The American Liberal And Progressive Idea is a blog that engages discourse and discussion on information that appears in the media and in historic artifacts that reflects The American Liberal And Progressive Idea on topics that range from: American constitutional government, civics, civil rights, culture, democracy, humanities, history, human rights, jurisprudence, peace, philosophy, politics, systems of belief, and the sciences.
Please click here to read a copy of the president's remarks provided by the White House and published in The New York Times.
President Obama's historic signing of the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009 was completed yesterday in a ceremony at the White House.
The Omnibus bill is actually a "compilation of natural wilderness Acts to designate certain land as components of the Natural Wilderness Preservation System and it authorizes the Department of the Interior and Department of Agriculture to participate in specified programs and activities concerning natural wilderness, rivers, boundary line adjustments, and much more." The bill actually protects "more than two million acres as wilderness and creating a new national system to conserve land held by the Bureau of Land Management."
The White House called the bill "one of the most sweeping pieces of conservation and public land management legislation in years."
Before the bill signing by President Obama Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar made some prefatory remarks:
"Over the last two centuries, America’s best ideas for protecting our vast lands and open spaces have often arrived while our country has faced its greatest trials.
"It was in the midst of our nation’s bloodiest conflict – the Civil War – that President Abraham Lincoln set aside the lands that are now Yosemite National Park.
"It was at the dawn of the 20th century, with our cities and industries growing and our open lands and watersheds disappearing, that President Teddy Roosevelt expanded our national parks and set aside the world’s largest system of lands dedicated to wildlife conservation, the national wildlife refuge system.
"And it was in the darkest days of the Great Depression that President Franklin Roosevelt put three million young Americans to work in the Civilian Conservation Corps. They built the trails, campgrounds, parks, and conservation projects we enjoy today.
"In these moments when our national character is most tested we rightly seek to protect that which fuels our spirit.
"For America’s national character - our optimism, our dreams, our shared stories – are rooted in our landscapes. "
The bill represents a collection of 170 specific and different bills that
can easily be considered a milestone in environmental legislation.
As Jean Williams, the Seattle Environmental Policy Examiner notes: "Now, President Obama is signing a law that will expand protection to over 160 other wilderness components, including the following:
"Oregon Badlands Wilderness Act to protect 30,000 acres of desert wilderness in Central Oregon.
"Spring Basin Wilderness Act to protect 8,600 acres of scenic wilderness long the John Day River in Central Oregon.
"Copper Salmon Wilderness Act of Oregon to protect 13,000 acres of old growth forest along the head of the Elk River; one of the most prolific salmon fisheries in the west.
"Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument Voluntary and Equitable Grazing Conflict Resolution Act of Oregon to protect 23,000 acres of pristine flowering meadows and old growth forests and insure voluntary relinquishment of grazing permits.
"Owyhee Public Lands Management Act 2007 of Idaho to protect over a half million acres of wilderness and 315 miles of streams and rivers in the scenic high desert country along the Owyhee River.
"National landscape Conservation System Act that has designated 26 million acres of “crown jewels” administered by the Bureau of Land Management from Alaska to the southern tip of Florida."
"As Americans, we possess few blessings greater than the vast and varied landscapes that stretch the breadth of our continent. Our lands have always provided great bounty -- food and shelter for the first Americans, for settlers and pioneers; the raw materials that grew our industry; the energy that powers our economy.
"What these gifts require in return is our wise and responsible stewardship. As our greatest conservationist President, Teddy Roosevelt, put it almost a century ago, "I recognize the right and duty of this generation to develop and use the natural resources of our land; but I do not recognize the right to waste them, or to rob, by wasteful use, the generations that come after us."
"That's the spirit behind the bipartisan legislation I'm signing today -- legislation among the most important in decades to protect, preserve, and pass down our nation’s most treasured landscapes to future generations."P
President Obama noted, that "another hopeful element to the legislation, namely the Christopher and Dana Reeve's Paralysis Act, which boosts research and rehabilitation for paralysis:"
"That's the mission of the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation. In the lobby of their facility in New Jersey sits Christopher’s empty wheelchair. And his son, Matthew Reeve, was once asked if the sight of it ever saddened him, and he replied no. He said, "Empty chairs -- that was Dad's goal," he said. "We hope there will be many more of them."
"Matthew is here with us today. And the legislation I'm about to sign makes solid progress toward the realization of that hope and the promise of a brighter future."
While Senate Democrat Majority Leader Harry Reid praised President Obama for the president's "firm resolve" when he has dealt with the auto industry: "The Administration's decision to send GM and Chrysler back to the drawing board was driven by three critical and commendable goals: protecting taxpayers' investment, moving America more quickly toward energy independence, and ensuring these two companies and the American auto industry as a whole can survive and as many workers as possible can keep their jobs," Reid said in a statement. "As we have maintained since the earliest days of this crisis, if these companies do not develop strong plans to remain viable in the long term, they will lose our support."
Republican leaders have gone out of their way to criticize the president's efforts to right the badly listing automobile manufacturers. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell contradicted the Majority Leader when he said that Republicans have been the leader for seeking to create reform of the auto industry.
"Republicans in Congress called for true reform before bailouts last year; automakers were given billions instead," McConnell's statement read in part. "Republicans said that taxpayer money set aside to strengthen the economy by preserving the flow of credit shouldn't be used for bailouts of individual businesses and unions; it was doled out anyway. And Republicans called for an end to funding enterprises that refused to demand reform from management, labor and investors; each refused."
McConnell ended his grab for attention by saying Republicans agreed with the notion that reforms must "be taken seriously or the taxpayer bailouts will end" but that that should have happened "tens of billions of dollars ago."
Te most severe critic of the president and Democrats position on the auto industry concentrated on Corker's criticism about te firing of Mr. Wagoner, the former head of GM. It should be remembered that Senator Corker was one of the GOP's leading voices last December when Republicans called for drastic wage cuts against blue-collar employees.
