The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com
- U.S. Charges Stanford With "Massive Ponzi Scheme"
- Presented By:
- Chris Weigant: Friday Talking Points [67] -- Washington At Warp Speed
- California Unemployment Rate Tops 10 Percent
- Schwarzenegger Declares California Drought Emergency
| U.S. Charges Stanford With "Massive Ponzi Scheme" | Top |
| U.S. securities regulators on Friday accused Texas billionaire Allen Stanford, his college roommate and three of their companies of carrying out a "massive Ponzi scheme" over at least a decade and misappropriating at least $1.6 billion of investors' money. Meanwhile, a Houston judge ruled on Friday that Laura Pendergest-Holt, the only person arrested in the $8 billion Allen Stanford fraud investigation, could walk free after she posted a $300,000 bond. | |
| Presented By: | Top |
| Chris Weigant: Friday Talking Points [67] -- Washington At Warp Speed | Top |
| We open today's column with a mental image -- a gigantic metal turtle-bot, inching its way along. Clomp, clomp, clomp... it moves forward so slowly you can barely see it move. Voiceover: "This is Washington." But wait! Barack Obama jumps aboard, and the robot transforms into a giant steamroller. It starts moving so fast, flattening issues left and right, until you can barely even see it and it becomes a blur. "This is Obama's Washington. Any questions?" Barack Obama is moving Congress so fast, we're approaching warp speed. Consider the fact that neither presidents Reagan nor Clinton got their ( much smaller) stimulus packages passed for over six months -- and Obama got his passed in mere weeks . And with Clinton and Reagan, that was a major party of their presidential legacy, whereas with Obama it is just the first item on a very long list of enormous changes to be made. Soon. Even the Republicans are worried by the Obama juggernaut. Here is none other than William Kristol, whom the Washington Post took pity on after he lost his job at the New York Times (so much for that "liberal media," huh?), in a recent column : Obama outlined much of this new foundation in the most unabashedly liberal and big-government speech a president has delivered to Congress since Lyndon Baines Johnson. Obama intends to use his big three issues -- energy, health care and education -- to transform the role of the federal government as fundamentally as did the New Deal and the Great Society. Conservatives and Republicans will disapprove of this effort. They will oppose it. Can they do so effectively? Perhaps -- if they can find reasons to obstruct and delay. They should do their best not to permit Obama to rush his agenda through this year. They can't allow Obama to make of 2009 what Franklin Roosevelt made of 1933 or Johnson of 1965. Slow down the policy train. Insist on a real and lengthy debate. Conservatives can't win politically right now. But they can raise doubts, they can point out other issues that we can't ignore (especially in national security and foreign policy), they can pick other fights -- and they can try in any way possible to break Obama's momentum. Only if this happens will conservatives be able to get a hearing for their (compelling, in my view) arguments against big-government, liberal-nanny-state social engineering -- and for their preferred alternatives. Right now, Obama is in the driver's seat -- a newly elected and popular president with comfortable Democratic congressional majorities and an adulatory mainstream news media. Still, Republicans do have advantages over their forebears in 1965 and 1933. There are more Republicans in Congress today, so they should be able to resist more effectively. There is much more of a record of liberal failures to look back on now than when the New Deal and the Great Society were being rushed through. Conservatism is more sophisticated than it was back then. So there is no reason to despair. Wow. I mean, wow. There it is in black and white: they got nothin'. Here is a respected conservative voice (respected by conservatives, that it), admitting that their only shot is to be the Party of Obstructionism. Just Say No (to everything Obama tries to do). And never fear, because "conservatism is more sophisticated" than before. Um, isn't that kind of an elitist thing to say, Bill? I'm just asking... Anyway, let me repeat Kristol's main point, just because it is such a joy to type: "Conservatives can't win politically right now." Wow. But he's right about the speed factor. Obama is getting so many things done in such a short period of time, it is literally hard to keep track of it all. The liberal blogosphere anticipated somewhat of an identity crisis right before Obama took office, worrying that without Bush to bash on a daily basis, maybe there wouldn't be enough news to write about anymore. Those fears, looking back after Obama's first month, are now in the laughable category. There's too much to write about. That's the new problem. Obama, while overturning Bush-era policies at a fast clip (just to have something to do before breakfast, one assumes), has gotten his stimulus package through. He's gotten several other good laws passed that the public barely even had time to notice (like children's health