Barack Obama

Koch Brothers have “substantial interest” in Ed Whitfield’s XL Pipeline

October 5, 2011

In recent months Koch Industries Inc., the business conglomerate run by billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch, has repeatedly told a U.S. Congressional committee and the news media that the proposed Keystone XL oil sands pipeline has “nothing to do with any of our businesses.”

But the company has told Canadian energy regulators a different story.

In 2009, Flint Hills Resources Canada LP, an Alberta-based subsidiary of Koch Industries, applied for—and won—”intervenor status” in the National Energy Board hearings that led to Canada’s 2010 approval of its 327-mile portion of the pipeline. The controversial project would carry heavy crude 1,700 miles from Alberta to the Texas Gulf Coast.

In the form it submitted to the Energy Board, Flint Hills wrote that it “is among Canada’s largest crude oil purchasers, shippers and exporters. Consequently, Flint Hills has a direct and substantial interest in the application” for the pipeline under consideration.

That Congressional committee is headed by Kentucky’s own Rep. Ed Whitfield… and he could, perhaps, claim that because they lied to him he had no idea they we were lying. But then he’d also have to claim that he should have done as Henry Waxman suggested and actually sought the truth.

This has “nothing to do with any of our businesses,” Koch spokespeople were quoted as telling the congressman’s staff members in a May 20 letter that Waxman sent to Reps. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), the Energy and Commerce Committee chair, and Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.), who chairs the Energy and Power Subcommittee.

In that letter, Waxman urged the Republican congressmen to seek documents from Koch Industries that Waxman’s own staff had been unable to obtain. At the time, Upton and Whitfield were fast-tracking a bill—which passed the House on July 26 but was ignored by the Senate—that would force the Obama administration to decide on Keystone XL by Nov. 1.

Anyway… if you’ve not been following the XL Pipeline story, the project Whitfield is championing may dump benzene and arsenic into your drinking water, and Whitfield’s been showered with half a million dollars by the fossil fuel industry over the past few years from the fossil fuel industry — the very people he supposedly oversees.

Over the past three cycles, Whitfield has taken at least $15,000 in cash from the Koch Brothers.

And as Reuters recently reported:

The Keystone XL pipeline, awaiting a thumbs up or down on a presidential permit, would increase the import of heavy oil from Canada’s oil sands to the U.S. by as much as 510,000 barrels a day, if it gets built.

Proponents tout it as a boon to national security that would reduce America’s dependence on oil from unfriendly regimes. Opponents say it would magnify an environmental nightmare at great cost and provide only the illusion of national benefit.

What’s been left out of the ferocious debate over the pipeline, however, is the prospect that if president Obama allows a permit for the Keystone XL to be granted, he would be handing a big victory and great financial opportunity to Charles and David Koch, his bitterest political enemies and among the most powerful opponents of his clean economy agenda.

The two brothers together own virtually all of Koch Industries Inc. — a giant oil conglomerate headquartered in Wichita, Kan., with annual revenues estimated to be $100 billion.

If you want to learn more about the XL Pipeline and how to get involved in the fight against the Koch Brothers and Ed Whitfield visit TarSandsAction.org now.

Obama threatens Veto of Davis/Boehner/GOP anti-environment bills

no comments

October 4, 2011

By David M. F. Schankula

Yesterday we mentioned John Boehner’s “GONE SOFT” email blast fluffing Geofferson Davis and one of his anti-public health bills. Well, Barry Hussein has pledged to veto the bill:

The White House is threatening to veto two House bills that would delay key Environmental Protection Agency air-pollution regulations.

“These bills would prevent the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from moving ahead with long-overdue requirements to reduce air pollution from industrial boilers, solid waste incinerators, and cement plants,” the White House said in a formal “statement of administration policy.”

“The bills also would weaken EPA’s ability to ensure that its standards protect American families from a range of harmful pollutants including mercury and other toxic metals, as well as smog and soot.”

Pay Your Taxes, Super Wealthy.

one comment

September 28, 2011

By David M. F. Schankula

The Center on Budget Policy and Priorities explains why the Bush Tax Cuts must expire if the Supercommittee has any real interest in producing a balanced plan and righting the deficit:

The new congressional committee on deficit reduction (the so-called “supercommittee”) not only can consider revenue increases, but must consider them — as well as spending cuts — if it’s going to produce a balanced plan.

There are five main reasons why.