Senator Corker a Senator from Tennessee said the "Wagoner firing was a "sideshow" meant to distract people from what he called the lack of progress made since aid first went to automakers last year and cast the administration's moves as a "major power grab" and a threat to free enterprise."
Corker continued his rant: "With sweeping new power the White House will be deciding which plants will survive and which won't, so in essence, this administration has decided they know better than our courts and our free market process how to deal with these companies."
Former GOP presidential standardbearer, John McCain said: "the Administration's removal of GM CEO Richard Wagoner "remarkable" and "unprecedented," and suggested it would have a chilling effect of other corporations. "So instead of sending General Motors and Chrysler into the pre-packaged bankruptcy they deserve, now have taken the unprecedented step of firing the CEO of General Motors," he said. "A remarkable move by the federal government. I think unprecedented in the history of this country."
McCain retorically asked: "What does this signal send to other corporations, financial institutions about whether the federal government will decide to fire them as well."
With a great deal of 'heavy lifting'facing the Democrats in the the House and in the Senate beginning after today and continuing throughout the upcoming week, Republicans have acted like a party without any leadership in charge and whose stock answer to Democratic proposals for legislative solutions to the many problems facing the nation has been to simply say no. Calling the Republicans the party of no originated with Democratic attacks on the GOP and have now spread to the elite media of newspapers and in particular on cable news programs.
The problem facing the Republicans as they try to pry themselves out from under the daily attacks they are suffering from calling them the party of no is that the Republicans have simply failed to produce any reasonably viable legislative proposals that can stand as alternatives to Democratic ideas. The Republicans failure to bring anything of substance to the legislative deal making table has severely damaged the GOP's image across the nation so that they are now commonly referred to as the party of no.
The stock in trade example of how the Republicans react has been to deny that the Democrats can legislate the nation out of the Republican-created economic disaster that has gripped the American economy around the throat. The next step for the GOP is to exclaim that the only way to get America's economy moving again is to apply more tax cuts to the upper reaches of American's income brackets -- in other words, give more tax breaks to the richest of the rich is how the Republicans propose to help America.
The lack of an overall party strategy set by a coordinating Republican Party leadership is most apparent when the Congressional Republican's approach to the impending Democratic legislative agenda is exposed. In the Senate, Mitch McConnell and his lieutenants have decided to attempt to tie up the Democrats proposals with a series of time-wasting amendments. Inthe House, on the other hand, the Republican House members went out odf their way to promote a news conference this past Thursday to proclaim their own series of solutions which were to be found in a glossily bound booklet that would prove to the nation that President Obama's claims that the Republicans did have a plan of their very own! and it would be revealed to Americans on March 26th, thus upstaging President Obama and the Democrats.
Carl Hulse, chief congressional correspondent of The New York Times, reported that Representative John A. Boehner, the minority leader, was grilled by reporters on Capitol Hill because the blue 18-page “recovery” pamphlet that the Republican leadership released was short on figures, spending or revenue details."
Mr Hulse provided his account of the Republican's bravado as amazingly explained by Mr. Boehner, the House Republican leader: “Wait and see next week,” said Mr. Boehner, who evidently is not all that impressed with budget documents anyway.... It’s just a bunch of numbers,” Boehner said.
So in retaliation to Mr. Boehner's belittlement of the Democrats plan as "just a bunch of numbers" the Democratic National Committee has now released a Web video that runs the gamut of news coverage of the Republicans’ event on Thursday, poking some fun at the number of zeros presented in that plan.
The truth of the matter is that the Republican's have gone beyond merely ridiculing themselves with their faux budget that contains nothing of substance; particularly no numbers that would show their plan to be a viable alternative to Democratic proposals; they have done so with a straight face and will not back down from a smoke and mirrors approach to solving the nation's economic problems.
I believe the Democrats have already won the battle to establish their legislation as the law of the land after they put down a surely disorganized Republican opposition leaving Mr. Boehner no alternative but to cry over his certain upcoming loss to President Obama and the Democrats.
The White house reported today that President Obama's weekly radio address focused on the plight of the people affected by the flood ravaged landscape of North Dakota, South Dakota, and Minnesota. He tried to give comfort to the flooding victims by mentioning the major role that government is engaging in to minimize the disastrous consequences of the rising waters. the president also commended the many volunteers: "In the Fargodome, thousands of people gathered not to watch a football game or a rodeo, but to fill sandbags. Volunteers filled 2.5 million of them in just five days, working against the clock, day and night, with tired arms and aching backs. Others braved freezing temperatures, gusting winds, and falling snow to build levees along the river’s banks to help protect against waters that have exceeded record levels."
"Earlier this week," President Obama "signed emergency and disaster declarations, these declarations provide Federal aid to supplement State and local response efforts. The Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency continue to coordinate the federal response and are working closely with State and Local officials. But it is the people who have filled sandbags, built levees, and contributed other ways in these communities that stand out as a reminder of what Americans can achieve when we serve others."
The midwest flooding marks the first major disaster test that President Obama has had to face in his young presidency and he "urged" Midwesterners to "remain vigilant" as the flood water rise and he assured those affected "that his administration was being vigilant as well," according to The New York Times.
“Even as we face an economic crisis which demands our constant focus, forces of nature can also intervene in ways that create other crises to which we must respond — and respond urgently,” Mr. Obama said. “For the people of North and South Dakota and Minnesota who live along rivers spilling over their banks, this is one such moment.”
Mr Obama lauded the efforts of volunteers: “College students have traveled by the busload from nearby campuses to lend a hand during their spring breaks,” Mr. Obama said. “Students from local high schools have asked if they could take time to participate.”
Obama continued his praise: “In the face of an incredible challenge, the people of these communities have rallied in support of one another, and their service isn’t just inspirational — it’s integral to our response. It’s also a reminder of what we can achieve when Americans come together to serve their communities.”
