Flashback: It Was Bush, GOP

That Opposed Executive Compensation Caps

By Sam Stein

It is a rather curious spectacle to see congressional Republicans express outrage at the exorbitant bonuses being handed out by bailed-out companies and blame the Obama administration for failing to curb the practice with AIG. Because when the first installment of the Troubled Asset Relief Program was passed it was the Bush administration and GOPers in Congress who were insisting that caps on executive compensation not be part of the legislation.

As the New York Times reported at the time that TARP was being crafted, "Congress and the administration remained at odds over the demands of some lawmakers, including limits on the pay of top executives whose firms seek help."

Former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson said that while he was upset with the levels of salary afforded to top executives, any cap on such would dissuade companies from participating in the TARP.

"If we design it so it's punitive and so institutions aren't going to participate, this won't work the way we need it to work," he told Fox News Sunday on September 21.

Senator Richard Shelby, the top Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, told CBS news that: "It should be up to the board of directors of a private corporation to set the compensation of an executive; it shouldn't be Congress's role."

Senator Mel Martinez told CNBC that: "While it is very appealing to think about executive compensation as being a part of this, one of the drawbacks to that is perhaps that we would have fewer entities participate in what is essentially a voluntary act."

And House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, "outraged" over AIG's issuance of $165 million in bonuses, said he was not in favor of "the federal government be[ing] able to set salaries across the board," when the issue of executive compensation arose in September 2008.

The issue extended to when the Obama administration was tasked with writing its own version of the TARP. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, likewise dismayed over AIG's bonuses this past week, said back in early February that while he was "appalled" at some of the perks executives had received, he did want "the government to take over these businesses and start telling them everything about what they can do."

That said, the Obama administration too was pushing back against overly-strict caps on executive earning albeit still favoring some form of limitation.

Of course, a distinction could be made between executive compensation and issuance of bonuses. One being salary, the other being rewards. But in this and other cases, money is fungible. And back when the Troubled Asset Relief Program was being debated, it was the leadership of the GOP and the past administration that asked that the issue not be touched for fear that it would derail the legislation.

It was, after all, President Bush who warned lawmakers not to "insist on provisions that would undermine the effectiveness of the plan" while Barney Frank, chairman of the House banking committee, declared that there would be "no golden parachutes while we are the owners" of the bad assets of Wall Street firms.

(Hat tips to Think Progress and Dana Milbank)

Help Share TRUTH !

B4B

Cuomo Reveals AIG Details:
"numerous individuals who received large 'retention' bonuses
are no longer at the firm."

(B4B Note: I Smell HUSH MONEY) !

(HuffPost) AIG's assertion that it had no choice but to make multi-million dollar bonus payments was undercut this afternoon by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who revealed new details about the now-infamous pay packages.

Cuomo reveals that 73 individuals received bonuses of $1 million or more, with one recipient getting a bonus of more than $6.4 million.

According to Bloomberg News, AIG has "also budgeted $57 million in "retention" pay for employees who will be dismissed, according to a March 2 filing to the Securities and Exchange Commission."

AIG planned to award about 4,600 of its managers and employees a total of about $1 billion, Bloomberg News reported in January, citing two people familiar with the situation. In addition to $450 million for employees in the financial products unit that sold credit-default swaps, AIG was to give about $470 million to staff of three other subsidiaries and $148 million to top executives, according to the people and company filings.

Of the $450 million for the financial products unit, the $165 million in retention pay was for 2008 and due to be paid by March 15, $55 million was paid in December and an additional $230 million was originally earmarked for 2009 retention payments. Liddy has said he wants to reduce the 2009 payments by at least 30 percent.

In particular, Cuomo takes aim at AIG's rationale for distributing more than $160 million in retention payments to members of its Financial Products subsidiary, "the unit of AIG that was principally responsible for the firm's meltdown," according to a letter sent by Cuomo to Barney Frank, chairman of the House Committee on Financial Services.

Though AIG has stressed that payments were essential to retain individuals at Financial Products vital to unwinding the subsidiary business, Cuomo notes that "numerous individuals who received large 'retention' bonuses are no longer at the firm."

Cuomo's office also learned more details about the bonuses:

• The top recipient received more than $6.4 million;
• The top seven bonus recipients received more than $4 million each;
• The top ten bonus recipients received a combined $42 million;
• 22 individuals received bonuses of $2 million or more, and combined they
received more than $72 million;
• 73 individuals received bonuses of $1 million or more; and
• Eleven of the individuals who received "retention" bonuses of $1 million
or more are no longer working at AIG, including one who received $4.6
million;

Again, these payments were all made to individuals in the subsidiary whose performance
led to crushing losses and the near failure of AIG. Thus, last week, AIG made more than 73
millionaires in the unit which lost so much money that it brought the firm to its knees, forcing taxpayer bailout. Something is deeply wrong with this outcome. I hope the Committee will
address it head on.

We have also now obtained the contracts under which AIG decided to make these
payments. The contracts shockingly contain a provision that required most individuals' bonuses to be 100% of their 2007 bonuses. Thus, in the Spring of last year, AIG chose to lock in bonuses for 2008 at 2007 levels despite obvious signs that 2008 performance would be disastrous in comparison to the year before. My Office has thus begun to closely examine the circumstances under which the plan was created.

B4B

VIDEO:
President Obama's Response To AIG Bonuses
Blames "Recklessness and Greed"

Click B4B if video does not appear

VIDEO:
MSNBC's Rachel Maddow
Reviews AIG Pathetic Greed !