Spending cuts alone can’t do the job. The key fiscal policy goal is to reduce deficits sufficiently to stabilize the debt relative to the size of the economy. The only way to accomplish this without severe cuts that would hit low- and middle-income Americans hard — in areas ranging from Medicare, Medicaid, and possibly Social Security to basic assistance for the poor — and weaken core government functions like education, scientific research, and ensuring safe food and water, is through revenue increases.

The 2001-2003 tax cuts are a significant contributor to projected deficits. Letting some or all of those tax cuts expire would make a significant contribution to reducing the deficit.

Higher-income people can and should share in the sacrifices needed to reduce long-term deficits. Low- and moderate-income households shouldn’t be forced to bear a disproportionate share of the burden through cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and programs targeted on people who are poor or near-poor.

Taxes are low both in historical terms and in comparison with other countries. By either standard, the United States has significant room for increasing tax revenues.

Higher taxes are not an inherent barrier to economic growth. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has said that tax increases used to reduce budget deficits can improve long-term economic growth and job creation. The experience of the 1990s shows that claims that reasonable revenue increases will sink the economy largely reflect politics and ideology, not solid analysis.

Read onwards.

Sonka does the Bridge of Jefferson County

no comments

September 28, 2011

By David M. F. Schankula

It’s Wednesday in Louieville which means Mr. Sonka’s got a brand new report out… read on and click through:

******************

September 28, 2011

Tea and taxes

After repeated attempts to cut infrastructure spending, Rand Paul says he has a plan for the Sherman Minton Bridge

BY JOE SONKA

As President Barack Obama stood next to the Ohio River in Cincinnati — with the “functionally obsolete” Brent Spence Bridge carefully framed behind him for the cameras — he began his pitch for the American Jobs Act, a bill that would pump $50 billion into the economy to repair crumbling bridges and other aging infrastructure around the country.

“Sen. Rand Paul is here,” Obama said to a chorus of boos from the partisan crowd that closely resembled a campaign rally.

Obama held out his hand to stop the crowd.

“Rand’s going to be supporting the bridges,” cautioned Obama, a defense he did not bother giving in response to the crowd’s even rougher treatment of House Speaker John Boehner and Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Republican leadership whose states are connected by the bridge and currently serve as the major obstacles to the passage of his jobs bill.

The president’s defense of the junior senator from Kentucky capped off a peculiar journey for the D.C. odd couple — who agree on almost nothing policy-wise — as Paul hitched a ride on Air Force One with him into the Cincinnati-Northern Kentucky Airport last Thursday.

On the flight from D.C., Sen. Paul pitched to the president his own proposal to fix defective bridges around the country, particularly the still-closed Sherman Minton Bridge just down Interstate 71 in Louisville.

The next day, Paul would again advocate for his proposal — the Emergency Transportation Safety Fund Act — in a press conference on the Sherman Minton.

Paul presents his idea as a common sense solution to free up the federal funds needed to repair bridges like the Sherman Minton, a bipartisan fix that even the Democrats flanking him last Thursday and Friday can get behind.

Regardless of whether that turns out to be true, it marks a rather interesting turn for the Kentucky senator, who has spent most of his first year in office advocating for a massive de-funding of the federal department ultimately responsible for financing the task.

****************CLICK TO READ THE REST*******************

Chandler comes out swinging on Bush Tax Cuts

4 comments

September 27, 2011

By David M. F. Schankula

Unfortunately, he just keeps missing. Whiff. Whiff. Whiff.

Swing away Ben:

“These were the largest tax cuts that we’ve had, maybe ever, but certainly in a very long time,” he said. “And they are a tremendous cause of the deficits that we’re looking at right now. And most of those tax cuts went to the very wealthiest people in this country.”

Chandler says wealthy people today have more money as a percentage of the economy than they’ve ever had in the history of the U.S.

“It’s kept us from having the ability to properly fund things like Medicare and Social Security,” he said. “So now people want to come along and say, ‘surprisingly, we don’t have the money to fund Medicare and Social Security.’ Well, of course we don’t. We’ve given all these big tax cuts to the wealthiest people in the country.“

Ben is, of course, absolutely correct in everything he says.

Which makes it all the more ridiculous that Ben Chandler is a vocal and powerful supporter of the Bush Tax Cuts.

Let’s run through this again for Ben’s benefit, since he’s trying to play pretend.

Ben Chandler signed a pledge to NEVER raise taxes on the super rich.

Last December when a handful of turncoat House Democrats joined forces with House Republicans to force Obama’s shift on these very same destructive Bush Tax Cuts… Ben Chandler was one of the fools pushing for and then voting for extension of the Bush Tax Cuts.

And Last September, one year ago!, Ben Chandler was certainly singing a different tune — hitting the campaign trail and blasting the idea that anyone would raise taxes on the super rich.

