the drive and the will but not the money to go to college, we can’t afford to send them. Go to China and you’ll see businesses opening research labs and solar facilities. South Korean children are outpacing our kids in math and science. Brazil is investing billions in new infrastructure and can run half their cars not on high-priced gasoline, but biofuels. And yet, we are presented with a vision that says the United States of America – the greatest nation on Earth – can’t afford any of this.
It’s a vision that says America can’t afford to keep the promise we’ve made to care for our seniors. It says that ten years from now, if you’re a 65 year old who’s eligible for Medicare, you should have to pay nearly $6,400 more than you would today. It says instead of guaranteed health care, you will get a voucher. And if that voucher isn’t worth enough to buy insurance, tough luck – you’re on your own. Put simply, it ends Medicare as we know it.
This is a vision that says up to 50 million Americans have to lose their health insurance in order for us to reduce the deficit. And who are those 50 million Americans? Many are someone’s grandparents who wouldn’t be able afford nursing home care without Medicaid. Many are poor children. Some are middle-class families who have children with autism or Down’s syndrome. Some are kids with disabilities so severe that they require 24-hour care. These are the Americans we’d be telling to fend for themselves.
Worst of all, this is a vision that says even though America can’t afford to invest in education or clean energy; even though we can’t afford to care for seniors and poor children, we can somehow afford more than $1 trillion in new tax breaks for the wealthy. Think about it. In the last decade, the average income of the bottom 90% of all working Americans actually declined. The top 1% saw their income rise by an average of more than a quarter of a million dollars each. And that’s who needs to pay less taxes? They want to give people like me a two hundred thousand dollar tax cut that’s paid for by asking thirty three seniors to each pay six thousand dollars more in health costs? That’s not right, and it’s not going to happen as long as I’m President.
The fact is, their vision is less about reducing the deficit than it is about changing the basic social compact in America. As Ronald Reagan’s own budget director said, there’s nothing “serious” or “courageous” about this plan. There’s nothing serious about a plan that claims to reduce the deficit by spending a trillion dollars on tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. There’s nothing courageous about asking for sacrifice from those who can least afford it and don’t have any clout on Capitol Hill. And this is not a vision of the America I know.
The America I know is generous and compassionate; a land of opportunity and optimism. We take responsibility for ourselves and each other; for the country we want and the future we share. We are the nation that built a railroad across a continent and brought light to communities shrouded in darkness. We sent a generation to college on the GI bill and saved millions of seniors from poverty with Social Security and Medicare. We have led the world in scientific research and technological breakthroughs that have transformed millions of lives.
This is who we are. This is the America I know. We don’t have to choose between a future of spiraling debt and one where we forfeit investments in our people and our country. To meet our fiscal challenge, we will need to make reforms. We will all need to make sacrifices. But we do not have to sacrifice the America we believe in. And as long as I’m President, we won’t.
Today, I’m proposing a more balanced approach to achieve $4 trillion in deficit reduction over twelve years. It’s an approach that borrows from the recommendations of the bipartisan Fiscal Commission I appointed last year, and builds on the roughly $1 trillion in deficit reduction I already proposed in my 2012 budget. It’s an approach that puts every kind of spending on the table, but one that protects the middle-class, our promise to seniors, and our investments in the future.
The first step in our approach is to keep annual domestic spending low by building on the savings that both parties agreed to last week – a step that will save us about $750 billion over twelve years. We will make the tough cuts necessary to achieve these savings, including in programs I care about, but I will not sacrifice the core investments we need to grow and create jobs. We’ll invest in medical research and clean energy technology. We’ll invest in new roads and airports and broadband access. We will invest in education and job training. We will do what we need to compete and we will win the future.
The second step in our approach is to find additional savings in our defense budget. As Commander-in-Chief, I have no greater responsibility than protecting our national security, and I will never accept cuts that compromise our ability to defend our homeland or America’s interests around the world. But as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Mullen, has said, the greatest long-term threat to America’s national security is America’s debt.
Just as we must find more savings in domestic programs, we must do the same in defense. Over the last two years, Secretary Gates has courageously taken on wasteful spending, saving $400 billion in current and future spending. I believe we can do that again. We need to not only eliminate waste and improve efficiency and effectiveness, but conduct a fundamental review of America’s missions, capabilities, and our role in a changing world. I intend to work with Secretary Gates and the Joint Chiefs on this review, and I will make specific decisions about spending after it’s complete.