If Video Does Not Appear Click B4B

President Obama to Unveil Plan to

Boost Small-Business Lending

By Kim Chipman

March 15 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama will spend more than half of the $730 million in government funds set aside to help small businesses to expand federal guarantees and lower lending fees to try to revive the flow of credit, people familiar with the matter said.

Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner will announce the $375 million plan tomorrow as part of a strategy to bolster Small Business Administration lending, the people said. The money will come from the $787 billion economic stimulus plan Congress passed last month.

Obama also will announce his intention to spend more than $10 billion in an effort to unlock the secondary credit market and increase bank liquidity, the people said. White House officials are trying to counter criticism in Congress that a $700 billion financial rescue plan is benefiting mostly banks rather than consumers or non-financial companies. Banks are still hoarding cash after $1.2 trillion in writedowns and losses since 2007.

“We know that small businesses are the engine of growth in the economy, and we absolutely want to do things to help them,” Christina Romer, who heads Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” today. “Because we know we’re doing a lot of help for banks. We’re doing a lot of help for homeowners. Small-business people need it, too.”

Under the new program, SBA will guarantee as much as 90 percent of loans, up from 85 percent for those under $150,000 and 75 percent for larger ones, the person said.

Job-Growth Engine

Romer also said that the Obama administration is succeeding in its fight against the economic decline and predicted the stimulus plan will revive growth.

Obama says ensuring the stability of small businesses is crucial because they are an engine for job growth. Yet many such companies are struggling as credit has dried up. The Small Business Administration typically guarantees $20 billion a year in loans, though new lending is on track to fall below $10 billion this year, the people said, citing the administration’s data.

U.S. gross domestic product is forecast to contract this quarter after shrinking at a 6.2 percent annual pace from October to December, the most since 1982. The jobless rate climbed to 8.1 percent last month as U.S. employers cut 651,000 workers from payrolls.

Geithner has said the administration’s financial rescue efforts will be aimed at restoring capital to banks that need it and trying to resuscitate consumer loan markets.

“By increasing the federally guaranteed portion of SBA loans, and giving more power to the SBA to expedite loan approvals, we believe we can turn around the dramatic decline in SBA lending we have seen in recent months,” Geithner said in a Feb. 10 speech.

B4B

Barney Frank On AIG

"Time To Fire Some People" !

WASHINGTON — Rep. Barney Frank charged Monday that a decision by financially strapped insurance giant AIG to pay millions in executive bonuses amounts to "rewarding incompetence."

Echoing outrage expressed on both sides of the political aisle in the wake of revelations that American International Group will pay roughly $165 million in bonuses, Frank said he believes it's time to shake up the company.

"These people may have a right to their bonuses. They don't have a right to their jobs forever," said Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat who is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

Appearing on NBC's "Today" show, Frank noted that the Federal Reserve Board, using a Depression-era statute, was the institution that gave AIG its initial government bailout, before Congress passed legislation providing for additional assistance. He said he did not think sufficient safeguards were built into that initial bailout by the Fed.

The $165 million was payable to executives by Sunday and was part of a larger total payout reportedly valued at $450 million. The company has benefited from more than $170 billion in a federal rescue.

AIG reported this month that it had lost $61.7 billion for the fourth quarter of last year, the largest corporate loss in history. The bulk of the payments at issue cover AIG Financial Products, the unit of the company that sold credit default swaps, the risky contracts that caused massive losses for the insurer.

It also was revealed over the weekend that American International Group Inc. used more than $90 billion in federal aid to pay out foreign and domestic banks, some of whom had received their own multibillion-dollar U.S. government bailouts.

Some of the biggest recipients of the AIG money were Goldman Sachs at $12.9 billion, and three European banks _ France's Societe Generale at $11.9 billion, Germany's Deutsche Bank at $11.8 billion, and Britain's Barclays PLC at $8.5 billion. Merrill Lynch, which also is undergoing federal scrutiny of its bonus plans, received $6.8 billion as of Dec. 31.

The money went to banks to cover their losses on complex mortgage investments, as well as for collateral needed for other transactions.

On ABC's "Good Morning America" Monday, Sen. Richard Shelby said Congress must do everything it can to make sure the government money going to AIG is handled appropriately.

"We ought to explore everything that we can through the government to make sure that this money is not wasted," the Alabama Republican said. "These people brought this on themselves. Now you're rewarding failure. A lot of these people should be fired, not awarded bonuses. This is horrible. It's outrageous."

Frank said he was disgusted, asserting that "these bonuses are going to people who screwed this thing up enormously."

"Maybe it's time to fire some people," he said. "We can't keep them from getting bonuses but we can keep them from having their jobs. ... In high school, they wouldn't have gotten retention (bonuses), they would have gotten detention."

AIG has agreed to Obama administration requests to restrain future payments. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner pressed the president's case with AIG's chairman, Edward Liddy, last week.

"He stepped in and berated them, got them to reduce the bonuses following every legal means he has to do this," said Austan Goolsbee, staff director of President Barack Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board.

Lawrence Summers, a leading Obama economic adviser, said Sunday that Geithner had used all his power, "both legal and moral, to reduce the level of these bonus payments."

In an interview that aired Sunday on CBS' "60 Minutes," Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke did not address the bonuses but expressed his frustration with the AIG intervention.