The New York Times explained that: "Mr. Obama’s remarks reflected the deep scar that another natural disaster, Hurricane Katrina, left on the administration of his predecessor, former President George W. Bush. The Bush administration’s bungled response to the disaster left a permanent stain on that presidency; Mr. Obama is no doubt acutely aware that the nation expects to hear from him when nature is putting Americans at risk."
The battle between creationists and the supporters of Darwinianism can be boiled down to whether a textbook;
which includes the wording "strengths and weaknesses" as standards for teaching high school students creationism, intelligent design and evolution on an equal basis.
Explore Evolution
It has been learned that: "A closely watched effort to keep a 20-year-old requirement that Texas public high school students evaluate the "strengths and weaknesses" of scientific theories, including evolution, failed Thursday in a 7-7 vote by the State Board of Education," effectively ending the effort of the coalition of anti-Darwinist forces who sought to keep the "strengths and weaknesses" language in the high school classrooms.
"Supporters of evolution had assailed the 20-year-old "strengths and weaknesses" clause as a back door to teaching biblical creationism, while evolution-only critics spoke of weaknesses in Darwinian theory."
Eugenie C. Scott of the National Center for Science Education talks with Geraldine Miller and is shown answering how the inclusion of the "strengths and weaknesses" argument could adversely affect the content of textbooks produced in Texas and used throughout the southern portion of the United States including California.
The issues and the subsequent vote were so complicated and controversial, that a number of different news organizations reported differing views the final vote:
"The 13-2 vote removes current requirements that students be taught the “strengths and weaknesses” of scientific theories. Instead, teachers will be required to have students scrutinize “all sides” of scientific theories, a move criticized by evolution proponents." (The Austin American-Statesman)
"The Texas Board of Education voted today by a 13-to-2 margin to change controversial language in the state's curriculum, making it harder for creationism to creep into public classrooms. For the past 20 years, the state's curriculum has instructed teachers to present the "strengths and weaknesses" of scientific theories, opening the door to non-scientific, faith-based alternatives." (The Scientific American)
"Social conservatives lost another skirmish over evolution Friday when the State Board of Education stripped two provisions from proposed science standards that would have raised questions about key principles of the theory of evolution." (The Dallas Morning News)
"After six hours of often mind-numbing debate, the State Board of Education has mercifully passed a final version of new science standards that will guide the content of science textbooks and curriculum for the next decade." (The Texas Observer)
"The document still has plenty of potential footholds for creationist attacks on evolution to make their way into Texas classrooms," said Kathy Miller, president of the watchdog group Texas Freedom Network. "Through a series of contradictory and convoluted amendments, the board crafted a road map that creationists will use to pressure publishers into putting phony arguments attacking established science into textbooks."
"We appreciate that the politicians on the board seek compromise, but don't agree that compromises can be made on established mainstream science or on honest education policy."
The creationists are at it again; this time the debate over the teaching of evolution in public schools will take place in Texas on March 26th and 27th. The scenario is that over the Texas Board of Education will debate whether the teaching of evolution should be co-mingled with creationist myths and fables. The ramifications of such a debate could potentially set in place the standards used to teach evolutionary science in numerous bible-belt southern states your years to come.
The most obvious ramifications have to do with three basic aspects of modern neo-Darwinian theory: the evolutionary position that complex organisms evolved from a common ancestor, or in the vernacular of science: MRCA - Acronym for Most Recent Common Ancestor; evolution's supposed "strengths and weaknesses"as a theory when it is actually a proven fact; and the complex processes of planetary formation.
All of the big wigs of the creationist movement including their most avid supporters will be in Austin, Texas including Lawrence Krauss and Casey Luskin and such supporting organizations as the conservative Free Market Foundation and Focus on the Family. Don't be fooled by the hype the creationist movement is putting out to the press; this conflict has nothing to do with science because it is aimed squarely at the powers which reason and rationality hold over our society.
The most disturbing aspect of the Thursday and Friday votes is the Texas Board of Education members will determine whether the state's proposed science curriculum should be allowed to "convey doubt about evolution that, according to scientists, simply does not exist."
The concept behind the amendments are shaped in such a way that they do not mention creationism or discuss the age of the Earth. Instead, they are focused on establishing an anti-science beachhead that will erode the scientific for studying evolution as a science.
"Members of the Discovery Institute, an intelligent-design think tank, helped draft critiques of evolution in Texas as well as Florida. According to Schafersman, the seven Texas Board of Education members who've supported the amendments are Young Earth creationists.
"Because teaching creationism as fact in public schools is illegal, supporters have resorted to language about "alternatives" and "strengths and weaknesses" into science curricula. There's little danger of students learning that the Earth is 4,000 years old, or that a supernatural entity carefully arranged dinosaur fossils to look natural. But students might not learn that science is a process of testing hypotheses and accumulating evidence to produce theories, like that of evolution. And when a few outlying critiques are presented as valid alternatives to scientific consensus, critical thinking suffers."
"The reason behind why a decision that favors the creationists is so important is that: "Texas schoolbooks are used throughout the south," Steve Schafersman, president of Texas Citizens for Science, a nonprofit science education and policy watchdog. "If we win, this will be the standard" and Texas textbooks will dominate the marketplace for ten years.
Of the several anti-science amendments being decided upon one: "amendment requires biology teachers to "analyze and evaluate the sufficiency or insufficiency of common ancestry to explain the sudden appearance, stasis and sequential nature of groups in the fossil record.” That all complex organisms are descended from a common ancestor is commonly accepted by evolutionary biologists."
Another amendment concerns "planetary-science guidelines "introduce unwarranted uncertainty to long-settled scientific issues," wrote Alan Leshner, CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and 23 leading members of Texas' science community in a letter delivered to McLeroy on Tuesday.