The third step in our approach is to further reduce health care spending in our budget. Here, the difference with the House Republican plan could not be clearer: their plan lowers the government’s health care bills by asking seniors and poor families to pay them instead. Our approach lowers the government’s health care bills by reducing the cost of health care itself.
Already, the reforms we passed in the health care law will reduce our deficit by $1 trillion. My approach would build on these reforms. We will reduce wasteful subsidies and erroneous payments. We will cut spending on prescription drugs by using Medicare’s purchasing power to drive greater efficiency and speed generic brands of medicine onto the market. We will work with governors of both parties to demand more efficiency and accountability from Medicaid. We will change the way we pay for health care – not by procedure or the number of days spent in a hospital, but with new incentives for doctors and hospitals to prevent injuries and improve results. And we will slow the growth of Medicare costs by strengthening an independent commission of doctors, nurses, medical experts and consumers who will look at all the evidence and recommend the best ways to reduce unnecessary spending while protecting access to the services seniors need.
Now, we believe the reforms we’ve proposed to strengthen Medicare and Medicaid will enable us to keep these commitments to our citizens while saving us $500 billion by 2023, and an additional one trillion dollars in the decade after that. And if we’re wrong, and Medicare costs rise faster than we expect, this approach will give the independent commission the authority to make additional savings by further improving Medicare.
But let me be absolutely clear: I will preserve these health care programs as a promise we make to each other in this society. I will not allow Medicare to become a voucher program that leaves seniors at the mercy of the insurance industry, with a shrinking benefit to pay for rising costs. I will not tell families with children who have disabilities that they have to fend for themselves. We will reform these programs, but we will not abandon the fundamental commitment this country has kept for generations.
That includes, by the way, our commitment to Social Security. While Social Security is not the cause of our deficit, it faces real long-term challenges in a country that is growing older. As I said in the State of the Union, both parties should work together now to strengthen Social Security for future generations. But we must do it without putting at risk current retirees, the most vulnerable, or people with disabilities; without slashing benefits for future generations; and without subjecting Americans’ guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock market.
The fourth step in our approach is to reduce spending in the tax code. In December, I agreed to extend the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans because it was the only way I could prevent a tax hike on middle-class Americans. But we cannot afford $1 trillion worth of tax cuts for every millionaire and billionaire in our society. And I refuse to renew them again.
Beyond that, the tax code is also loaded up with spending on things like itemized deductions. And while I agree with the goals of many of these deductions, like homeownership or charitable giving, we cannot ignore the fact that they provide millionaires an average tax break of $75,000 while doing nothing for the typical middle-class family that doesn’t itemize.
My budget calls for limiting itemized deductions for the wealthiest 2% of Americans – a reform that would reduce the deficit by $320 billion over ten years. But to reduce the deficit, I believe we should go further. That’s why I’m calling on Congress to reform our individual tax code so that it is fair and simple – so that the amount of taxes you pay isn’t determined by what kind of accountant you can afford. I believe reform should protect the middle class, promote economic growth, and build on the Fiscal Commission’s model of reducing tax expenditures so that there is enough savings to both lower rates and lower the deficit. And as I called for in the State of the Union, we should reform our corporate tax code as well, to make our businesses and our economy more competitive.
This is my approach to reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over the next twelve years. It’s an approach that achieves about $2 trillion in spending cuts across the budget. It will lower our interest payments on the debt by $1 trillion. It calls for tax reform to cut about $1 trillion in spending from the tax code. And it achieves these goals while protecting the middle class, our commitment to seniors, and our investments in the future.
In the coming years, if the recovery speeds up and our economy grows faster than our current projections, we can make even greater progress than I have pledged here. But just to hold Washington – and me – accountable and make sure that the debt burden continues to decline, my plan includes a debt failsafe. If, by 2014, our debt is not projected to fall as a share of the economy – or if Congress has failed to act – my plan will require us to come together and make up the additional savings with more spending cuts and more spending reductions in the tax code. That should be an incentive for us to act boldly now, instead of kicking our problems further down the road.
So this is our vision for America – a vision where we live within our means while still investing in our future; where everyone makes sacrifices but no one bears all the burden; where we provide a basic measure of security for our citizens and rising opportunity for our children.