"It makes me angry. I slammed the phone more than a few times on discussing AIG," Bernanke said. "It's _ it's just absolutely _ I understand why the American people are angry."

In a letter to Geithner dated Saturday, Liddy said outside lawyers had informed the company that AIG had contractual obligations to make the bonus payments and could face lawsuits if it did not do so.

B4B

Presidential Notice and Message
on Iranian Sanctions

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

March 11, 2009

TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES:

Section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)) provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless, prior to the anniversary date of its declaration, the President publishes in the Federal Register and transmits to the Congress a notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date. In accordance with this provision, I have sent the enclosed notice to the Federal Register for publication, stating that the Iran emergency declared on March 15, 1995, is to continue in effect beyond March 15, 2009.

The crisis between the United States and Iran resulting from the actions and policies of the Government of Iran that led to the declaration of a national emergency on March 15, 1995, has not been resolved. The actions and policies of the Government of Iran are contrary to the interests of the United States in the region and pose a continuing unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States. For these reasons, I have determined that it is necessary to continue the national emergency declared with respect to Iran and maintain in force comprehensive sanctions against Iran to respond to this threat.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
March 11, 2009.
# # #

B4B

(First Lady Michelle Obama joins in the applause at the Executive Order signing ceremony
Wednesday, March 11, 2009 in the East Room of the White House, creating the White House Council on Women and Girls.
White House Photo/Pete Souza)

“Opportunities their mothers and grandmothers and great grandmothers never dreamed of”

WHITE HOUSE

A little while ago the President signed an Executive Order to ensure there is always an eye kept on how every government agency is addressing the challenges confronted by women of all ages. The White House Council on Women and Girls will be chaired by Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett, with Director of Public Liaison Tina Tchen serving as Executive Director, and will made up of Cabinet Secretaries and other top White House staff. It will begin its work immediately by asking each agency to analyze their current status and ensure that they are focused internally and externally on women.

During its first year, the Council will also focus on formulating comprehensive, coordinated policies in the following areas:

• Improving women’s economic security by ensuring that each of the agencies is working to directly improve the economic status of women.
• Working with each agency to ensure that the administration evaluates and develops policies that establish a balance between work and family.
• Working hand-in-hand with the Vice President, the Justice Department’s Office of Violence Against Women and other government officials to find new ways to prevent violence against women, at home and abroad.
• Finally, the critical work of the Council will be to help build healthy families and improve women’s health care.

President Obama opened his remarks speaking about the women in his life, before signing the Executive Order to put it all in motion:

I sign this order not just as a President, but as a son, a grandson, a husband, and a father, because growing up, I saw my mother put herself through school and follow her passion for helping others. But I also saw how she struggled to raise me and my sister on her own, worrying about how she'd pay the bills and educate herself and provide for us.

I saw my grandmother work her way up to become one of the first women bank vice presidents in the state of Hawaii, but I also saw how she hit a glass ceiling -- how men no more qualified than she was kept moving up the corporate ladder ahead of her.

I've seen Michelle, the rock of the Obama family -- (laughter) -- juggling work and parenting with more skill and grace than anybody that I know. But I also saw how it tore at her at times, how sometimes when she was with the girls she was worrying about work, and when she was at work she was worrying about the girls. It's a feeling that I share every day.

And he closed his remarks on the same note:

So now it's up to us to carry that work forward, to ensure that our daughters and granddaughters have no limits on their dreams, no obstacles to their achievements -- and that they have opportunities their mothers and grandmothers and great grandmothers never dreamed of. That's the purpose of this Council. Those are the priorities of my presidency. And I look forward to working with all of you to fulfill them in the months and years to come.

All right, so I'm going to go sign this thing. Thank you very much.

Read more, including the full list of initial members, in the official release.

Be Inspired...Be Informed...Be Involved !

B4B

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

_________________________________________________________________

March 11, 2009

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT

ON EARMARK REFORM

Room 350

Dwight D. Eisenhower Executive Office Building

11:23 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. I ran for President pledging to change the way business is done in Washington and build a government that works for the people by opening it up to the people. And that means restoring responsibility and transparency and accountability to actions that the government takes. And working with the Congress over my first 50 days in office, we've made important progress toward that end.

Working together, we passed an American Recovery and Reinvestment Act that's already putting people back to work doing the work that America needs done. We did it without the customary Congressional earmarks -- the practice by which individual legislators insert projects of their choosing. We're implementing the Recovery Act with an unprecedented level of aggressive oversight and transparency, including a website -- recovery.gov -- that allows every American to see how their tax dollars are spent and report on cases where the system is breaking down.

I also signed a directive that dramatically reforms our broken system of government contracting, reining in waste and abuse and inefficiency; saving the American taxpayers up to $40 billion each year in the process.

And I've laid out plans for a budget that begins to restore fiscal discipline so we can bring down the $1.3 trillion budget deficit we've inherited and pave the way for our long-term prosperity. For the first time in many years, we've produced an honest budget that makes the hard choices required to cut our deficit in half by the end of my first term in office.

Now, yesterday Congress sent me the final part of last year's budget; a piece of legislation that rolls nine bills required to keep the government running into one, a piece of legislation that addresses the immediate concerns of the American people by making needed investments in line with our urgent national priorities.

That's what nearly 99 percent of this legislation does -- the nearly 99 percent that you probably haven't heard much about.

What you likely have heard about is that this bill does include earmarks. Now, let me be clear: Done right, earmarks have given legislators the opportunity to direct federal money to worthy projects that benefit people in their districts, and that's why I've opposed their outright elimination. And I also find it ironic that some of those who rail most loudly against this bill because of earmarks actually inserted earmarks of their own –- and will tout them in their own states and their own districts.

But the fact is that on occasion, earmarks have been used as a vehicle for waste, and fraud, and abuse. Projects have been inserted at the 11th hour, without review, and sometimes without merit, in order to satisfy the political or personal agendas of a given legislator, rather than the public interest. There are times where earmarks may be good on their own, but in the context of a tight budget might not be our highest priority. So these practices hit their peak in the middle of this decade, when the number of earmarks had ballooned to more than 16,000, and played a part in a series of corruption cases.

In 2007, the new Democratic leadership in Congress began to address these abuses with a series of reforms that I was proud to have helped to write. We eliminated anonymous earmarks and created new measures of transparency in the process, so Americans can better follow how their tax dollars are being spent. These measures were combined with the most sweeping ethics reforms since Watergate. We banned gifts and meals and made sure that lobbyists have to disclose who they're raising campaign money from, and who in Congress they send it to. So we've made progress. But let's face it, we have to do more.

I am signing an imperfect omnibus bill because it's necessary for the ongoing functions of government, and we have a lot more work to do. We can't have Congress bogged down at this critical juncture in our economic recovery. But I also view this as a departure point for more far-reaching change.

In my discussions with Congress, we have talked about the need for further reforms to ensure that the budget process inspires trust and confidence instead of cynicism. So I believe as we move forward, we can come together around principles that prevent the abuse of earmarks.

These principles begin with a simple concept: Earmarks must have a legitimate and worthy public purpose. Earmarks that members do seek must be aired on those members' websites in advance, so the public and the press can examine them and judge their merits for themselves. Each earmark must be open to scrutiny at public hearings, where members will have to justify their expense to the taxpayer.

Next, any earmark for a for-profit private company should be subject to the same competitive bidding requirements as other federal contracts. The awarding of earmarks to private companies is the single most corrupting element of this practice, as witnessed by some of the indictments and convictions that we've already seen. Private companies differ from the public entities that Americans rely on every day –- schools, and police stations, and fire departments.

When somebody is allocating money to those public entities, there's some confidence that there's going to be a public purpose. When they are given to private entities, you've got potential problems. You know, when you give it to public companies -- public entities like fire departments, and if they are seeking taxpayer dollars, then I think all of us can feel some comfort that the state or municipality that's benefitting is doing so because it's going to trickle down and help the people in that community. When they're private entities, then I believe they have to be evaluated with a higher level of scrutiny.

Furthermore, it should go without saying that an earmark must never be traded for political favors.

And finally, if my administration evaluates an earmark and determines that it has no legitimate public purpose, then we will seek to eliminate it, and we'll work with Congress to do so.

Now I know there are members in both Houses with good ideas on this matter. And just this morning, the House released a set of recommendations for reform that I think hold great promise. I congratulate them on that.

Now I'm calling on Congress to enact these reforms as the appropriation process moves forward this year. Neither I nor the American people will accept anything less.

It's important that we get this done to ensure that the budget process works better, that taxpayers are protected, and that we save billions of dollars that we so desperately need to right our economy and address our fiscal crisis. Along with that reform, I expect future spending bills to be debated and voted on in an orderly way, and sent to my desk without delay or obstruction, so that we don't face another massive, last-minute omnibus bill like this one.

I recognize that Congress has the power of the purse. As a former senator, I believe that individual members of Congress understand their districts best. And they should have the ability to respond to the needs of their communities. I don't quarrel with that. But leadership requires setting an example and setting priorities, and the magnitude of the economic crisis we face requires responsibility on all our parts.

The future demands that we operate in a different way than we have in the past. So let there be no doubt: This piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business, and the beginning of a new era of responsibility and accountability that the American people have every right to expect and demand.

If we're going to solve our economic crisis; if we're going to put Americans back to work; if we're going to make the investments required to build a foundation for our future growth -- then we must restore the American people's faith that their government is working for them, and that it's on their side. That's the government I promised. That's the government I intend to lead.

Thank you very much, everybody.

END 11:33 A.M. EDT

B4B

---

Editorial: Jack Cafferty

"GOP Becoming a CARTOON" !

NEW YORK (CNN) -- The Republican Party is becoming a cartoon.

Where to start?

Bobby Jindal: "I'm certainly not nearly as good of a speaker as Obama." Good OF a speaker? How about not as good at eighth-grade grammar either. It's embarrassing.

Sarah Palin? Billing the taxpayers for her kids to travel to official events the children weren't even invited to? She finally agreed to pay back the state for that money she took.

Her per diem charges to the state in the amount of $17,000 while she was living at home instead of in the governor's mansion? She has now agreed to pay the taxes owed on that money. Another tawdry grab at a few dollars that didn't belong to her.

Michael Steele, the newly elected chairman of the Republican National Committee, down on his knees apologizing to the helium-filled poster boy of the conservative right? Pathetic.

If the Republicans are ever to emerge from the long dark night they have created for themselves it will have to be without pandering to the right wing nuts that comprise Rush Limbaugh's radio audience. Didn't they learn anything in the last election?

All of which is to say the GOP is blowing it big time. They were handed a golden opportunity to redeem themselves with the election of Barack Obama -- a chance to line up and in unison condemn the evil their party put in the White House the previous eight years.

The country had had a bellyful of George Bush, Dick Cheney, and the rest of the messengers of darkness in Washington who had sold out the principles of the Republican Party in favor of huge deficits, a doubling of the national debt, and a growing intrusion of the federal government into people's private lives.

But instead of getting on board the change train and recognizing the incredible amount of damage their people had done to the country, Republicans go blithely along as though nothing has happened. They're busy obstructing Obama's programs and criticizing the Democrats' spending plans that are aimed at trying to bring the country out of a horrible recession.

I hate to break it to them, but a lot has happened. And they're not going to like any of it.

The latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll shows the Republican Party's favorability rating at an all-time low. President Obama's is at an all-time high. The same poll shows that Republicans are getting most of the blame for the partisanship that hinders governmental progress. And perhaps most telling, when asked which party is best equipped to lead the country out of recession, the Republicans trail the Democrats by a stunning 30 points.

And while all this is going on, the GOP ran a straw poll on who the party's nominee should be for president in 2012. Ready?

Mitt Romney finished first followed by Bobby Jindal, Ron Paul and Sarah Palin.

The Republican Party is marching double-time down the road to irrelevance and they don't even know it.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Jack Cafferty.

B4B

VIDEO: Jim Cramer Explains

Stock Market Manipulation 101

Explains as 'standard procedure'...'so what it's illegal'

Article by Julie Satow (HuffPost) In light of the current economic crisis, and with the hullabaloo ignited recently by Jon Stewart over the accuracy of CNBC's reporting, we thought it might be useful to revisit this shocking 2006 interview Jim Cramer gave to TheStreet.com's Aaron Task.

In it, the host of Mad Money says he regularly manipulated the market when he ran his hedge fund. He calls it "a fun game, and it's a lucrative game." He suggests all hedge fund managers do the same. "No one else in the world would ever admit that, but I could care. I am not going to say it on TV," he quips in the video.

He also calls Wall Street Journal reporters "bozos" and says behaving illegally is okay because the SEC doesn't understand it anyway.

Here are some gems:

-On manipulating the market: "A lot of times when I was short at my hedge fund, and I was positioned short, meaning I needed it down, I would create a level of activity before hand that could drive the futures,"

-On falsely creating the impression a stock is down (what he calls "fomenting"): "You can't foment. That's a violation... But you do it anyway because the SEC doesn't understand it." He adds, "When you have six days and your company may be in doubt because you are down, I think it is really important to foment."

-On the truth: "What's important when you are in that hedge fund mode is to not be doing anything that is remotely truthful, because the truth is so against your view - it is important to create a new truth to develop a fiction," Cramer advises. "You can't take any chances."

Special thanks to our tipster Henry Chukuka! Keep those tips coming team!

WATCH:

If video does not appear click B4B

President Obama Adds To
His List of '50 Day' Accomplishments
Now Taking On Education

While Republicans WHINE That He's
"Doing Too Much"...Huh ?

From WHITE HOUSE

In the opening of his speech today at the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, the President met critics head on who complain of too much change, too fast:

Every so often, throughout our history, a generation of Americans bears the responsibility of seeing this country through difficult times and protecting the dream of its founding for posterity. This is a responsibility that has fallen to our generation. Meeting it will require steering our nation’s economy through a crisis unlike any we have seen in our time. In the short-term, that means jumpstarting job creation, re-starting lending, and restoring confidence in our markets and our financial system. But it also means taking steps that not only advance our recovery, but lay the foundation for lasting, shared prosperity.

I know there are some who believe we can only handle one challenge at a time. They forget that Lincoln helped lay down the transcontinental railroad, passed the Homestead Act, and created the National Academy of Sciences in the midst of Civil War. Likewise, President Roosevelt didn’t have the luxury of choosing between ending a depression and fighting a war. President Kennedy didn’t have the luxury of choosing between civil rights and sending us to the moon. And we don’t have the luxury of choosing between getting our economy moving now and rebuilding it over the long term.

The President explained why, on education in particular, we cannot afford to wait, noting that even within a few years America will see a different reality: "By 2016, four out of every ten new jobs will require at least some advanced education or training."

The President pledged to end pointless partisan finger-pointing, and to ensure that new investments also came with new reforms. He pointed to deep commitments both in the recovery act and his budget proposal, while also telling the audience that "It is time to start rewarding good teachers and stop making excuses for bad ones."

He proposed four pillars of reform:

1) "Investing in early childhood initiatives" like Head Start;

2) "Encouraging better standards and assessments" by focusing on testing itineraries that better fit our kids and the world they live in;

3) "Recruiting, preparing, and rewarding outstanding teachers" by giving incentives for a new generation of teachers and for new levels of excellence from all of our teachers.

4) "Promoting innovation and excellence in America’s schools" by supporting charter schools, reforming the school calendar and the structure of the school day.

And for students themselves, the President had a message for them as well:

Of course, no matter how innovative our schools or how effective our teachers, America cannot succeed unless our students take responsibility for their own education. That means showing up for school on time, paying attention in class, seeking out extra tutoring if it’s needed, and staying out of trouble. And to any student who’s watching, I say this: don’t even think about dropping out of school. As I said a couple of weeks ago, dropping out is quitting on yourself, it’s quitting on your country, and it is not an option – not anymore. Not when our high school dropout rate has tripled in the past thirty years. Not when high school dropouts earn about half as much as college graduates. And not when Latino students are dropping out faster than just about anyone else. It is time for all of us, no matter what our backgrounds, to come together and solve this epidemic.

B4B Note: Today's message from President Obama regarding education was made at The Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Convention of which ZERO Republicans attended this weekend. PITIFUL !
B4B

Republican Lahood Slams Party's Charges of "Socialism", "Obama Recession"

Says Obama "Inherited" This Economic Mess

By Sam Stein (HuffPost)

Secretary of Transportation Ray Lahood hit back hard on Monday to charges from White House critics that President Barack Obama's economic policies -- focused on leveraging government spending to stimulate demand -- had exacerbated the recession and constituted a form of socialism.

In an interview with the Huffington Post, LaHood, one of the few Republican members of the Obama administration, scoffed at the recent talking points emanating from the congressional leaders of his own party. His voice rising at times with emotion, the transportation czar tackled first the notion that the president was a socialist in disguise.

"I don't agree with it," LaHood said. "If you go out and interview these people working on this road in Maryland... these people are thrilled. They are thrilled that they are working in March on a good paying job building roads, which is what they were trained to do. That's going to be happening all over America. So the idea that this is socialism -- it is not socialism, it is economic development. It is going to provide an economic engine around communities all over American for jobs; good paying jobs; and help people pay their bills. I don't call that socialism.... We are the model for the world when it comes to infrastructure. We are the model for the interstate system. I don't call that socialism. Our $40 billion [for the Department of Transportation]: not socialism. It is good paying jobs that is going to drive the economies in a lot of states and a lot of communities."

LaHood's comments come amidst a growing chorus of GOP critics claiming that Obama is engineering a government takeover of the nation's main economic organs. The theme has found its way into mainstream political dialogue as well. In an interview last week with the New York Times, Obama was asked bluntly whether he is a socialist. The president initially brushed the question off, then called the reporters back after the interview ended to supplement his response. "It was hard for me to believe that you were entirely serious about that socialist question," Obama told the Times' scribes. "I did think it might be useful to point out that it wasn't under me that we started buying a bunch of shares of banks."

Perhaps more importantly, public opinion polls suggest that a large proportion of Americans are open both to additional stimulus spending as well as government intervention to revamp insolvent banks. Faced with these numbers, Republican strategists have deployed a separate strategy: portraying the president, with each passing day, as more and more responsible for the current crisis.

Asked about this line of attack, replete with phrases like the "Obama recession," Secretary LaHood offered a similarly ardent rebuke. If blame is to be cast, he declared, it can only, at this point, lie with the previous White House.

"This is not an Obama recession," he said. "He inherited all of this. He inherited a $1 trillion dollar debt. He inherited the recession. He inherited the lousy stock market. All of this was inherited. The guy has been in office a little over a month and what he has tried to do is listen to every economist he could listen to. And he put in place some opportunities to get people to work quickly through the transportation bill portion of it, to help the banks, and to help the real estate industry. And it is going to take time."

Help Share the Facts !

B4B

President Obama Cracking Down on
Defense Contractors

No-Bid Contracts and Outright Fraud Must Stop !

(WHITE HOUSE) Last week began with the fiscal responsibility summit, where the President and members of Congress came together to generate ideas to get the country on a sustainable long-term track. One of the exchanges that got the most attention was between the President and Senator John McCain, who discussed the idea of procurement overruns, in Defense Department contracts in particular.

Wednesday Sen. McCain joined the President again to develop that idea further, along with Senators Carl Levin and Claire McCaskill and Representatives Edolphus Towns and Peter Welch. The President signed a Presidential Memorandum that will reform government contracting by strengthening oversight and management of taxpayer dollars, ending unnecessary no-bid and cost-plus contracts and maximizing the use of competitive procurement processes, and clarifying rules prescribing when outsourcing is and is not appropriate. The OMB will be tasked with giving guidance to every agency on making sure contracts serve the taxpayers, not the contractors.

In addition, the President endorsed the goals of the bipartisan effort on defense procurement reform led by Senators Carl Levin and McCain, and has asked Defense Secretary Gates to work with the Senators going ahead. In his remarks, President Obama made clear that while there are those who will try to protect contractor excesses behind cries of weakening our national defenses, there will be a bipartisan, firm stand to put those excesses to an end:

The American people's money must be spent to advance their priorities -- not to line the pockets of contractors or to maintain projects that don't work.

Recently that public trust has not always been kept. Over the last eight years, government spending on contracts has doubled to over half a trillion dollars. Far too often, the spending is plagued by massive cost overruns, outright fraud, and the absence of oversight and accountability. In some cases, contracts are awarded without competition. In others, contractors actually oversee other contractors. We are spending money on things that we don't need, and we're paying more than we need to pay. And that's completely unacceptable.

This problem cuts across the government, but I want to focus on one particular example, and that is the situation in defense contracting. Now, I want to be clear, as Commander-in-Chief, I will do whatever it takes to defend the American people, which is why we've increased funding for the best military in the history of the world. We'll make new investments in 21st century capabilities to meet new strategic challenges. And we will always give our men and women the -- in uniform, the equipment and the support that they need to get the job done.

But I reject the false choice between securing this nation and wasting billions of taxpayer dollars. And in this time of great challenges, I recognize the real choice between investments that are designed to keep the American people safe and those that are designed to make a defense contractor rich.