"These amendments serve only to undermine sound science education in Texas," they wrote.:
Chief Pinata for the Democratic Party, Rush Limbaugh is being attacked again. This time the attack is coming in the form of campaign literature that is being distributed by a Democrat running for an open House seat in New York's 20th congressional seat to replace the former member Kirsten Gillibrand. A direct mail piece being used by the Democrat Scott Murphy, who hopes to replace MS. Gillbrand in a traditionally Republican district is using the Limbaugh mailing to turn up the heat in the race and influence greater numbers of Democrats to show up at the polls next Tuesday, March 31st.
The mailer superimposes text over a pensive looking photo of Barack Obama and complains that: "Rush Limbaugh and his lackeys in Washington the Republicans in the House, have made it clear that they will try to be a roadblock to the change America desperately needs. You can help stop them by sending Scott Murphy to Congress to help Barrack Obama change Washington."
On the same mailer, there is an angry looking photo of Limbaugh with the words "I hope Obama fails" superimposed in large block letters over the defacto leader of the GOP. Along the bottom of the mailing enclosed in parentheses is the ominous statement that: "Somebody wants you to stay home on March 31st...." The clear indication being that it is Limbaugh and his cronies in Washington who want to adversely affect the recovery of the nation.
Limbaugh has been the central figure in a concerted Democratic push against the right wing conservative ideologues who are pushing the Republican agenda of obfuscation and obstruction against the Democrats in Congress and President Obama in particular.
Democrats have been more than overjoyed to use the many 'shoot from the hip' style of comments uttered by Limbaugh on his nationally syndicated radio talk show, as well as the comments he made in his overblown keynote address at the Conservative Political Action Conference this past February. Limbaugh has proven to be an excellent source for turning out Democratic fundraisers to raise money but Democrats have turned Limbaugh into a strategic vote production tool as the Democrats make use of the many absurd statements made by Limbaugh and his followers to spur Democratic turnout.
It comes as no surprise that Democrats find Limbaugh and his irk to be a vile group of anti-patriots and the length of time and manner in which national Democrats have vilified Limbaugh it wouldn't be surprising if his entrance into the campaign brings out a larger Democratic turnout and the house seat stays in Democratic control.
Incontrovertible proof that the Earth is a geologically active planet.
Did you know that Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal believes Federal Funds set aside for the study of volcanoes in the United States is nothing but a waste of money?
As a possible harbinger of better times to come, U.S. financial markets rose more than 5 percent as the days final hour of trading to place after the Treasury Department's declared their new plan that will allow banks to remove toxic assets from their account statements.
The New York Times explains that: "The Obama administration formally presented the latest step in its financial rescue package on Monday, an attempt to draw private investors into partnership with a new federal entity that could eventually buy up to $1 trillion in troubled assets that are weighing down banks and clogging up the credit markets." President Obama and Treasury Secretary Geithner announced the "Public Private Investment Plan" earlier today in which: "the government and private investors," according to the Washington Post "will invest together to buy up between $500 billion and $1 trillion worth of real estate-related loans and securities from banks. The government will use up to $100 billion from the Troubled Assets Relief Program, matched by private funds, to capitalize the purchases.
The Washington Post explains: "The hope is that instead of hoarding cash in case those assets continue to lose value, banks will resume lending money once the toxic assets are off their books.
"The government and private investors, meanwhile, will hold the assets for the long term, and stand to either make or lose money depending on how the economy does."
The New York Times reiterates: "The success or failure of the plan carries not only enormous stakes for the nation’s recovery but certain political risks for Mr. Geithner as well. At least two Republican senators have called for his resignation. And on Sunday, Senator Richard C. Shelby of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the Banking Committee, told Fox News that “if he keeps going down this road, I think that he won’t last long.”
The core of the new plan will consist of $75 billion to $100 billion in funds provided by TARP, the Troubled Assets Relief Program which will allow the Public-Private Investment Program will supply about $500 billion to purchase the toxic assets with the government hoping that the monies available will eventually rise to nearly a trillion dollars that will be available to buy troubled assets.
The Financial Services Roundtable, an important financial services lobby, endorsed the Treasury’s plans on Monday morning, "saying that the purchase program would keep the troubled assets from bogging down big banks and preventing a recovery in banking and the broader financial system. Many experts say the financial system must recover before the country can claw its way out of the broad and painful recession.
Steve Bartlett, president of the Financial Services Roundtable remarked: “The partnership between public and private institutions is a great way to help restore liquidity in the market,.. “It is encouraging to see Treasury creating unique ways of stimulating the economy while protecting the taxpayer.”
It seems the greatest hindrance to the new plan is the number of banks and private investors who will become involved, and if Wall Street investors maintain their support for the plan.
One investor, the head equity trader at BNY ConvergEx Group, Anthony Conroy said: “People are excited that there’s a plan, that there’s a definitive plan.”
Other investors such as Matthew Eads, portfolio manager and securities analyst for Atlanta-based Eads & Heald Investment Counsel. felt unrestrained in voicing their opinions: "The market's really trading more on psychology now than fundamentals,... "Investors are really looking for anything to grab on that's a sign of good news."
Weighing in with his opinion President Obama, following his economic briefing stated: "We believe that this is one more element that is going to be absolutely critical in getting credit flowing again," Obama said. "It's not going to happen overnight. There's still great fragility in the financial systems, but we think that we are moving in the right direction.
"And we are very confident that," Obama continued, "in coordination with the Federal Reserve and the FDIC, other relevant institutions, that we are going to be able to not only start unlocking these credit markets, but we're also going to be in position to design the regulatory authorities that are necessary to prevent this kind of systemic crisis from happening again."
In essence the plan works in this manner: "according to a Treasury Department fact sheet: Imagine that a bank wants to sell mortgage loans with a $100 million face value. The FDIC would auction the loans to private bidders. Suppose the winning bidder offered $84 million. The private investor would put up $6 million, Treasury would put up $6 million, and the FDIC would guarantee $72 million worth of loans.
"If investors select assets wisely," The Washington Post explains, "and the assets prove to have good value over the long run, the loans will be repaid, and the hedge fund and Treasury Department split the remaining profits in proportion to their original investment. If the investors choose poorly, or the assets fall significantly in value, the government shares in the initial loss and potentially is required to spend additional money to cover the loan guarantees.