Of course, there will be those who disagree with my approach. Some will argue we shouldn’t even consider raising taxes, even if only on the wealthiest Americans. It’s just an article of faith for them. I say that at a time when the tax burden on the wealthy is at its lowest level in half a century, the most fortunate among us can afford to pay a little more. I don’t need another tax cut. Warren Buffett doesn’t need another tax cut. Not if we have to pay for it by making seniors pay more for Medicare. Or by cutting kids from Head Start. Or by taking away college scholarships that I wouldn’t be here without. That some of you wouldn’t be here without. And I believe that most wealthy Americans would agree with me. They want to give back to the country that’s done so much for them. Washington just hasn’t asked them to.
Others will say that we shouldn’t even talk about cutting spending until the economy is fully recovered. I’m sympathetic to this view, which is one of the reasons I supported the payroll tax cuts we passed in December. It’s also why we have to use a scalpel and not a machete to reduce the deficit – so that we can keep making the investments that create jobs. But doing nothing on the deficit is just not an option. Our debt has grown so large that we could do real damage to the economy if we don’t begin a process now to get our fiscal house in order.
Finally, there are those who believe we shouldn’t make any reforms to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security out of a fear that any talk of change to these programs will usher in the sort of radical steps that House Republicans have proposed. I understand these fears. But I guarantee that if we don’t make any changes at all, we won’t be able to keep our commitments to a retiring generation that will live longer and face higher health care costs than those who came before.
Indeed, to those in my own party, I say that if we truly believe in a progressive vision of our society, we have the obligation to prove that we can afford our commitments. If we believe that government can make a difference in people’s lives, we have the obligation to prove that it works – by making government smarter, leaner and more effective.
Of course, there are those who will simply say that there’s no way we can come together and agree on a solution to this challenge. They’ll say the politics of this city are just too broken; that the choices are just too hard; that the parties are just too far apart. And after a few years in this job, I certainly have some sympathy for this view.
But I also know that we’ve come together and met big challenges before. Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neill came together to save Social Security for future generations. The first President Bush and a Democratic Congress came together to reduce the deficit. President Clinton and a Republican Congress battled each other ferociously and still found a way to balance the budget. In the last few months, both parties have come together to pass historic tax relief and spending cuts. And I know there are Republicans and Democrats in Congress who want to see a balanced approach to deficit reduction.
I believe we can and must come together again. This morning, I met with Democratic and Republican leaders in Congress to discuss the approach I laid out today. And in early May, the Vice President will begin regular meetings with leaders in both parties with the aim of reaching a final agreement on a plan to reduce the deficit by the end of June.
I don’t expect the details in any final agreement to look exactly like the approach I laid out today. I’m eager to hear other ideas from all ends of the political spectrum. And though I’m sure the criticism of what I’ve said here today will be fierce in some quarters, and my critique of the House Republican approach has been strong, Americans deserve and will demand that we all bridge our differences, and find common ground.
This larger debate we’re having, about the size and role of government, has been with us since our founding days. And during moments of great challenge and change, like the one we’re living through now, the debate gets sharper and more vigorous. That’s a good thing. As a country that prizes both our individual freedom and our obligations to one another, this is one of the most important debates we can have.
But no matter what we argue or where we stand, we’ve always held certain beliefs as Americans. We believe that in order to preserve our own freedoms and pursue our own happiness, we can’t just think about ourselves. We have to think about the country that made those liberties possible. We have to think about our fellow citizens with whom we share a community. And we have to think about what’s required to preserve the American Dream for future generations.
This sense of responsibility – to each other and to our country – this isn’t a partisan feeling. It isn’t a Democratic or Republican idea. It’s patriotism.
The other day I received a letter from a man in Florida. He started off by telling me he didn’t vote for me and he hasn’t always agreed with me. But even though he’s worried about our economy and the state of our politics, he said,
“I still believe. I believe in that great country that my grandfather told me about. I believe that somewhere lost in this quagmire of petty bickering on every news station, the ‘American Dream’ is still alive…
We need to use our dollars here rebuilding, refurbishing and restoring all that our ancestors struggled to create and maintain…We as a people must do this together, no matter the color of the state one comes from or the side of the aisle one might sit on.”
I still believe as well. And I know that if we can come together, and uphold our responsibilities to one another and to this larger enterprise that is America, we will keep the dream of our founding alive in our time, and pass on to our children the country we believe in. Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.
The Country We Believe In
The George Washington University
Washington, D.C.
April 13, 2011
As Prepared for Delivery—
Good afternoon. It’s great to be back at GW. I want you to know that one of the reasons I kept the government open was so I could be here today with all of you. I wanted to make sure you had one more excuse to skip class. You’re welcome.