Last year, the Government Accountability Office, GAO, looked into 95 major defense projects and found cost overruns that totaled $295 billion. Let me repeat: That's $295 billion in wasteful spending. And this wasteful spending has many sources. It comes from investments and unproven technologies. It comes from a lack of oversight. It comes from influence peddling and indefensible no-bid contracts that have cost American taxpayers billions of dollars.

It's A New Day !

B4B

CSPAN VIDEO: MUST SEE/Share !

Congressman Kanjorski (Pa.) Tells Facts
That US Economy Was on Verge of
Total Collapse September 15, 2008

Explains TRUTH Behind Bush's Original Bail-Out !

Why Was This NEVER On The 'News' ???
Click B4B if video does not appear

President Obama to Release Fed Funds
for Embryonic Stem Cell Research

By BEN FELLER and LAURAN NEERGAARD, AP

WASHINGTON – Eight years of frustration are close to an end for scientists seeking ways to use embryonic stem cells to combat illness and injury.

On Monday, President Barack Obama plans to reverse limits imposed by President George W. Bush on using federal money for research with embryonic stem cells.

The long-promised move will allow a rush of research aimed at one day better treating, if not curing, ailments from diabetes to paralysis — research that is has drawn broad support, including from notables like Nancy Reagan, widow of the late Republican President Ronald Reagan, and the late Christopher Reeve.

But it stirs intense controversy over whether government crosses a moral line with such research, and opponents promptly denounced the move.

Obama will hold an event at the White House to announce the move, a senior administration official said Friday. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the policy had not yet been publicly announced.

Embryonic stem cells are master cells that can morph into any cell of the body. Scientists hope to harness them so they can create replacement tissues to treat a variety of diseases — such as new insulin-producing cells for diabetics, cells that could help those with Parkinson's disease or maybe even Alzheimer's, or new nerve connections to restore movement after spinal injury.

"I feel vindicated after eight years of struggle, and I know it's going to energize my research team," said Dr. George Daley of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute and Children's Hospital of Boston, a leading stem cell researcher.

But the research is controversial because days-old embryos must be destroyed to obtain the cells. They typically are culled from fertility-clinic leftovers otherwise destined to be thrown away.

Under Bush, taxpayer money for that research was limited to a small number of stem cell lines that were created before Aug. 9, 2001, lines that in many cases had some drawbacks that limited their potential usability.

But hundreds more of such lines — groups of cells that can continue to propagate in lab dishes — have been created since then, ones that scientists say are healthier, better suited to creating treatments for people rather than doing basic laboratory science.

Work didn't stop. Indeed, it advanced enough that this summer, the private Geron Corp. will begin the world's first study of a treatment using human embryonic stem cells, in people who recently suffered a spinal cord injury.

Nor does Obama's change fund creation of new lines. But it means that scientists who until now have had to rely on private donations to work with these newer stem cell lines can apply for government money for the research, just like they do for studies of gene therapy or other treatment approaches.

The aim of the policy is to restore "scientific integrity" to the process, the administration official said.

"America's biomedical research enterprise experienced steady decline over the past eight years, with shrinking budgets and policies that elevated ideology over science. This slowed the pace of discovery and the search for cures," said Sean Morrison, director of the University of Michigan's Center for Stem Cell Biology.

Critics immediately denounced the move.

"Taxpayers should not have to foot the bill for experiments that require the destruction of human life," said Tony Perkins of the conservative Family Research Council. "President Obama's policy change is especially troubling given the significant adult stem cell advances that are being used to treat patients now without harming or destroying human embryos."

Indeed, there are different types of stem cells: So-called adult stem cells that produce a specific type of tissue; younger stem cells found floating in amniotic fluid or the placenta. Scientists even have learned to reprogram certain cells to behave like stem cells.

But even researchers who work with varying types consider embryonic stem cells the most flexible and thus most promising form — and say that science, not politics, should ultimately judge.

"Science works best and patients are served best by having all the tools at our disposal," Daley said.

Obama made it clear during the campaign he would overturn Bush's directive.

During the campaign, Obama said, "I strongly support expanding research on stem cells. I believe that the restrictions that President Bush has placed on funding of human embryonic stem cell research have handcuffed our scientists and hindered our ability to compete with other nations."

He said he would lift Bush's ban and "ensure that all research on stem cells is conducted ethically and with rigorous oversight."

"Patients and people who've been patient advocates are going to be really happy," said Amy Comstock Rick of the Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research.

The ruling will bring one immediate change: As of Monday, scientists who've had to meticulously keep separate their federally funded research and their privately funded stem cell work — from buying separate microscopes to even setting up labs in different buildings — won't have that expensive hurdle anymore.

Next, scientists can start applying for research grants from the National Institutes of Health. The NIH already has begun writing guidelines that, among other things, are expected to demand that the cells being used were derived with proper informed consent from the woman or couple who donated the original embryo.

It's A New Day !

B4B

Obama's Surprise Sasha & Malia

with White House Gift

WASHINGTON — First daughters Malia and Sasha Obama got a big surprise after school Wednesday: a brand-new swing set.

They squealed with delight upon seeing it, a spokeswoman for the first lady said.

President Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, went to work while the girls were at school, having the set installed on the south grounds of the White House within sight of the Oval Office, where their father spends plenty of time.

Late last year as the couple planned the family's move to Washington, they had discussed with the chief usher at the White House ways to make the historic residence feel more like home for their girls, said Katie McCormick Lelyveld, a spokeswoman for Michelle Obama.