Chandler has supported the Bush Tax Cuts over and over and over again. Now he attempts to play the other side.

Perhaps disgruntled Kentucky Democrats of the 6th District will be heartened by Ben Chandler’s words — perhaps they are so desperate for Ben to do something right that they will accept this.

But Ben Chandler acknowledging that he has directly helped cripple America’s “ability to properly fund things like Medicare and Social Security” should be of little solace to anyone who values either of those two programs, or who values the ideals of the Democratic Party.

So keep on swinging, Ben Chandler.

How many Dems out there are fooled by this pantomime?

At President’s Speech, Crowd Boos Rand Paul & Mitch McConnell… Prez only tells them to go easy on Rand

2 comments

September 23, 2011

By David M. F. Schankula

At his speech yesterday, The President gave some props to Rand Paul:

THE PRESIDENT: We’ve got some folks I just want to make sure are acknowledged here today. First of all, the Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, is in the house. Give him a round of applause. (Applause.) We’ve got the mayor of the great city of Cincinnati — Mark Mallory is here. (Applause.) We’ve got the mayor of Covington, Mayor Denny Bowman. (Applause.) Senator Rand Paul is here.

AUDIENCE: Booo –

THE PRESIDENT: Rand is going to be supporting bridges, so we’ve got to — (applause.) And we’ve got Congressman John Yarmuth in the house. (Applause.)

But no such treatment for Mitch McConnell:

THE PRESIDENT: It’s time to build an economy that creates good, middle-class jobs in this country. It’s time to build an economy that honors the values of hard work and responsibility. It’s time to build an economy that lasts. And, Cincinnati, that starts right now. That starts with your help. (Applause.) Maybe some of the people in Congress would rather settle their differences at the ballot box than work together right now. In fact, a while back, Senator McConnell said that his “top priority” — number-one priority — was “to defeat the President.” That was his top priority.

AUDIENCE:Booo –

THE PRESIDENT:Not jobs, not putting people back to work, not rebuilding America. Beating me.

Both Mitch and Rand were invited on the trip… but only Rand took the President up on the offer, because Rand has some big ideas about infrastructure and because Mitch just has big ideas about letting America drown in a shitter.

From the WH Pool comes some details of what President Obama and Rand “The Best Thing to Happen to the Republican Party” Paul chatted about:

“There is a bill I am trying to get the president interested in,” he said. He said that in the national transportation bill, 10 percent of funds are set aside for things like beautification. Paul would like to reprogram that money for emergency work on bridges. “He seemed receptive,” said Paul of Obama. “This is something I think I can get Republican support for.”

[As a side note, you'll note that the Mayors of Cincinnati and Covington were both on hand. They -- along with Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear -- met the President at the airport. But somehow... only the two mayors made the trip from the airport to the event site and Steve Beshear got left behind. Was it something he said?]

Did Steve Beshear really tell the President to “GET OFF OUR BACKS” yesterday?

one comment

September 23, 2011

By David M. F. Schankula

As Joe reported earlier, Steve Beshear put out a press release yesterday after meeting the President of the United States and giving POTUS a piece of his mind.

Let’s consider some highlights:

The Governor asked the President to work with Congress to immediately authorize federal emergency funds to repair the Sherman Minton Bridge….

“I called on the President to expedite funding for repairs to keep our families working, and reminded him that deteriorating infrastructure is just one more example of what happens when Washington keeps playing partisan games and ignores the real needs of citizens. We cannot afford to keep delaying repairs that stymie economic growth.”

Again, as Joe points out, the very notion of Steve Beshear “calling” on President Obama to “expedite” anything is ridiculous, and the fact that Steve Beshear then goes on to claim that he “reminded” the President about the danger of “partisan games” is just Steve’s latest embarrassment to all Kentucky Democrats.

And if you’re one of those Democrats who reads this blog and, on posts like this, shakes your head and wishes we’d shut up and get off the Governor’s back… well, tough luck. Make your excuses for this:

The Governor also reminded the President that the EPA’s continued and unexplained shifting of regulations regarding coal mining jeopardizes thousands of Kentucky jobs and causes detrimental ripple effects in other state job sectors – especially manufacturing.

“Coal is not only a vital national resource, but coal mining also supports thousands of Kentucky families,” said Gov. Beshear. “These arbitrary changes in EPA guidelines cause unnecessary and costly delays in permitting, which compromise jobs and investments. It’s time for the EPA to end these unpredictable policy swings and work with us on a reasonable policy that protects our families.”

Riiight.