"The idea is to get those assets off the books of banks and onto the books of long-term investors who could lose money without causing broader economic damage."
It is important to note that Treasury officials intend to use their plan to gather momentum that will solve the ongoing breakdown in America's financial system.
In a national statistical study released by the American Religious Identification Survey of 2008 researchers found that most Americans are still Christians, but as a nation, Americans are becoming less Christian and less religious in their beliefs.
The new poll shows that many Americans who once defined themselves as Christians has fallen from a high of 86 percent in 1990 to just 76 percent in 2008 - that's a significant drop of 12 percentage points over an 18 year span.
Of additional significance is the finding that shows that 15 percent of Americans now have no commitment to any religion; that is an almost doubling of the number of Americans who have decided to follow no religious denomination. In fact, the number of Americans without any religious preference outnumbers all other major religious groups except Catholics and Baptists.
Meanwhile, the number of atheists has grown from 900,000 to 1.6 million. Barry Kosmin, a principle investigator for the survey believes the ongoing and more open discussion being witnessed by researchers parallels the recent popularity of numerous books by authors such as Christopher Hitchens' whose "God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything" has given people an opportunity to feel greater ease in openly confessing their lack of religious faith.
In larger terms, the nation as a whole is becoming more secular as one time bastions of Catholicism in the New England states and throughout the Midwest have withered away and have followed people relocating to the Sunbelt.
At this point in time, the only rligious group that is showing signs of growth are the evangelicals who are using the glitzy approaches of television and megachurches to attract followers. And the hard economic times are helping to expand the base of evangelical followers as the megachurches display sharp upward trends in patronage.
For a series of excellent interactive maps and other features please go to USATODAY here.
President Obama used his weekly radio address to prepare the nation for his emphasis on his $3.6 trillion federal budget. Obama announced his plans to cut the deficit in half by2012 and renewing his commitment to energy independence, education and health care reform.
Signaling what the President expects to be a difficult confrontation with Congress, Obama said: “As the House and the Senate take up this budget next week, the specific details and dollar amounts in this budget will undoubtedly change,” Mr. Obama said. “That’s a normal and healthy part of the process.”
President Obama explained: “when all is said and done,” Americans will be positioned to cut our foreign oil needs by increasing our use of wind and solar power technologies,expanding our use of biofuels and the production and use of more fuel-efficient cars.
Obama's overall goal is to "end the bubble-bust cycle of the past and jump start our economy in the short term while laying the groundwork for America’s long-term prosperity."
The President spoke plainly and forcefully: “To those who say we have to choose between health care reform and fiscal discipline, I say that making investments now that will dramatically lower health care costs for everyone won’t add to our budget deficit in the long term; it is one of the best ways to reduce it."
President Obama plans a Tuesday night prime-time news conference to explain his economic recovery plans with the American people.
Obama explained that: “With the fiscal mess we’ve inherited and the cost of this financial crisis, I’ve proposed a budget that cuts our deficit in half by the end of my first term,” Mr. Obama said. “That’s why we are scouring every corner of the budget and have proposed $2 trillion in deficit reductions over the next decade.”
In addition, the President addressed the lessons he learned from his recent trip outside of Washington when he held town-hall meetings where ordinary citizens voiced their opinions that the economy needs to be strengthened and Obama also made an important bipartisan appearance with California Governor Arnold Schwartzeneger at the gatherings.
Of his priority on the budget which he plans to discuss throughout the coming week, Obama remarked: ""These investments are not a wish list of priorities that I picked out of thin air – they are a central part of a comprehensive strategy to grow this economy by attacking the very problems that have dragged it down for too long: the high cost of health care and our dependence on oil; our education deficit and our fiscal deficit."
With economic conditions in the United States continuing on a downward spiral that have left President Obama's administration estimates well over $1.8 trillion higher than initial estimates had predictedmeans that administration "budget proposals, if carried out, would produce a staggering $9.3 trillion in total deficits over the next decade."
Huge scary numbers no matter from which political persuasion the deficit is viewed. This news means that during the decade from 2010 to 2019, there will be an excessive debt of $2.3 trillion generated according to the Congressional Budget Office; that translates to deficits of close to $1 trillion a year for the next ten years.
"... although Obama would come close to meeting his goal of cutting the deficit in half by the end of his first term, the CBO predicts that the nation's annual operating deficit would never drop below 4 percent of the overall economy over the next decade, a level administration officials have said is unsustainable because the national debt would grow too rapidly."
That translates to the CBO's opinion that national debt will increase by 82% "of the overall economy by 2019 under Obama's policies, compared with a pre-recession average of 40 percent."
The CBO estimates will have a considerable political as well as economic impact on Obama's relations with Congress.
Congressional Democrats will most likely be forced to make fiscal adjustments to Obama's budgetary plans. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) met with President Obama this past week and "said the president "understands the legislative process" and that "it's going to require everyone to make adjustments."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, commenting on the CBO numbers and the budgetary plans of the administration and house Democrats said: "This budget is a statement of our values and our investments in education, health care and the health of America. That includes prevention as well as care, and the energy initiatives as well as tax relief for 95 percent of the American people, as well as an approach that takes the deficit down. Those are the priorities of the budget."
Following up on Pelosi's comments; Peter Orszag, administration budget director echoed the Speaker's comments: "There are always some adjustments," Orszag said of the legislative budget process. "But those four pillars" -- health care, education, clean energy and deficit reduction -- "will be represented."
Americans across the nation are voicing their anger at Wall Street, in particular against AIG as President Obama is waging a battle for the support of the nation to make changes in the way Wall Street executives conduct themselves.
The most outrageous situation facing Americans is that "the reality is that no matter what we do now, tens of trillions of dollars in wealth have been lost. All that's left is simply an elaborate exercise in settling up the accounts."