Malia and Sasha, ages 10 and 7, had never lived anywhere but Chicago.

"Many first families have made these sorts of changes to make the White House feel like home," McCormick Lelyveld said. "This one is like their little mark."

The 100 percent cedar and North American Redwood structure has four swings, including a tire swing, a slide, a fort, a climbing wall and climbing ropes. There's also a picnic table with brass plates etched with the names of all 44 presidents, she said.

"They ran right for it. They were really, really excited. All four of them," McCormick Lelyveld said.

The girls played on the set for almost an hour in chilly weather, she said. Their mother went for a swing, too.

The Obamas paid for the swing set, which was made and installed by Rainbow Play Systems of Brookings, S.D. The company's Web site says it's the most trusted brand name in wooden swing sets.

Presidents throughout the years have altered the landscape of the White House grounds to suit their recreational needs, or their children's.

James Buchanan added the first greenhouse in 1857, and Theodore Roosevelt followed with a tennis court in 1903.

Historical photos show two of Franklin D. Roosevelt's grandchildren playing on a slide near a jungle gym on the South Lawn, and much later Caroline Kennedy pushing younger brother John F. Kennedy Jr. on a swing set, also on the South Lawn.

Gerald Ford added an outdoor swimming pool, and Jimmy Carter's daughter, Amy, had a treehouse. George H.W. Bush had tree-mounted swings installed for granddaughters Jenna and Barbara, and Bill Clinton, a jogger, installed a running track.

___

White House: http://www.whitehouse.gov

B4B

1 in 8 U.S. Households Late Paying

or In Foreclosure

Prime loan defaults increasing rapidly

NEW YORK (Reuters) – About one in eight U.S. households, a record share, ended 2008 behind on their mortgage payments or in the foreclosure process as job losses intensified a housing crisis spawned by lax lending practices, the Mortgage Bankers Association said on Thursday.

With unemployment at a 16-1/2-year high and expected to continue rising until mid- to late 2010, more borrowers will pay late or fall into foreclosure this year, said the group's chief economist.

"While California, Florida, Nevada, Arizona and Michigan continue to dominate the delinquency numbers, some of the sharpest increases we saw last quarter in loans 90 days or more delinquent were in Louisiana, New York, Georgia, Texas and Mississippi, signs of the spreading impact of the recession," said Jay Brinkmann.

Duress is no longer isolated to borrowers with lower credit quality. As joblessness grew, so did late payments on prime fixed-rate loans that represent two-thirds of mortgages.

U.S. President Barack Obama's $275 billion housing stimulus program will standardize modifications for distressed loans and pave the way for more refinancing.

That should smooth differences caused by various moratoria by states and companies that temporarily curbed the surge in foreclosures in the fourth quarter, Brinkmann said.

"But keep in mind that there are three drivers to the housing problem, and this program of course addresses mostly the first one," he added, referring to loan structure, underwriting quality and fraud.

The two other problems -- an oversupply caused by overbuilding and foreclosures, and unemployment -- still loom large.

Having one in eight households late paying or in foreclosure is "unacceptable in a country like ours," said Nicholas Bratsofolis, senior managing director of structured refinance at mortgage bank LendAmerica in Melville, New York.

"Instead of wringing our hands, I think we should start utilizing the tools that the government has given to us to remedy the ills that are facing many of these homeowners," he said.

A record 11.18 percent of loans on one-to-four unit residences were at least one payment past due or in the foreclosure process in 2008.

The delinquency rate jumped 2.06 percentage points from a year ago to a record 7.88 percent. The share of loans in the foreclosure process leaped 1.26 percentage points in the year to a record 3.30 percent.

MBA started tracking the data in 1972.

Housing has yanked down the U.S. economy after being a key driver of it earlier this decade. In a vicious cycle, a weakening economy is now further siphoning demand for homes.

"In a recession like this, housing is never just about housing," said Jed Kolko, associate research director at the Public Policy Institute of California, in San Francisco. "Unemployment leads to foreclosures, foreclosures contribute to lower tax revenues, less consumer spending -- it's all related."

MORE STATES WITH MORE PROBLEMS

As the economy sours, more states have joined the five that had been primary trouble spots for late payments and foreclosures.

"We see New York being influenced by the layoffs that we've been seeing on Wall Street and some of the rest of the industry associated with that," Brinkmann noted.

"Some of the Southern states that had construction-related unemployment, whether it was forest product or plywood manufacturing. Some of the tourism industry is now being hit, certainly in Mississippi with the casinos, and in Florida."

Subprime adjustable-rate loans and prime ARM loans still drive the late payments, but that is shifting.

"We will continue to see, however, a shift away from delinquencies tied to the structure and underwriting quality of loans to mortgage delinquencies caused by job and income losses," Brinkmann said.

Of particular concern, he said, is rising joblessness for people with college education or technical training. The rate nearly doubled in the last half of 2008 to just under 4 percent.

"We saw some sharp pickups in delinquency rates with prime loans and I think that's now going to continue as long as we see unemployment continue to climb among the people most likely to own homes," Brinkmann said.

How high unemployment in that segment of the population gets and how long it stays there will "determine ultimately how long the prime fixed loan delinquencies continue to climb," he said. "Some of these people do have adequate reserves to last maybe six months or a year without a job. But the longer this thing goes on, the quicker they then run through those reserves and their loans go delinquent."

(Editing by Dan Grebler)

B4B