So Governor Beshear “reminded” the President about the EPA’s “unexplained” regulations (“They’re not unexplained, you idiot,” you can almost hear the President responding) and the thousands of Kentucky lives… oh what’s the point?

Why keep up this charade?

Why is Steve Beshear even trying to lie about this?

How much time did it take you to read all that? How much time would it take you to tell the President he needs to take infrastructure investments seriously and that he needs to do something about the economy and, oh yeah, “why are you trying to destroy Kentucky? GET OFF OUR BACKS?”

According to the White House Press pool reports:

Air Force One touched down in Cincinnati at 2:11PM
The President left the plane 10 minutes later (2:21PM)
Waiting at the base of steps, the President was greeted by three men — Steve Beshear, Covington Mayor Denny Bowman and Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory
The President “shook hands and chatted briefly with each before heading off to work the rope line.”
The President took the stage in downtown Cincinnati at 2:55PM

Let’s say the drive from the airport to the event took 15-20 minutes… the Pool reports the motorcade slowed considerably as they crossed the bridge into Cincinnati. Let’s say, also, that the President had maybe five minutes between actually arriving at the site and then taking the stage.

That means, roughly speaking, there was 9 minutes between President Obama walking down the steps from Air Force One and departing the airport.

In that 9 minutes, the President of the United States has to work a rope line and have three full blown conversations… giving Beshear, hmm… about 1:30 to maybe two minutes to cram all this information in:

1) Insult the President’s intelligence;

2) Tell him how important infrastructure is even though he’s been talking about it for weeks;

3) Insinuate he’s not taking it seriously;

4) Accuse him of playing partisan politics;

5) Get in POTUS’s face and yell about the EPA;

6) Call regultaions “unexplained” and “arbitrary”

7) Finally, drone on about a bunch of stuff that doesn’t address the environmental, health or true economic impacts of Coal.

Maybe it happened.

Maybe Steve Beshear actually said all that.

Maybe.

Maybe he’s been taking speech lessons:

Or… maybe he’s, how can we put this… stretching the truth.

Should we just give him a break? Should we just take his word for it?

Sure… some might suggest we just shut up and support the governor.

But to them we say…

Deregulation, Corporate Tax Holidays, and the Trillion Dollar Lie

one comment

September 20, 2011

By David M. F. Schankula

Over the weekend, the Wall Street Journal highlighted a new report out from our friends at the Federal Reserve:

Corporations have a higher share of cash on their balance sheets than at any time in nearly half a century, as businesses build up buffers rather than invest in new plants or hiring.

Nonfinancial companies held more than $2 trillion in cash and other liquid assets at the end of June, the Federal Reserve reported Friday, up more than $88 billion from the end of March. Cash accounted for 7.1% of all company assets, everything from buildings to bonds, the highest level since 1963.

ThinkProgress focused on some of the resulting corporate and Republican doublespeak — how the GOP and Big Business seeks to use this hoarding of cash to make corporations even richer, noting:

…Republican presidential candidates and corporate leaders continue to lobby for lower corporate tax rates and huge corporate tax giveaways under the guise that they will lead to higher rates of job creation.

They go on to focus on an even wackier Republican Conclusion… that because the Corporations are hoarding so much cash, it’s time to give them a Tax Holiday, a chance to bring home the sizeable (and not included in the above $2 Trillion figure) chunks of change these Giant Coprorations have hidden away in foreign lands and foreign banks.

If the US Government would just not tax them on that money, they could bring it back home and… well, the reasoning sort of breaks down there (for why wouldn’t they just bring that cash back home and then hoard it away with the rest of their cash?). But as ThinkProgress points out:

Evidence from past repatriation tax holidays, in which corporations can bring foreign cash holdings back to the U.S. at lower tax rates, shows that companies wouldn’t use the funds to spur job growth. As one of the members on President Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers said, the 2004 repatriation holiday “didn’t accomplish the stated goals of bringing jobs and investment to the U.S.” After the holiday ended, corporations cut thousands of jobs and stashed more money overseas in anticipation of a future holiday — a perhaps prescient move, as multiple Republican presidential candidates have endorsed an even bigger tax holiday than the corporations have asked for.

Meanwhile, Republican candidates continue to endorse drastic reductions in the corporate tax rate, even as American corporations pay one of the lowest effective tax rates in the developed world.

Unmentioned by either ThinkProgress or the WSJ is the other part of this equation, the other half of the Republican Party’s lie.

For the past few months, Republicans (and some business leaders) have tried to use the $2-3 Trillion hoarding as an excuse for another type of corporate giveaway: Deregulation.