insurance expansion). This week alone, he gave a "don't call it the State of the Union" State of the Union speech to Congress, introduced his first budget outline, and capped the week off by announcing our withdrawal plan from Iraq. That's in one week . And those are just the high points . Maybe we need a stimulus plan for Congress: free Red Bull for everyone, just so they can keep up with the pace. Nancy Pelosi, when she was first sworn in as Speaker of the House, announced that Congress was going to be working longer weeks and more days, because things needed to get done. Then, after Bush proved he could stop anything Democrats passed that he didn't specifically ask for, they kind of slacked off a bit. Well, it's time to get back to work, in a big way. So far, for the most part, Congress has kept up. They slipped their original target date for the stimulus (Inauguration Day) back to Presidents' Day, but then they met that deadline. And the most amusing thing to me, which really proves what I'm trying to say here, is that the House passed an omnibus budget for the current fiscal year (something they were supposed to do before last October, and hadn't done yet) -- and nobody even noticed . Obama is moving so fast, that the news cycles don't have time to keep up. All eyes were instead on Obama's budget for next year, and this year's budget just snuck by everyone. Now usually, this would have taken weeks (if not months ) of haggling in the House before it even got to a vote. While it still has to get through the Senate, it's just astounding that it flew through under everyone's radar. Oh, and by the way, Congress is halfway through adding new members to the House of Representatives, something it hasn't done for 80 years (which, as I pointed out yesterday , will remove the possibility of a tie in the Electoral College). You may have missed that one, too. It's been a busy week. Hopefully, the first of many. Maybe we should start calling it the "Do-Everything Congress." Let's see if they can live up to that label. Senator Dick Durbin gets a hat tip here for stepping up to the plate, but you'll have to wait for the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week section to hear why. This week we had a lot of contenders for Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week , which is always good news. The more the merrier, that's what I say. For refusing to let the Bush cabal slink away into the night, Senators Sheldon Whitehouse and Pat Leahy were strong contenders for the MIDOTW this week. Both spearheaded the effort to investigate the abuses of the Bush administration, and refused to just sweep everything under the carpet. Salon has some Whitehouse quotes on the matter , and the Washington Post reports today that they're moving forward. Both Leahy and Whitehouse deserve an Honorable Mention here for their efforts. Nancy Pelosi also gets an Honorable Mention, for her Rachel Maddow interview this week, where she is pushing further than even the Truth Commission proposed by Leahy. She wants prosecutions. Period. Salon's Glenn Greenwald has the story . This is the only chance we're going to get to find out what was done in our name, so I salute Pelosi for pushing harder than most Democrats on the issue. But clearly the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week was President Obama. His speech was stunning in its reach, its breadth, and even (yes) its delivery. This was not your father's State of the Union, in other words. And Bobby Jindal's response was laughable not for his delivery (which was widely panned), but for the actual content -- refusing to offer any new ideas from the GOP, which will only serve to shrink their party to its hardcore base. But, speeches aside, just look at what Obama got accomplished this week, and the outline of his plans for the next few weeks. Obama has kicked Washington in the seat of its collective pants, and for that alone he wins the MIDOTW award. Well done, Mister President! [ Congratulate President Barack Obama on the White House contact page to let him know you appreciate his efforts. ] This is getting kind of redundant. I was trying to think of a candidate for this week's Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week , and was almost to the point of not handing out an award at all (a rare occurrence, but it has happened before) when I remembered the gift that just keeps on giving. Sigh. Roland Burris, for the second consecutive week, is the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week for new revelations that there was apparently some nepotism involved in his Senate seat as well as the usual Blagojevich slime. Burris got told by yet another leading Illinois Democrat, his fellow Senator Dick Durbin, that he really should resign. Burris ignored him. As with last week, Burris will share his MDDOTW award with the Democrats in the Illinois legislature, who could end this nightmare by calling a special election. For the second week in a row, they both deserve their Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award. I have helpfully provided Burris' contact info here, in case you'd like to join the chorus urging him to go. [ Contact Roland Burris on his Senate contact page to let him know what you think he should do. ] [ Program Note: I have been asked by a nameless congressional staffer (yes, some of them do actually read this weekly screed) whether it is proper for them to directly draw my attention to individuals in Congress who may have done something which deserves an award. I have ruled that this is indeed proper. I cannot be "lobbied" -- as I will accept nothing of value in any way for my consideration, but then that's probably illegal anyway (just wanted to mention it). But if you'd like to contact me in the hopes of spotlighting worthy Democrats, feel free to do so via my "Email Chris" page on my website. Full anonymity, is (of course) guaranteed. Sorry for the interruption, we return you now to your regularly scheduled article.... ] Volume 67 (2/27/09) But all this patting ourselves on the back for the blinding speed doesn't mean that we've won the battle. Let's keep our shoulder to the prize and our eyes on the wheel (or something like that). Because no matter how great a product you have, you have to market it well or it will fail. And Republicans are already publicly admitting that their only hope is to rabidly attack all of Obama's ideas, meaning the other side is chomping at the bit. Democrats have to be ready with their response. So, as our usual public service, we offer up this week's suggested talking points for Democrats everywhere. Especially the ones about to be interviewed this weekend. Don't forget the SOFA Barack Obama laid out his plans for withdrawing from Iraq today. Republicans actually seem to think it's not that bad a plan (so much for all that "waving the white flag of surrender" nonsense, eh?). Nancy Pelosi was a bit concerned about the 50,000 residual troops left behind, but what Obama reportedly said today was "35-50,000." But Obama did commit to bringing all our forces home by the end of 2011. Right? Well, actually, yes and no. That's what Obama said, but the reality is that this timetable had already been set by the Status Of Forces Agreement (SOFA) which Bush signed late last year (which Obama pointed out, in the same sentence). Meaning that all the debating about it that is likely about to happen is kind of a moot point. The details of the numbers are a lesser point right now, and somebody needs to point this out. "Under the SOFA that Bush agreed to, all U.S. military personnel will be out of Iraq at the end of 2011. And, furthermore, all U.S. combat troops will pull out of Iraqi cities and back to their own bases in just a few short months. By this summer, U.S. forces will have only a very minor role in keeping stability in Iraq. Which means they'll start to come home, in large numbers. After this drawdown is complete, in 2010, we will then look at how to bring the rest of them home before the deadline we have already agreed to. This will allow the president to make his decision based on the situation at that time. I honestly don't see why there's even an argument about any of this, as we've all known this is how it was going to happen ever since Bush signed the SOFA." Trusting Obama's honesty I think Democrats are missing a key framing opportunity. The media has been allowing Republicans to rant and rave for the past few weeks about how bad Obama's plan is for (fill in the blank). The polls, however, show Obama retaining his high popularity. There is a reason for this, and I think it boils down to this: People trust Obama to at least try to do the right thing. That sounds simple. It is. Americans want to trust their president. Especially in a time of crisis. They want to believe that he is leveling with them. And, so far, they do. Democrats need to forcefully remind the media of this, and of what a change it is from the past eight years. "President Barack Obama is getting high approval ratings not just because he is changing Washington before our eyes. The real reason why is that people trust him. They trust that when he puts out a budget, he will not resort to fancy accounting tricks to hide the size of the problem. They trust that when he said something on the campaign trail he really meant it. They trust he is going to try and enact his agenda. That's why they voted for him, and that's why they continue to support him. You need to point that out to your viewers a bit more often. When you use phrases like 'the American people believe X or Y,' you need to check the polls first to see if you are correct, or if you're just repeating what some Republican told you is the case. The American | |
| California Unemployment Rate Tops 10 Percent | Top |