What angers Americans the most is "that the hundreds of billion dollars of taxpayer funds that have been put at risk to keep AIG and Citi from failing and taking the whole financial system down with them."
The only useful purpose all of this public anger is having is that it is helping to let off some collective pessure that has building for years on the way Wal Street has been conducting it's business practices. It also aids in the coalesce of political pressure for reform of the political checks and balances that keep Wall Streters in check. And with the renewed call for stricter regulations comes the hope that in the future Wall Street finaciers will be forced to "think long and hard the next time they get the urge to take excessive risks with other people's money."
One of the most tangible forms of protest being waged by angry American took shape on Capitol Hill today when House members decisively authorized "a near total tax on bonuses paid this year to employees of the American International Group and other firms that have accepted large amounts of federal bailout funds, rattling Wall Street as lawmakers rushed to respond to populist anger."P
Angry Democrats and Republicans authorized a nearly 90% tax "on bonuses for traders, executives and bankers earning more than $250,000."
The hast to restrain the bonuses by Housemembers who have waged vigorous battles over the limitation of compensation for Wall Street executives, demonstrates the high degree of tension being brought to bear by the bailout. On the Senate side, lawmakers are expected to consider a tax on executive bonuses that will differ with the measure passed by the House, which will effect final pasage of the bill.
President Obama urged congressional members to come up with a “final product that will serve as a strong signal to the executives who run these firms that such compensation will not be tolerated.”
In a cautious and measured response, President Obama Mr. Obama said he believed legislators were “responding, I think, to everybody’s anger” but that the best way to handle the situation was “to make sure you’ve closed the door before the horse gets out of the barn.”P
Members of Congress voiced their displeasure in terse statements: “As A.I.G.’s recent actions remind us, it is unconscionable that companies dependent upon the largess of the federal government for their very existence should in turn pay irresponsibly exorbitant bonuses to the rapscallions partially responsible for the current recession,” Representative John D. Dingell, Democrat of Michigan, said.
Wall Street executives called the legislative actions reckless and ill-conceived. And many bank executives threatened to pull out from efforts to right the nation's economy.
Even senior Republican leaders backed the stringent measures: “It is an extreme use of the tax code to correct an extreme and excessive wrong done to the American taxpayer,” said Representative Dave Camp of Michigan, senior Republican on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, who backed the measure despite reservations.
"But experts on constitutional and tax law said it was likely the House bill could pass muster. Numerous court rulings have upheld retroactive tax provisions, particularly over short periods. The House bill applies back only to Jan. 1, 2009. The measure is also strengthened by the fact that it does not apply to just one company or group of individuals, and does not take aim only at past bonuses but also bonuses to be paid in the future, experts said.
"The chief executive of insurance giant American International Group told Congress today that he allowed millions of dollars in "distasteful" bonuses to be paid to top employees of a troubled division because he was trying to prevent that business from collapsing, but he said he has asked recipients to return part of the payments in view of public outrage over them."
“I have asked the employees of A.I.G. Financial Products to step up and do the right thing,” Mr. Liddy told lawmakers. “Specifically, I have asked those who received retention payments of $100,000 or more to return at least half of those payments.”
"Edward M. Liddy said AIG has been making progress in winding down a part of the firm that caused the problems, but he noted that the division -- AIG Financial Products -- still has a $1.6 trillion portfolio that continues to impose "substantial risk."
"Explaining his decision to let the retention bonus payments go ahead, Liddy told a subcommittee of the House Financial Services Committee, "I was trying desperately to prevent an uncontrolled collapse of that business." He referred to $165 million in retention bonuses that were paid last weekend, out of a total of more than $400 million in such bonuses payable for 2008 and 2009.Explaining his decision to let the retention bonus payments go ahead, Liddy told a subcommittee of the House Financial Services Committee, "I was trying desperately to prevent an uncontrolled collapse of that business." He referred to $165 million in retention bonuses that were paid last weekend, out of a total of more than $400 million in such bonuses payable for 2008 and 2009."
"In response to questions, Liddy said AIG has kept the Federal Reserve informed of its plans, including the bonus payments, but had not directly discussed them with the Treasury Department or Congress. He denied that there was "any intent to deceive or hide anything" from Treasury or the Congress."
"Of the 418 employees who received bonuses, 298 got more than $100,000, according to the New York attorney general, Andrew M. Cuomo. The highest bonus was $6.4 million, and 6 other employees received more than $4 million. Fifteen other people received bonuses of more than $2 million and 51 received $1 million to $2 million."
"Before Mr. Liddy’s testimony, the A.I.G. affair prompted President Obama to declare that a culture of “excess greed” demonstrated in A.I.G.’s dealings should have no place in a new Wall Street.
“As we get out of this crisis, as we work toward getting ourselves out of this recession, I hope that Wall Street and the marketplace don’t think that we can return to business as usual,” the president said after meeting with his economic advisers."
"Accordingly, Mr. Obama said, he will push for quick Congressional legislation to create a regulatory framework for entities like A.I.G., which is not a bank, similar to the powers that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation has over banks."
“I’m angry,” the president said. “What I want us to do, though, is channel our anger in a constructive way.”
"The president reiterated his faith in Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner. “No Treasury secretary since maybe Alexander Hamilton has faced such challenges,” he said. Mr. Obama has already called for Mr. Geithner to explore whatever legal means might be available to retrieve the bonuses. The president and his aides have also noted often that the near-collapse of A.I.G. and other aspects of the financial crisis began to manifest themselves before the start of the Obama administration."
"Liddy said AIG has "made great progress in winding down" its financial products business, reducing its portfolio by about $1.1 trillion. But with $1.6 trillion still on the books, "there is a risk that that could blow up," he said. "If it explodes, it could cause irreparable damage" to the progress already made and could jeopardize a massive federal bailout of the entire company, Liddy added. He said of the bonus payments, "in the context of the $1.6 trillion and the money already invested in us, we thought that was a good trade."