Of course, what we’ve been debating here in Washington for the last few weeks will affect your lives in ways that are potentially profound. This debate over budgets and deficits is about more than just numbers on a page, more than just cutting and spending. It’s about the kind of future we want. It’s about the kind of country we believe in. And that’s what I want to talk about today.
From our first days as a nation, we have put our faith in free markets and free enterprise as the engine of America’s wealth and prosperity. More than citizens of any other country, we are rugged individualists, a self-reliant people with a healthy skepticism of too much government.
But there has always been another thread running throughout our history – a belief that we are all connected; and that there are some things we can only do together, as a nation. We believe, in the words of our first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, that through government, we should do together what we cannot do as well for ourselves. And so we’ve built a strong military to keep us secure, and public schools and universities to educate our citizens. We’ve laid down railroads and highways to facilitate travel and commerce. We’ve supported the work of scientists and researchers whose discoveries have saved lives, unleashed repeated technological revolutions, and led to countless new jobs and entire industries. Each of us has benefitted from these investments, and we are a more prosperous country as a result.
Part of this American belief that we are all connected also expresses itself in a conviction that each one of us deserves some basic measure of security. We recognize that no matter how responsibly we live our lives, hard times or bad luck, a crippling illness or a layoff, may strike any one of us. “There but for the grace of God go I,” we say to ourselves, and so we contribute to programs like Medicare and Social Security, which guarantee us health care and a measure of basic income after a lifetime of hard work; unemployment insurance, which protects us against unexpected job loss; and Medicaid, which provides care for millions of seniors in nursing homes, poor children, and those with disabilities. We are a better country because of these commitments. I’ll go further – we would not be a great country without those commitments.
For much of the last century, our nation found a way to afford these investments and priorities with the taxes paid by its citizens. As a country that values fairness, wealthier individuals have traditionally born a greater share of this burden than the middle class or those less fortunate. This is not because we begrudge those who’ve done well – we rightly celebrate their success. Rather, it is a basic reflection of our belief that those who have benefitted most from our way of life can afford to give a bit more back. Moreover, this belief has not hindered the success of those at the top of the income scale, who continue to do better and better with each passing year.
Now, at certain times – particularly during periods of war or recession – our nation has had to borrow money to pay for some of our priorities. And as most families understand, a little credit card debt isn’t going to hurt if it’s temporary.
But as far back as the 1980s, America started amassing debt at more alarming levels, and our leaders began to realize that a larger challenge was on the horizon. They knew that eventually, the Baby Boom generation would retire, which meant a much bigger portion of our citizens would be relying on programs like Medicare, Social Security, and possibly Medicaid. Like parents with young children who know they have to start saving for the college years, America had to start borrowing less and saving more to prepare for the retirement of an entire generation.
To meet this challenge, our leaders came together three times during the 1990s to reduce our nation’s deficit. They forged historic agreements that required tough decisions made by the first President Bush and President Clinton; by Democratic Congresses and a Republican Congress. All three agreements asked for shared responsibility and shared sacrifice, but they largely protected the middle class, our commitments to seniors, and key investments in our future.
As a result of these bipartisan efforts, America’s finances were in great shape by the year 2000. We went from deficit to surplus. America was actually on track to becoming completely debt-free, and we were prepared for the retirement of the Baby Boomers.
But after Democrats and Republicans committed to fiscal discipline during the 1990s, we lost our way in the decade that followed. We increased spending dramatically for two wars and an expensive prescription drug program – but we didn’t pay for any of this new spending. Instead, we made the problem worse with trillions of dollars in unpaid-for tax cuts – tax cuts that went to every millionaire and billionaire in the country; tax cuts that will force us to borrow an average of $500 billion every year over the next decade.
To give you an idea of how much damage this caused to our national checkbook, consider this: in the last decade, if we had simply found a way to pay for the tax cuts and the prescription drug benefit, our deficit would currently be at low historical levels in the coming years.
Of course, that’s not what happened. And so, by the time I took office, we once again found ourselves deeply in debt and unprepared for a Baby Boom retirement that is now starting to take place. When I took office, our projected deficit was more than $1 trillion. On top of that, we faced a terrible financial crisis and a recession that, like most recessions, led us to temporarily borrow even more. In this case, we took a series of emergency steps that saved millions of jobs, kept credit flowing, and provided working families extra money in their pockets. It was the right thing to do, but these steps were expensive, and added to our deficits in the short term.
So that’s how our fiscal challenge was created. This is how we got here. And now that our economic recovery is gaining strength, Democrats and Republicans must come together and restore the fiscal responsibility that served us so well in the 1990s. We have to live within our means, reduce our deficit, and get back on a path that will allow us to pay down our debt. And we have to do it in a way that protects the recovery, and protects the investments we need to grow, create jobs, and win the future.
Now, before I get into how we can achieve this goal, some of you might be wondering, “Why is this so important? Why does this matter to me?”
Here’s why. Even after our economy recovers, our government will still be on track to spend more money than it takes in throughout this decade and beyond. That means we’ll have to keep borrowing more from countries like China. And that means more of your tax dollars will go toward paying off the interest on all the loans we keep taking out. By the end of this decade, the interest we owe on our debt could rise to nearly $1 trillion. Just the interest payments.
Then, as the Baby Boomers start to retire and health care costs continue to rise, the situation will get even worse. By 2025, the amount of taxes we currently pay will only be enough to finance our health care programs, Social Security, and the interest we owe on our debt. That’s it. Every other national priority – education, transportation, even national security – will have to be paid for with borrowed money.
Ultimately, all this rising debt will cost us jobs and damage our economy. It will prevent us from making the investments we need to win the future. We won’t be able to afford good schools, new research, or the repair of roads and bridges – all the things that will create new jobs and businesses here in America. Businesses will be less likely to invest and open up shop in a country that seems unwilling or unable to balance its books. And if our creditors start worrying that we may be unable to pay back our debts, it could drive up interest rates for everyone who borrows money – making it harder for businesses to expand and hire, or families to take out a mortgage.
The good news is, this doesn’t have to be our future. This doesn’t have to be the country we leave to our children. We can solve this problem. We came together as Democrats and Republicans to meet this challenge before, and we can do it again.
But that starts by being honest about what’s causing our deficit. You see, most Americans tend to dislike government spending in the abstract, but they like the stuff it buys. Most of us, regardless of party affiliation, believe that we should have a strong military and a strong defense. Most Americans believe we should invest in education and medical research. Most Americans think we should protect commitments like Social Security and Medicare. And without even looking at a poll, my finely honed political skills tell me that almost no one believes they should be paying higher taxes.
Because all this spending is popular with both Republicans and Democrats alike, and because nobody wants to pay higher taxes, politicians are often eager to feed the impression that solving the problem is just a matter of eliminating waste and abuse –that tackling the deficit issue won’t require tough choices. Or they suggest that we can somehow close our entire deficit by eliminating things like foreign aid, even though foreign aid makes up about 1% of our entire budget.
So here’s the truth. Around two-thirds of our budget is spent on Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and national security. Programs like unemployment insurance, student loans, veterans’ benefits, and tax credits for working families take up another 20%. What’s left, after interest on the debt, is just 12 percent for everything else. That’s 12 percent for all of our other national priorities like education and clean energy; medical research and transportation; food safety and keeping our air and water clean.
Up until now, the cuts proposed by a lot of folks in Washington have focused almost exclusively on that 12%. But cuts to that 12% alone won’t solve the problem. So any serious plan to tackle our deficit will require us to put everything on the table, and take on excess spending wherever it exists in the budget. A serious plan doesn’t require us to balance our budget overnight – in fact, economists think that with the economy just starting to grow again, we will need a phased-in approach – but it does require tough decisions and support from leaders in both parties. And above all, it will require us to choose a vision of the America we want to see five and ten and twenty years down the road.
One vision has been championed by Republicans in the House of Representatives and embraced by several of their party’s presidential candidates. It’s a plan that aims to reduce our deficit by $4 trillion over the next ten years, and one that addresses the challenge of Medicare and Medicaid in the years after that.
Those are both worthy goals for us to achieve. But the way this plan achieves those goals would lead to a fundamentally different America than the one we’ve known throughout most of our history.
A 70% cut to clean energy. A 25% cut in education. A 30% cut in transportation. Cuts in college Pell Grants that will grow to more than $1,000 per year. That’s what they’re proposing. These aren’t the kind of cuts you make when you’re trying to get rid of some waste or find extra savings in the budget. These aren’t the kind of cuts that Republicans and Democrats on the Fiscal Commission proposed. These are the kind of cuts that tell us we can’t afford the America we believe in. And they paint a vision of our future that’s deeply pessimistic.
It’s a vision that says if our roads crumble and our bridges collapse, we can’t afford to fix them. If there are bright young Americans who have the drive and the will but not the money to go to college, we can’t afford to send them. Go to China and you’ll see businesses opening research labs and solar facilities. South Korean children are outpacing our kids in math and science. Brazil is investing billions in new infrastructure and can run half their cars not on high-priced gasoline, but biofuels. And yet, we are presented with a vision that says the United States of America – the greatest nation on Earth – can’t afford any of this.
It’s a vision that says America can’t afford to keep the promise we’ve made to care for our seniors. It says that ten years from now, if you’re a 65 year old who’s eligible for Medicare, you should have to pay nearly $6,400 more than you would today. It says instead of guaranteed health care, you will get a voucher. And if that voucher isn’t worth enough to buy insurance, tough luck – you’re on your own. Put simply, it ends Medicare as we know it.
This is a vision that says up to 50 million Americans have to lose their health insurance in order for us to reduce the deficit. And who are those 50 million Americans? Many are someone’s grandparents who wouldn’t be able afford nursing home care without Medicaid. Many are poor children. Some are middle-class families who have children with autism or Down’s syndrome. Some are kids with disabilities so severe that they require 24-hour care. These are the Americans we’d be telling to fend for themselves.
Worst of all, this is a vision that says even though America can’t afford to invest in education or clean energy; even though we can’t afford to care for seniors and poor children, we can somehow afford more than $1 trillion in new tax breaks for the wealthy. Think about it. In the last decade, the average income of the bottom 90% of all working Americans actually declined. The top 1% saw their income rise by an average of more than a quarter of a million dollars each. And that’s who needs to pay less taxes? They want to give people like me a two hundred thousand dollar tax cut that’s paid for by asking thirty three seniors to each pay six thousand dollars more in health costs? That’s not right, and it’s not going to happen as long as I’m President.
The fact is, their vision is less about reducing the deficit than it is about changing the basic social compact in America. As Ronald Reagan’s own budget director said, there’s nothing “serious” or “courageous” about this plan. There’s nothing serious about a plan that claims to reduce the deficit by spending a trillion dollars on tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. There’s nothing courageous about asking for sacrifice from those who can least afford it and don’t have any clout on Capitol Hill. And this is not a vision of the America I know.
The America I know is generous and compassionate; a land of opportunity and optimism. We take responsibility for ourselves and each other; for the country we want and the future we share. We are the nation that built a railroad across a continent and brought light to communities shrouded in darkness. We sent a generation to college on the GI bill and saved millions of seniors from poverty with Social Security and Medicare. We have led the world in scientific research and technological breakthroughs that have transformed millions of lives.
This is who we are. This is the America I know. We don’t have to choose between a future of spiraling debt and one where we forfeit investments in our people and our country. To meet our fiscal challenge, we will need to make reforms. We will all need to make sacrifices. But we do not have to sacrifice the America we believe in. And as long as I’m President, we won’t.
Today, I’m proposing a more balanced approach to achieve $4 trillion in deficit reduction over twelve years. It’s an approach that borrows from the recommendations of the bipartisan Fiscal Commission I appointed last year, and builds on the roughly $1 trillion in deficit reduction I already proposed in my 2012 budget. It’s an approach that puts every kind of spending on the table, but one that protects the middle-class, our promise to seniors, and our investments in the future.
The first step in our approach is to keep annual domestic spending low by building on the savings that both parties agreed to last week – a step that will save us about $750 billion over twelve years. We will make the tough cuts necessary to achieve these savings, including in programs I care about, but I will not sacrifice the core investments we need to grow and create jobs. We’ll invest in medical research and clean energy technology. We’ll invest in new roads and airports and broadband access. We will invest in education and job training. We will do what we need to compete and we will win the future.
The second step in our approach is to find additional savings in our defense budget. As Commander-in-Chief, I have no greater responsibility than protecting our national security, and I will never accept cuts that compromise our ability to defend our homeland or America’s interests around the world. But as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Mullen, has said, the greatest long-term threat to America’s national security is America’s debt.
Just as we must find more savings in domestic programs, we must do the same in defense. Over the last two years, Secretary Gates has courageously taken on wasteful spending, saving $400 billion in current and future spending. I believe we can do that again. We need to not only eliminate waste and improve efficiency and effectiveness, but conduct a fundamental review of America’s missions, capabilities, and our role in a changing world. I intend to work with Secretary Gates and the Joint Chiefs on this review, and I will make specific decisions about spending after it’s complete.