| SACRAMENTO (AP) -- California's unemployment rate jumped to 10.1 percent in January, the state's first double-digit jobless reading in a quarter-century. The jobless rate announced Friday by the state Employment Development Department represents an increase from the revised figure of 8.7 percent in December. It also is 2.5 percentage points higher than the national jobless rate in January of 7.6 percent. A year ago, California's unemployment rate was 6.1 percent. Since then, steep declines in the construction, finance, information and retail industries have put thousands out of work. "The recession is worse than we thought," said Howard Roth, chief economist at the state Department of Finance. The number of people without jobs in California soared to more than 1.8 million, up 754,000 from January 2008. Roth said he believed the construction and finance industries had bottomed out, only to see losses increase in both. He said he hopes for marginal improvement in the economy over the second half of the year. Stephen Levy, senior economist for the Palo Alto-based Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy, said the last time California's unemployment topped 10 percent was June 1983. "They're confirming what we already know, which is that we're in a very, very deep recession that is going to last for many months," Levy said. Nonfarm payroll jobs declined by 494,000, or 3.3 percent, from a year ago, according to the state's survey of California businesses. A separate federal survey of households showed a drop of 283,000 jobs from December, or a loss of 437,000 jobs from January 2008. Of California's jobless, nearly 1 million had been laid off while about 127,000 left their jobs voluntarily. The others were new to the labor market or were trying to re-enter. In a statement, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said the unemployment numbers released Friday are "a sobering reminder" that rejuvenating the state's economy should be government's top priority. The two-year state budget package approved last week includes economic stimulus measures such as a $10,000 tax credit for buyers of new homes and tax credits for movie studios and multistate corporations. It also relaxes environmental rules for some construction projects and provides incentives for small businesses that hire more workers. "It is extremely important that we put people back to work. This is why we negotiated all the extra pieces in the budget," Schwarzenegger said during a Friday campaign event in Fresno to promote six budget-related measures that will appear on the May 19 special election ballot. Home builders are looking to the homebuyer tax credit, which takes effect April 1, to start pulling the industry out of its slump. "Hopefully, that will give a shot in the arm for the housing markets that have been so depressed in the last two years," said Tim Coyle, senior vice president of the California Building Industry Association. The industry typically expects to build about 200,000 housing units a year. In 2008, it built just 66,000, resulting in roughly 300,000 lost jobs, he said. The last time California's unemployment rate was over 10 percent was during a 12-month period that ended in June 1983. Construction, manufacturing, transportation, trade, information, and professional and financial services were among the sectors posting the biggest losses, according to the figures released Friday. They lost a combined 86,700 jobs over the past month. Adding the hospitality and leisure industries, those sectors lost 537,000 jobs from a year ago. The information sector posted the largest decline in the past month, shedding 27,700 jobs, most of them in the motion picture and sound industries. The construction trades posted the largest year-over-year decline on a percentage basis, losing 130,800 jobs or 15.5 percent. Education and health care services saw job increases. "It looks like California's precipitous manufacturing decline continues," said Gino DiCaro, spokesman for California Manufacturers and Technology Association. "Since January 2001, we have now lost close to 500,000 manufacturing jobs in California. That's a quarter of California's industrial base, and those are simply high-wage jobs that California can't afford to lose." DiCaro said his group has studied private sector vs. public sector job growth since 2001 and found that the private sector accounts for just 15 percent of new jobs. "California's got a lot of work ahead of it to improve the job climate in the state," he said. Job losses could be on the horizon for state government workers as the Schwarzenegger administration looks to trim costs further. The governor's office has said the state must reduce its payroll by 10 percent, which could include laying off up to 10,000 state employees. Cities and counties across California also are laying off public employees. "The government sector has certainly slowed down, where before it was one of the top three job sectors," said Jodi Chavez, a Newport Beach-based vice president at the national staffing firm Ajilon. She said her agency is seeing increased hiring among beer and wine distributors and manufacturers of video games. "I think families are spending more time at home than going out," she said. January's double-digit unemployment figure could be revised downward as additional information comes in, said Kevin Callori, spokesman for the Employment Development Department. The rising jobless rate is putting a strain on the state fund that pays out unemployment insurance. The Employment Development Department said 717,525 Californians were receiving unemployment insurance benefits in January, up from 480,858 at the same time last year. In January, California began borrowing from the federal government to keep its unemployment insurance fund solvent. The employment department projected the state will need to borrow $2.4 billion through year's end and $4.9 billion in 2010 if the state doesn't adjust its benefits or taxes on employers. One potential bright spot in Friday's report: New jobless claims in California fell to 75,514, down from 87,979 in December. Associated Press Writer Juliet Williams contributed to this report. | |