"The AIG chief, who said he came out of retirement to run the company for a salary of $1 a year, told the subcommittee he fears that "the damage is done" from the bonuses and that employees who are needed to wind down the financial products division are likely to return them "with their resignations." He praised those employees for reducing the risk to American taxpayers through their efforts so far."
"We have to keep shrinking this business dramatically and quickly so it doesn't get away from us," he said.
"By late afternoon, several legislative proposals to recoup the bonuses were being discussed in the Capitol, although their prospects were not clear."
“We are the effective owners of this company,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, going on to suggest a lawsuit to recover the $165 million in bonuses. “I think it’s worth trying.”
"The lawmakers, having heard from their furious constituents, seemed unwilling to be mollified by the pledge from Mr. Liddy, who took the helm at A.I.G. last fall after it had begun imploding because of reckless investments, that the company’s 116,000 employees were united in wanting to work out of the morass, and work “shoulder to shoulder” with federal regulators.
"Instead, the lawmakers were focused on the recipients of bonuses at the very unit that caused A.I.G. “to teeter on the brink of collapse,” as Representative Paul E. Kanjorski, the Pennsylvania Democrat who heads the capital markets subcommittee, put it.
“A million dollars is a sizable sum to the typical American family,” Mr. Kanjorski said, “and a million dollars is a lottery prize for anyone who has just lost a job.” He called on A.I.G.’s employees to join with the legions of Americans who “have made personal sacrifices to survive these difficult times.”
"For the American people, said Representative Paul Hodes, Democrat of New Hampshire, the initials “A.I.G.” now stand for “arrogance, incompetence and greed.”
"In prepared testimony submitted to Congress earlier today, Liddy said that "mistakes were made at AIG on a scale few could have ever imagined possible." He said the company strayed from its insurance business into what became "an internal hedge fund" that then grew overexposed to market risk."P
"But he said AIG's new management team has addressed the company's liquidity crisis and stabilized its cash position."
"As lawmakers heard testimony on AIG, President Obama called on Congress to give the government greater regulatory authority over financial institutions. Speaking to reporters on the White House lawn before leaving on a trip to California, he said he is consulting with Capitol Hill on legislation that would provide resolution authority similar to the powers that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. holds over banks."
"It would allow us proactively to get out in front, make sure that we're separating out bad assets from good, dealing with contracts that may be inappropriate, and preventing the kinds of systemic risks that we've seen taking place with AIG," Obama said. He said this authority would be part of "a broader package of regulatory steps."
"While Americans are "rightly outraged" by the AIG bonuses, "just as outrageous is the culture that these bonuses are a symptom of," Obama said, "a situation where excess greed, excess compensation, excess risk-taking have all made us vulnerable and left us holding the bag." He reiterated his call to move beyond "a constant bubble-bust mentality" and build a foundation for sustainable economic growth."
"I hope that Wall Street and the marketplace don't think that we can return to business as usual," Obama said. "The business models that created a lot of paper wealth but not real wealth in the country and have now resulted in crisis can't be the model for economic growth going forward."
"Asked if he wished he had found out about the bonuses sooner than last week, Obama said "nobody here" drafted the bonus contracts or supervised AIG when it started to "put the economy at risk." But he said, "We are responsible, though. The buck stops with me. And my goal is to make sure that we never put ourselves in this kind of position again."
"Obama also rebuffed calls for the resignation of Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, saying he has "complete confidence" in him. "Nobody's working harder than this guy," the president said with Geithner standing nearby. "He is making all the right moves in terms of playing a bad hand."
"Liddy acknowledged that AIG has received "generous" federal aid, and he conceded that "the patience of America's taxpayers is wearing thin." Because of a need to "continue managing our business as a business" and "certain legal obligations," he said, "AIG has recently made a set of compensation payments, some of which I find distasteful."
"Liddy added that "we are all in this together" and that the company is working hard to execute a restructuring plan aimed at repaying AIG's debt to the government "to the maximum extent possible," continuing the company's main insurance business and protecting policyholders.
"Frank called the bonuses "wholly unjustified" and said it was time for the federal government to assert its "ownership rights" under the bailout to make major changes in the way the company operates. Because of the Treasury's assistance, the government now effectively owns about 80 percent of AIG. He attributed the bonus problem to the way AIG contracts are written."
"Frank called the bonuses "wholly unjustified" and said it was time for the federal government to assert its "ownership rights" under the bailout to make major changes in the way the company operates. Because of the Treasury's assistance, the government now effectively owns about 80 percent of AIG. He attributed the bonus problem to the way AIG contracts are written."
"They give themselves contracts which effectively insulate them from losses," he said. "What I think we should be doing is exercising our rights as owners of this company and bring lawsuits." The people getting the bonuses "performed so badly" and the losses are so great, he said, "that we are justified in rescinding the bonuses."
"In deciding to bail out AIG, the government concluded that, given the company's "deeply embedded role in the global financial system," it could not be allowed to fail because a collapse "posed too great a risk to the global economy, particularly in the context of the near or actual failure of other financial institutions," Liddy said.
"Seeking to assuage the public anger over the bailouts, Liddy said AIG understood that its behavior needed to change because of its receipt of federal bailout money."
"So, on our own initiative, we adopted a series of restrictions on executive compensation, eliminated our federal lobbying activities, halted corporate political contributions and kept controls on our expenses," he said.
"The bonus retention payments range from $1,000 to nearly $6.5 million, according to documents that AIG provided to the Treasury Department. Seven employees were getting more than $3 million, and 73 employees -- including 11 who no longer work at AIG -- received $1 million or more last week, according to New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo.
Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General of New York State, has, according to The New York Times, announced that:"Seventy-three employees were paid more than $1 million in the latest bonuses at the insurance giant American International Group."
Cuomo disclosed information in a written communication to Congressman Barney Frank, chairman of the House Committee on Financial Services regarding "the $165 million in bonuses that A.I.G. paid out last week."