The third step in our approach is to further reduce health care spending in our budget. Here, the difference with the House Republican plan could not be clearer: their plan lowers the government’s health care bills by asking seniors and poor families to pay them instead. Our approach lowers the government’s health care bills by reducing the cost of health care itself.
Already, the reforms we passed in the health care law will reduce our deficit by $1 trillion. My approach would build on these reforms. We will reduce wasteful subsidies and erroneous payments. We will cut spending on prescription drugs by using Medicare’s purchasing power to drive greater efficiency and speed generic brands of medicine onto the market. We will work with governors of both parties to demand more efficiency and accountability from Medicaid. We will change the way we pay for health care – not by procedure or the number of days spent in a hospital, but with new incentives for doctors and hospitals to prevent injuries and improve results. And we will slow the growth of Medicare costs by strengthening an independent commission of doctors, nurses, medical experts and consumers who will look at all the evidence and recommend the best ways to reduce unnecessary spending while protecting access to the services seniors need.
Now, we believe the reforms we’ve proposed to strengthen Medicare and Medicaid will enable us to keep these commitments to our citizens while saving us $500 billion by 2023, and an additional one trillion dollars in the decade after that. And if we’re wrong, and Medicare costs rise faster than we expect, this approach will give the independent commission the authority to make additional savings by further improving Medicare.
But let me be absolutely clear: I will preserve these health care programs as a promise we make to each other in this society. I will not allow Medicare to become a voucher program that leaves seniors at the mercy of the insurance industry, with a shrinking benefit to pay for rising costs. I will not tell families with children who have disabilities that they have to fend for themselves. We will reform these programs, but we will not abandon the fundamental commitment this country has kept for generations.
That includes, by the way, our commitment to Social Security. While Social Security is not the cause of our deficit, it faces real long-term challenges in a country that is growing older. As I said in the State of the Union, both parties should work together now to strengthen Social Security for future generations. But we must do it without putting at risk current retirees, the most vulnerable, or people with disabilities; without slashing benefits for future generations; and without subjecting Americans’ guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock market.
The fourth step in our approach is to reduce spending in the tax code. In December, I agreed to extend the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans because it was the only way I could prevent a tax hike on middle-class Americans. But we cannot afford $1 trillion worth of tax cuts for every millionaire and billionaire in our society. And I refuse to renew them again.
Beyond that, the tax code is also loaded up with spending on things like itemized deductions. And while I agree with the goals of many of these deductions, like homeownership or charitable giving, we cannot ignore the fact that they provide millionaires an average tax break of $75,000 while doing nothing for the typical middle-class family that doesn’t itemize.
My budget calls for limiting itemized deductions for the wealthiest 2% of Americans – a reform that would reduce the deficit by $320 billion over ten years. But to reduce the deficit, I believe we should go further. That’s why I’m calling on Congress to reform our individual tax code so that it is fair and simple – so that the amount of taxes you pay isn’t determined by what kind of accountant you can afford. I believe reform should protect the middle class, promote economic growth, and build on the Fiscal Commission’s model of reducing tax expenditures so that there is enough savings to both lower rates and lower the deficit. And as I called for in the State of the Union, we should reform our corporate tax code as well, to make our businesses and our economy more competitive.
This is my approach to reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over the next twelve years. It’s an approach that achieves about $2 trillion in spending cuts across the budget. It will lower our interest payments on the debt by $1 trillion. It calls for tax reform to cut about $1 trillion in spending from the tax code. And it achieves these goals while protecting the middle class, our commitment to seniors, and our investments in the future.
In the coming years, if the recovery speeds up and our economy grows faster than our current projections, we can make even greater progress than I have pledged here. But just to hold Washington – and me – accountable and make sure that the debt burden continues to decline, my plan includes a debt failsafe. If, by 2014, our debt is not projected to fall as a share of the economy – or if Congress has failed to act – my plan will require us to come together and make up the additional savings with more spending cuts and more spending reductions in the tax code. That should be an incentive for us to act boldly now, instead of kicking our problems further down the road.
So this is our vision for America – a vision where we live within our means while still investing in our future; where everyone makes sacrifices but no one bears all the burden; where we provide a basic measure of security for our citizens and rising opportunity for our children.