| Schwarzenegger Declares California Drought Emergency | Top |
| SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a state of emergency Friday because of three years of below-average rain and snowfall in California, a step that urges urban water agencies to reduce water use by 20 percent. "This drought is having a devastating impact on our people, our communities, our economy and our environment, making today's action absolutely necessary," the Republican governor said in his statement. Mandatory rationing is an option if the declaration and other measures are insufficient. The drought has forced farmers to fallow their fields, put thousands of agricultural workers out of work and led to conservation measures in cities throughout the state, which is the nation's top agricultural producer. Agriculture losses could reach $2.8 billion this year and cost 95,000 jobs, said Lester Snow, the state water director. State agencies must now provide assistance for affected communities and businesses and the Department of Water Resources must protect supplies, all accompanied by a statewide conservation campaign. Three dry winters have left California's state- and federally operated reservoirs at their lowest levels since 1992. Federal water managers announced last week that they would not deliver any water this year to thousands of California farms, although that could change if conditions improve. The state has said it probably would deliver just 15 percent of the water contractors have requested this year. Schwarzenegger declared a statewide drought in June but stopped short of calling a state of emergency. His 2008 executive order directed the state Department of Water Resources to speed water transfers to areas with the worst shortages and help local water districts with conservation efforts. Over the last few weeks, storms have helped bring the seasons' rain totals to 87 percent of average, but the Sierra snowpack remains at 78 percent of normal for this time of year. State hydrologists say the snowpack must reach between 120 to 130 percent of normal to make up for the two previous dry winters and replenish California's key reservoirs. Court decisions intended to protect threatened fish species also have forced a significant cutback in pumping from the Sacramento-San Joaquin delta, the heart of the state's delivery system. The governor, farmers and lawmakers have argued for years that California must upgrade its decades-old water supply and delivery system and build new reservoirs. "The situation is extremely dire," said Tim Quinn, executive director of the Association of California Water Agencies, adding that the governor's action Friday "underscores the urgency of serving the long-term structural problems." The state delivers water to more than 25 million Californians and more than 750,000 acres of farmland. Schwarzenegger's order leaves the door open for more severe restrictions later. Additional measures can include mandatory water rationing and water reductions if there is no improvement in water reserves and residents fail to conserve on their own. At least 25 water agencies throughout the state already have imposed mandatory restrictions, while 66 others have voluntary measures in place. The state prefers such local efforts so it does not have to call for statewide rationing, Snow said. The federal government on Thursday created a drought task force to provide farmers technical assistance in managing existing water supplies. Farmers also could be eligible for federally-backed emergency loans. Almond farmer Shawn Coburn of Mendota said the emergency declaration comes too late for many growers who already are halfway through the season. Some farmers didn't bring in bees to pollinate, while others sprayed their orchards with chemicals that keep nuts from forming. "It's too late," he said. "It's going to sound horrible coming from a farmer because you never turn down help, but come on, this thing is over with." ___ Associated Press writer Tracie Cone in Fresno contributed to this report. | |
CREATE MORE ALERTS:
Auctions - Find out when new auctions are posted
Horoscopes - Receive your daily horoscope
Music - Get the newest Album Releases, Playlists and more
News - Only the news you want, delivered!
Stocks - Stay connected to the market with price quotes and more
Weather - Get today's weather conditions
| You received this email because you subscribed to Yahoo! Alerts. Use this link to unsubscribe from this alert. To change your communications preferences for other Yahoo! business lines, please visit your Marketing Preferences. To learn more about Yahoo!'s use of personal information, including the use of web beacons in HTML-based email, please read our Privacy Policy. Yahoo! is located at 701 First Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA 94089. |
No comments:
Post a Comment