Awesome workout routine celebrated

Ryan’s plan has become the latest front in Washington’s budget wars, following the tussle over the 2011 budget that ended in a bipartisan deal that included $38.5 billion in spending cuts. This current round—which precedes the coming fight over raising the national debt ceiling—is more perilous for the Republicans, for the Ryan proposal presents the Republicans in all their Republicaness, as the party that wants to end Medicaid and Medicare as these programs currently exist (that is, wipe out the guarantee of medical care for the poor and for the elderly), while tossing a trillion dollars in tax cut bonuses to well-to-do Americans. (Only four House GOPers voted against the measure.)

With this vote, the GOP is embracing the caricature of itself: telling the poor they’ll have to do with less, throwing granny out of the hospital bed, and easing life for gazillionaires. Of course, the party claims its proposed “reforms”—doling out block grants to the states to cover some of the costs of health care for the poor and employing a privatized voucher system for the elderly that won’t provide any guarantee of medical services—will strengthen Medicaid and Medicare. And it’s again wheeling out its argument that restoring tax rates from the booming 1990s will impede economic growth. But essentially the Republican Party is resorting to the same-old same-old: market fetishism and trickle-down economics—and accusing President Barack Obama and others who link the GOP’s Medicare and Medicaid cuts to tax breaks for billionaires of engaging in “class warfare.” (Apparently, it is not class warfare to squeeze the poor and the elderly to create fiscal room for tax cuts for the wealthy.)

The obvious political question is: have the Rs gone too far?

During the 2011 budget dust-up, the GOP message was simple (perhaps simplistic): cut spending to save the economy. This may not make sense, for slashing spending can reduce demand, which is not likely to boost an already sluggish economy. But it sure sounds reasonable. After all, if individual households have to tighten their belts in hard times, shouldn’t the government? During this debate, there was not much focus on the particular targets of the cuts. The back-and-forth mainly concerned big numbers: $61 billion or $32 billion or $38.5 billion. As public opinion polls demonstrate consistently, cutting spending is far more appealing in the abstract. With much of this skirmish centered on abstractions, the GOP had an advantage.

Round 2 is not so abstract. The main targets are front and center, and when it comes to Medicare, voters really care.

The Republicans seem to know this. Last year, they ran attack ads against Democrats assailing the Ds for supporting Obama’s health care initiative, which included hundreds of billions of dollars in Medicare savings that the GOPs blasted as “cuts” that would threaten the program. Yet now they are proposing a far more radical change that would eviscerate Medicare’s foundational premise: guaranteed service. In Ryan’s Brave New World, future seniors (people who are now below the age of 55) would be handed vouchers they can use to obtain insurance, which may or may not cover all the health care they need, and they would have to pay thousands of dollars more per year to cover their medical bills.

This ought to concentrate the minds of voters—including those of an independent stripe—who are looking forward to guaranteed Medicare health care for themselves or their parents. No doubt, most of the people who are near that 55-cut-off have seen Medicare deliver affordable and decent care to their parents, friends, and colleagues. The system works, and these soon-to-be seniors will want the same deal for themselves. Their kids, facing an uncertain economic period and a weak job market, should also desire a robust Medicare guarantee for their nearing-retirement parents. Consequently, Ryan’s plan to limit and privatize Medicare—which is based on the iffy notion that competition among private insurers for customers who tend to need expensive services will drive down costs—probably won’t sound like a good bargain to many.

But Republicans don’t seem to be able to help themselves. Filled to the brim with an antipathy toward government and a fixation with free-market cant, they are rushing forward with Ryan on to a political minefield, congratulating themselves on having the courage to take this course. After having a difficult time contending with the GOP’s never-ending chants for government spending cuts, Obama finally has a counter-weight: the Republicans want to demolish an essential and effective government program that you or a parent might need to lower taxes for the swells. Obama is still battling on GOP turf, for the most pressing issue remains what to cut (instead of say, what programs should be expanded to create jobs as soon as possible). Yet he now has an argument almost as easy to convey and grasp as the GOP’s cut-cut-cut mantra.

In his speech on Wednesday, Obama attempted to define the current face-off as a difference of vision and values. Republicans, he said, want to pull the plug on communal commitments and rely on markets and individual resourcefulness. He and the Democrats, he noted, believe in banding together, via government when necessary, to enhance the general well-being of the nation. Turning a mud-wrestle over billions here and billions there into such a high-minded debate is a heavy lift. With Ryan’s budget in the spotlight, Obama has a shot at this.

Perhaps in the long run—meaning the time between now and the elections in November 2012—popular dissatisfaction with the economy will trump everything else, and Obama and the Democrats will once again feel the wrath of pissed-off voters. But the Ryan plan offers a possible escape route for the president and his party. In tough times, the party on the outs (which in 2012 will still be the Republicans) strives to define an election as a referendum on the folks in charge: If you don’t like how things are going, vote the bum out. In response, the in-power party tries to present the election as a choice: You may not love us, but the other guys will really screw things up. Last November, the Republicans got the far better end of this conventional dynamic. Yet today, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and his Republicans made it easier for the White House and the Democrats to set up a choice-election in 2012. They did so just by being themselves.

David Corn is Mother Jones’ Washington bureau chief.

Posted by Gypsy Chief

Posted by Gypsy Chief

Follow @GypsyChief

Bob Inglis’ committee meeting lecture on climate change is exactly what the lame duck session is supposed to be about.
Fri, Nov 19 2010 at 1:52 PM EST

Source: Mother Nature Network

Representative Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) PARTING SHOTS: Outgoing South Carolina Rep. Bob Inglis had a few thing to get off his chest before leaving Washington.

With his time limited in Washington, Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) took a few shots (see video) at his Republican counterparts during an environmental subcommittee meeting this week. The South Carolina Republican hit fellow conservatives with a one-two punch by attacking their denial of climate change and their economic hypocrisy.

Climate Science on this Blog

We have been covering ways that you can get involved in the fight to understand global climate change. You can participate in Climateprediction.net which is a BOINC distributed computing effort to improve the accuracy of climate prediction models. All they ask is that you donate some unused cpu cycles.

Posted by Gypsy Chief

Follow @GypsyChief

Five Who Fell

Politico had an interesting story in mid-May this year. Five Democratic members of Congress, pictured here, cast a no vote on health care reform the first time it came up in the house. On the second go round these five Democrats switched from no to yes. Those changed votes provided the margin of victory needed to pass the measure. The Politico story went on to say that they became special targets of Republican wrath. They are from left Alan Boyd FL 2nd, Betsy Markey CO 4th, John Boccieri OH 16th, Scott Murphy NY 20th, Suzanne Kosmas FL 24th.

Photo credit to Politico because I stole it from them.

Results are in. All five have lost. Kosmas got 40.3% of the vote with 100% reporting. Markey got 40.5% with 96% reporting. Boccieri got 41.2% with 100% reporting. Boyd got 41.4% with 99% reporting. Murphy got 44.6% with 99% reporting.

All figures are from Nate Silver’s 538 blog at the Five Thirty Eight Blog at NYT. I compiled them very early this morning. Though incomplete and unofficial a material change is highly unlikely in my opinion.

Caution – I do not see causation in these results. Ever since the mid-May story in Politico I’ve been following these members to see how they were doing. A few weeks ago it looked like Boyd and Murphy might win and the others lose. One source I consulted today said that Boyd’s district on the Florida panhandle is more like Alabama than Florida. One could drive oneself crazy trying to sort out what is important and what is not. So the only thing I know for sure is that all have lost.

I am also suspicious about stories that talk about special targets for wrath as if that is going to have a material effect on the outcome. Wrathiness sounds too much like magical thinking to me. That said, it is likely that these particular outcomes will be interpreted as a rejection of “Obamacare”. I think we need a whole lot more research before reaching that conclusion.

Here is another conclusion one could reach. Sometimes doing the right thing is more important than getting reelected. Call me idealistic – that idea appeals to me.

Posted by Gypsy Chief

Follow @GypsyChief

A message from EMILY’s List

Dear Gypsy Chief and all of your readers,

I’ll be honest: I’ve had it up to here with all these articles implying the
election has already been decided. You know what decides elections? You. Yes, you — and like-minded volunteers who can help protect advocates like Barbara Boxer and Patty Murray and stop a GOP takeover — just by making calls from home! An hour of your time can help make history.

These numbers will knock your socks off: our Team EMILY volunteers phone-banked for Sens. Barbara Boxer and Patty Murray, calling Democratic women voters who don’t always turn out in midterm elections. We made 77,748 calls and nearly 70% of the folks we reached pledged to vote in 2010!

See what I mean? This election isn’t over — sorry, pundits! Not when we have people like you, who can make such a difference for EMILY’s List candidates with a little bit of time, making contact with women who crave some solid information and need a little push to get out and vote.

Can you volunteer one hour of your time to reach 40 women who otherwise might not turn out for the election? Just one hour can make a difference — sign up to volunteer right now!

Click to Volunteer One Hour to Reach 40 Voters

Here’s one thing the press has gotten right: women are going to decide this election. But it all depends on whether we get to the polls — and that’s where you come in. You can get those crucial swing voters to the polls simply by reaching out to them with a phone call made from your home. Remember: just one hour for 40 voters — this is how we win. Will you join us?

Thanks for everything you do.

Best,

Denise Feriozzi

WOMEN VOTE! Director

Posted by Gypsy Chief

Only One Represents CO 4th District

Fox 31 News has pulled a Cory Gardner ad which falsely accuses Betsy Markey of having voted for the 2010 federal budget when in fact she voted against it twice. The full story can be found here.

Rep Ed Markey [D-MA] pictured on the right, pointed out that the two Markeys do not even look alike.

Photo Credit: ColoradoPols

Posted by Gypsy Chief

Follow @GypsyChief

Where does he stand on student loans?

Gardner-backer-Armey-would-end-federal-student-loan-programs-in-Colorado

So, where does Cory Gardner stand on this issue? Thanks to our friends at Politics Daily for a heads-up on this. The story is from The Colorado Independent.

Photo Credit: The Colorado Independent

Posted by Gypsy Chief

Follow @GypsyChief

This ad is the new TV spot from Women Vote!, a project of EMILY’s List–a very strong and emotionally compelling attack on GOP candidate Cory Gardner’s vote against autism coverage for children in the state legislature. The source is ColoradoPols.com

Posted by Gypsy Chief

Follow @GypsyChief

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), a longtime advocate of a strong military with a robust budget, is considering a few ways to help Defense Secretary Robert Gates save some cash.

Beginning with a speech a stone’s throw from President Eisenhower’s boyhood home, Gates recommended the Pentagon begin finding ways to cut its own budget in order to save key programs and forces from the crippling cuts seen in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

With rising deficits, plans to draw down forces in Iraq and Afghanistan and a changing mood on Capitol Hill, even defense spending stalwarts such as Skelton are looking for places to trim.

Read the rest of this story at Politico byline Jen DiMascio.

Interesting story but DiMascio points out that Skelton remains supportive of a second engine for the F35 Joint Strike fighter.

My translation: We’re open to defense cuts. We’re going to do it next time. Recall that Congresswoman Betsy Markey voted to strip funds for this second engine that Defense Secretary Gates says is not needed.

Photo Credit: Politico

Posted by Gypsy Chief