Mr. Cuomo wrote “A.I.G. made more than 73 millionaires in the unit which lost so much money that it brought the firm to its knees, forcing a taxpayer bailout,”“A.I.G. made more than 73 millionaires in the unit which lost so much money that it brought the firm to its knees, forcing a taxpayer bailout.” Cuomo observed that: “Something is deeply wrong with this outcome.”
"Mr. Cuomo did not name the bonus recipients, but the numbers are eye-popping, given A.I.G.’s fragile state. The highest bonus was $6.4 million, and six other employees received more than $4 million, according to Mr. Cuomo. Fifteen other people received bonuses of more than $2 million, and 51 people received bonuses between $1 million and $2 million, Mr. Cuomo said. Eleven of those who received “retention” bonuses of $1 million or more are no longer working at A.I.G., including one who received $4.6 million, he said.
The New York Times explains that: "A.I.G., which is now 80 percent owned by the government, paid out the so-called retention payments, saying the bonuses were needed to persuade workers to stick around in its financial products unit. But the payouts have caused a public furor, and the White House said on Monday that the Treasury would write new requirements about the bonus money in the next $30 billion that it provides to the insurance giant. Already, the government has given A.I.G. $170 billion."
By Tuesday of this week House and Senate members as well as administration officials were "called on A.I.G. to rescind the bonuses and warned that they would introduce legislation to recoup the money, including the threat of a tax on A.I.G. employees."
"Senate Democrats will seek to recoup $165 million in bonuses paid to executives of the troubled insurance giant American International Group through a narrowly focused tax, unless the money is returned voluntarily, party leaders announced this morning."
"Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader announced that Max Baucus, Finance Committee Chairman are scheduled to "unveil a proposal by tomorrow that would tax up to 98 percent of the bonus money. "That will certainly send a message to the people at AIG and all others who try to benefit from the hardships the American people face," Reid said.
On the House side Congressmen Steve Isreal and Tim Ryan "introduced the "Bailout Bonus Tax Bracket Act" to create a 100 percent tax on bonuses over $100,000 that are distributed to employees of financial firms receiving federal bailout funds. Currently, the IRS withholds 25 percent from bonuses less than $1 million and 35 percent for bonuses more than $1 million dollars. The Israel-Ryan proposal would apply to all bonuses to government-supported firms such as AIG that have been given since Jan. 1.
Mr. Frank added his opinion that regarding A.I.G. the moment had arrived "to exercise our ownership rights.”
Frank spoke out against the A.I.G. Bonus recipients to say “I think we should be suing to get the bonuses back as the owner.”
Chairman Frank attacked the necessity for paying out "retention bonuses" in a badly preforming economy by claiming that: "“It is hardly a tough market for hiring people with financial expertise.”
Although long planned, "the AIG bonuses have sparked bipartisan outrage on Capitol Hill and place in serious jeopardy the prospect of further aid to the banking sector. AIG took huge risks with its investments in credit default swaps, an unregulated market that collapsed in the credit crisis and, it received more than $170 billion in taxpayer bailout money in the past year as a result of the financial meltdown. The company has received more bailout money than any other single firm, and is now 80 percent government-owned."
"The bonuses, guaranteed through employment contracts that had been made public to the government earlier and paid out on Friday, were offered as a way to lure or keep top talent to help sort out the financial situation at AIG, officials there said. But when news of the payments surfaced in recent days, lawmakers turned to the Obama administration, demanding that the U.S. Treasury attempt to claw back some of the money."
"Despite serious efforts to stop the bonuses, the administration apparently was unable to stop the payments. Yesterday, President Obama expressed his unhappiness with the bonuses and directed government lawyers to review the company's contracts to see whether provisions guaranteeing the bonuses can be overturned. The administration also last week persuaded the company to restructure some of the payments, and the top seven AIG executives had earlier agreed to forego their bonuses through this year."
New York State Attorney General Cuomo, according to New York Times reports: "subpoenaed A.I.G. on Monday for the names of the people who shared in the new bonus pool." Cuomo went on to say "the fact that 11 people who received some of the money were no longer at A.I.G., raised questions about whether the bonuses were truly for retention purposes."
The New York Times speculated that: "Mr. Cuomo may be able to use a state law about fraudulent conveyance to force A.I.G. to rescind the bonuses. Mr. Cuomo would have to show that A.I.G. was undercapitalized when it paid the bonuses and that the people who received the bonuses did not earn them."
During an interview this past Monday, Mr. Cuomo said: “I understand they (A.I.G.) have contracts,... That’s not necessarily determinant because a lot has happened since that contract was signed.”
The New York Times concludes by explaining that: "A.I.G. altered some of its practices last fall after discussions with Mr. Cuomo. The company canceled about $160 million in planned expenses for conferences as well as $600 million in payouts in deferred compensation plans after Mr. Cuomo threatened to sue the company."
Majority Leader Reid stated "We as a Congress are not defenseless,... We can also do things."
Senator Charles Schumer was summarized by The Washington Post as having said: "AIG executives would be given an opportunity to pay back the bonus money voluntarily, before being hit with the tax" and was directly quoted by The Washington Post "If you don't return it on your own (referring to AIG oficials), we will do it for you," Schumer said.
The Washington Post explained that: Senator Charles Grassley, the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee has intimated that: "The tax idea has quickly gained momentum as the quickest and most efficient method for capturing the bonus money." Grassley stated to Max Baucus: "I want to back you up on looking into that and doing what we can to make sure these things don't happen in the future."
Senator Christopher Dodd, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, has proposed "to write a tax provision in a way that is specifically targeted to that audience."
The Washington Post has speculated that Dodd's action "to write a tax provision in a way that is specifically targeted to that audience:"to write a tax provision in a way that is specifically targeted to that audience."
When speaking to reporters today, Steny Hoyer, trying to arouse public sentiment against AIG executives proclaimed: "Have they no shame, have they no sense of responsibility to American taxpayers? . . . Have they no sense of decency?"