Of course, there will be those who disagree with my approach. Some will argue we shouldn’t even consider raising taxes, even if only on the wealthiest Americans. It’s just an article of faith for them. I say that at a time when the tax burden on the wealthy is at its lowest level in half a century, the most fortunate among us can afford to pay a little more. I don’t need another tax cut. Warren Buffett doesn’t need another tax cut. Not if we have to pay for it by making seniors pay more for Medicare. Or by cutting kids from Head Start. Or by taking away college scholarships that I wouldn’t be here without. That some of you wouldn’t be here without. And I believe that most wealthy Americans would agree with me. They want to give back to the country that’s done so much for them. Washington just hasn’t asked them to.
Others will say that we shouldn’t even talk about cutting spending until the economy is fully recovered. I’m sympathetic to this view, which is one of the reasons I supported the payroll tax cuts we passed in December. It’s also why we have to use a scalpel and not a machete to reduce the deficit – so that we can keep making the investments that create jobs. But doing nothing on the deficit is just not an option. Our debt has grown so large that we could do real damage to the economy if we don’t begin a process now to get our fiscal house in order.
Finally, there are those who believe we shouldn’t make any reforms to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security out of a fear that any talk of change to these programs will usher in the sort of radical steps that House Republicans have proposed. I understand these fears. But I guarantee that if we don’t make any changes at all, we won’t be able to keep our commitments to a retiring generation that will live longer and face higher health care costs than those who came before.
Indeed, to those in my own party, I say that if we truly believe in a progressive vision of our society, we have the obligation to prove that we can afford our commitments. If we believe that government can make a difference in people’s lives, we have the obligation to prove that it works – by making government smarter, leaner and more effective.
Of course, there are those who will simply say that there’s no way we can come together and agree on a solution to this challenge. They’ll say the politics of this city are just too broken; that the choices are just too hard; that the parties are just too far apart. And after a few years in this job, I certainly have some sympathy for this view.
But I also know that we’ve come together and met big challenges before. Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neill came together to save Social Security for future generations. The first President Bush and a Democratic Congress came together to reduce the deficit. President Clinton and a Republican Congress battled each other ferociously and still found a way to balance the budget. In the last few months, both parties have come together to pass historic tax relief and spending cuts. And I know there are Republicans and Democrats in Congress who want to see a balanced approach to deficit reduction.
I believe we can and must come together again. This morning, I met with Democratic and Republican leaders in Congress to discuss the approach I laid out today. And in early May, the Vice President will begin regular meetings with leaders in both parties with the aim of reaching a final agreement on a plan to reduce the deficit by the end of June.
I don’t expect the details in any final agreement to look exactly like the approach I laid out today. I’m eager to hear other ideas from all ends of the political spectrum. And though I’m sure the criticism of what I’ve said here today will be fierce in some quarters, and my critique of the House Republican approach has been strong, Americans deserve and will demand that we all bridge our differences, and find common ground.
This larger debate we’re having, about the size and role of government, has been with us since our founding days. And during moments of great challenge and change, like the one we’re living through now, the debate gets sharper and more vigorous. That’s a good thing. As a country that prizes both our individual freedom and our obligations to one another, this is one of the most important debates we can have.
But no matter what we argue or where we stand, we’ve always held certain beliefs as Americans. We believe that in order to preserve our own freedoms and pursue our own happiness, we can’t just think about ourselves. We have to think about the country that made those liberties possible. We have to think about our fellow citizens with whom we share a community. And we have to think about what’s required to preserve the American Dream for future generations.
This sense of responsibility – to each other and to our country – this isn’t a partisan feeling. It isn’t a Democratic or Republican idea. It’s patriotism.
The other day I received a letter from a man in Florida. He started off by telling me he didn’t vote for me and he hasn’t always agreed with me. But even though he’s worried about our economy and the state of our politics, he said,
“I still believe. I believe in that great country that my grandfather told me about. I believe that somewhere lost in this quagmire of petty bickering on every news station, the ‘American Dream’ is still alive…
We need to use our dollars here rebuilding, refurbishing and restoring all that our ancestors struggled to create and maintain…We as a people must do this together, no matter the color of the state one comes from or the side of the aisle one might sit on.”
I still believe as well. And I know that if we can come together, and uphold our responsibilities to one another and to this larger enterprise that is America, we will keep the dream of our founding alive in our time, and pass on to our children the country we believe in. Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)