Ed Whitfield says:

American financial institutions and American businesses are collectively sitting on more than $3 trillion in cash unwilling to invest or reinvest in our economy because of the uncertainty coming from our federal government.

Ed blames the government’s regulation of Corporate America for Corporate America’s unwillingness to use the money they have to expand job markets. Because the EPA wants our water to be safe, Corporations are hoarding “more than $3 trillion in cash.” Because the Obama Administration believes Wall Street needs more policing after totally wrecking the economy so that they can’t, you know, do it all over again… corporations are hoarding “more than $3 trillion in cash.”

Mitch McConnell is making the same argument. As he told Chambers of Commerce in Texas this August:

Regulations are the main reason companies collectively are sitting on between $2 trillion to $3 trillion in cash. They are “afraid to invest any of it,” McConnell said.

Afraid!

Corporate America is cowering, clutching its blankie, and sobbing quietly. Those terrible regulations!

The Republican Party and the Giant Corporations they represent are trying to have it three ways.

They are hoarding all their cash so that if the economy totally collapses, they’ll still be sitting pretty.
They are demanding further tax breaks and they are fighting, voraciously, President Obama’s modest tax re-valuation.
They are attempting to use the fact that they’ve hoarded $2-3 Trillion in cash to bring about the deregulation they have always wanted.

Boom, Roasted: Mitch McConnell highlights the disaster of the Reagan presidency

2 comments

September 19, 2011

By David M. F. Schankula

Mitch was on Meet the Press on Sunday.

He made a lot of wild claims, like that he had no particular opinion either way about the Republican Party’s rank and file wildly cheering for the death of their fellow countrymen.

And he pretended like he’d never said that his one and only objective is to remove President Obama, consequences and America and the economy bedamned.

And Mitch McConnell said this, too:

Regretfully, it never gets talked about, but there actually are things we agree on.

Right.

Like the color of the sky and of the grass and that it’s best to inhale oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide. And you should stay hydrated and nourished. See! We agree on many important things. Mitch’s best moment, though, came after David Gregory pressed him on “the hard stuff.” Witness:

MR. GREGORY: But let’s talk about the hard stuff because my question’s about taxes.

SEN. McCONNELL: Mm-hmm.

MR. GREGORY: If the president is willing to deal on Medicare cuts, cuts to that program, are you willing to consider tax increase as part of a larger effort to reduce the deficit?

SEN. McCONNELL: Well, we’re certainly interested in tax reform. I don’t have a single member of my conference who doesn’t think it’s time to take a whole look at the tax code all over again. It’s been 25 years since President Reagan led us through this effort on a bipartisan basis back in the mid-’80s. It got the top rate from 70 percent down to 28 percent, was a big step in the right direction, and helped produce an economic boom for a fairly lengthy period of time. So tax reform, we’re certainly open to. We’re not opposed to more revenue.

That’s some hard stuff! So hard, in fact, Gregory forgot to question any of it.

Like… how is Mitch defining “economic boom”?

Or… how long is “a fairly lengthy period of time”? A month or two? A year? A couple years? A decade? Thee decades?

Here’s what one could reliably (and factually) say: Sure, the Reagan years did, eventually manage to drag America up from a recession, sort of, before ultimately cratering into a massive stock market crash and a vast Wall Street conspiracy to suck money away from average people and then, oh right!, back into recession.

Is that the economic boom Mitch McConnell is talking about?

Or is he talking about the super wealthy and the giant coprorations getting richer and richer thanks to tax reform and increased loopholes and the various other glories of Reaganomics as the rest of America got… further away.

From CBPP (pdf):

In 2007, the share of after-tax income going to the top 1 percent hit its highest level (17.1 percent) since 1979, while the share going to the middle one-fifth of Americans shrank to its lowest level during this period (14.1 percent).

Between 1979 and 2007, average after-tax incomes for the top 1 percent rose by 281 percent after adjusting for inflation — an increase in income of $973,100 per household — compared to increases of 25 percent ($11,200 per household) for the middle fifth of households and 16 percent ($2,400 per household) for the bottom fifth.

If all groups’ after-tax incomes had grown at the same percentage rate over the 1979-2007 period, middle-income households would have received an additional $13,042 in 2007 and families in the bottom fifth would have received an additional $6,010.

In 2007, the average household in the top 1 percent had an income of $1.3 million, up $88,800 just from the prior year; this $88,800 gain is well above the total 2007 income of the average middle-income household ($55,300).

Or you could look at Mitch McConnell’s mythical “Reagan Boom” this way: