Category: News and Media


Photo taken from Politico

Since former president George W. Bush passed tax cuts for the wealthy in 2001, Barack Obama vocally made it his sole mission to reverse the tax policy during his campaign and career as president since 2008.

Unexpectedly, the long battle over the financial policy has led Obama to strike a deal with the GOP that would let the Republicans extend their precious tax cuts for two more years in exchange for a 13-month extension of unemployment insurance benefits.

According to Ezra Klein from the Washington Post, Obama and the GOP came to an agreement that the GOP would get around $95 billion in tax cuts for wealthy Americans and $30 billion in estate tax cuts. Democrats got $120 billion in payroll-tax cuts, $40 billion in refundable tax credits (Earned Income Tax Credit, Child Tax Credit and education tax credits), $56 billion in unemployment insurance, and, depending on how you count it, about $180 billion (two-year cost) or $30 billion (10-year cost) in new tax incentives for businesses to invest.

Unfortunately, House Democrats have nothing but utter disdain and fury over the compromise and put out a flurry of complaints, saying Obama gave in too quickly to the GOP.

“I still don’t think it’s in the best interest of our country, I really don’t,” said Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa). “I just don’t think we fought hard enough. I disagree with the president. He had a press conference and called it a political fight. It’s not a political fight, it’s a fight about what our country is about.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) vowed on Tuesday night to filibuster what he called a “very bad agreement,” while Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) said: “I think a ransom was paid and it was a very high price,” according to a report from The Hill newspaper,

Meanwhile, Obama stood firm and hit back at his own party for wallowing in politics in a Tuesday press conference on  Dec. 7, 2010. Claiming the deal was all for the sake of the American people.

“My number one priority is to do what’s right for the American people, for jobs, and for economic growth. I’m focused on making sure that tens of millions of hardworking Americans are not seeing their paychecks shrink on January 1st just because the folks here in Washington are busy trying to score political points,” Obama said and also continued to stress the importance behind his decision.

“I’ll cite three of them. Number one, if you are a parent trying to raise your child or pay college tuition, you will continue to see tax breaks next year. Second, if you’re a small business looking to invest and grow, you’ll have a tax cut next year. Third, as a result of this agreement, we will cut payroll taxes in 2011, which will add about $1,000 to the take-home pay of a typical family,” Obama said. “So this isn’t an abstract debate. This is real money for real people that will make a real difference in the lives of the folks who sent us here. It will make a real difference in the pace of job creation and economic growth. In other words, it’s a good deal for the American people,”

I believe the President was very genuine with the reasons he gave for compromising with the GOP. Even 67 percent of Americans get why Obama did what he had to according to the Politico polls.

After a ridiculous amount of overspending on the war in Iraq and Afghanistan for over seven years, George W. Bush left the American economy in major financial crisis, leaving a heap of shit for Obama to clean up. The tax cuts have only been Bush’s retribution and have been welcome in the American economy given the devastation of the recession and unemployment. However, not everyone deserves these tax cuts especially these dishonest wealthy corporate businessmen who already cheat on their taxes. Middle income families that are struggling to get by- do.

I understand the frustration of the Democratic party with the extension of the tax cuts because  they were supposed to expire at the end of nine years. However, Obama is not to blame. The GOP went back on their word and made this their number one agenda. The Republicans opposed every measure Obama took to end the tax cuts so he did what could. I understand he campaigned to end the tax cuts for the rich since 2008 but he has until 2012 to deliver on his promise. Until then, Democrats should understand the compromise is better than nothing.

With the high rate of unemployment, new businesses that open in the District are always welcome. Many of those looking for jobs locally flocked to the new Panera Bread that opened recently at Dupont Circle, and the establishment has already accepted numerous applications. Dupont Circle will be one of their first locations here in the Capital.

“I’ve always said that there should be a Panera in D.C.,” said Dyani Hanrahan, head of community relations for Panera Bread. “It’s a great opportunity to serve the populous. For every community we move into, we want to become a part of what’s really relevant to the D.C. community.”

According to General Manager Eden Wadsworth, Panera Bread expanded because the company realized they didn’t have many locations in urban markets. Since its opening in D.C., Panera Bread has hired 50 employees and associates.

“You shouldn’t believe the stigma, that you won’t find good help here. I came from New York and the general view is that you wouldn’t find quality people to work with. That’s not true,” Wadsworth said. “I’ve met people that have been looking and spent time looking [for jobs], and I’m glad that I’ve been able to offer them positions. These are people I couldn’t imagine living without now.”

Before finding a position at Panera Bread, Donald Bell had been looking for a job since January, after he got laid off from Ronald Reagan International Airport. Without work, he struggled to pay bills and to stay in school.

“It was a tough time for me but I kept looking and I applied online here, got called in for the interview and got the job the same day,” Bell said. “I love it — it’s fun, it keeps me busy and the atmosphere is great,”

Of course Panera is not the only place hiring in town. A few blocks away from the Archives-Navy and Memorial-Penn Quarter Metro station is Carmine’s, a family-style restaurant that serves abundant portions of homemade Italian food made for sharing with friends and family. The restaurant’s birthplace is in New York, and the franchise has expanded to New Jersey, the Bahamas and finally Washington, D.C.

“We came here because of the opportunity for new market. D.C. is really thriving despite the unemployment rate being very low, so we wanted to provide jobs to a market that is growing and really great for the restaurant business,” Carmine’s general manager, Arlene Weston, said.

Since its opening in August, the restaurant branch has hired and trained more than 275 employees. “We feel we have made a great contribution to reducing the unemployment rate. We had a four week-training program to ensure newcomers understand the significance of house hospitality and the service market,” Weston said.

The general manager stated the restaurant’s goal was to promote an industry in an area that wasn’t as pronounced compared to government-related jobs, and recommended other restaurants expand their business to the Capitol.

“This place is a viable market and it’s the place to be — there’s been New York, Vegas, L.A., but D.C. is the place to be,” Weston said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, leader of a Democratic caucus that suffered historic losses in this weeks’ midterm election, announced today she will run to be the House minority leader when Congress reconvenes next year.

In an announcement made on Twitter, Pelosi said she would run the for the position because she is “driven by the urgency of creating jobs,” as well as protecting President Obama’s sweeping health care law, which Congress passed in March.

“Our work is far from finished,” she wrote in a letter to colleagues that was released today. “As a result of Tuesday’s election, the role of Democrats in the 112th Congress will change, but our commitment to serving the American people will not. We have no intention of allowing our great achievements to be rolled back. It is my hope that we can work in a bipartisan way to create jobs and strengthen the middle class.”

The announcement comes days after voters elected more than 60 new Republicans to the House, the largest pickup in an election since 1948. A growing chorus of Democrats have called on Pelosi to step down and let new members run for leadership.

Rep. Larry Kissell, D-N.C. added his voice to that chorus today, telling Politico that, “We suffered a devastating defeat on Tuesday in terms of the House of Representatives. In order to become a national party again, we should have new leadership in the next Congress.” Reps. Heath Shuler, D-N.C., John Yarmuth, D-Ky., and Jim Matheson, D-Utah, have also said they will not support their leader.

Republicans in competitive races across the country tried to tie vulnerable Democrats to Pelosi, frequently invoking her name in campaign ads. A Gallup Poll last month found that only 29% of voters view Pelosi, a 12-term California Democrat, favorably. That compares with 44% who viewed her favorably when she assumed the speakership in 2007.

“Given that there are now 60-plus defeated Democrat House members urgently seeking jobs due to Nancy Pelosi’s failed leadership, we welcome her decision to run for House minority leader,” Ken Spain, spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said in a statement.

But Pelosi remains popular among the liberal wing of the party and with many conservative Democrats tossed out of office their power within the party could grow.

“Speaker Nancy Pelosi is one of the strongest, most progressive leaders in Washington,” the liberal MoveOn said in a statement. “Some corporate Democrats are taking the wrong lesson—saying that Democrats should be less progressive and more like the Republicans. And they’re pushing Speaker Pelosi to step down. This would be a terrible loss for progressives, and for the country.”

This article was taken from USA Today.

The U.S. workforce grew a 151,ooo jobs stronger in October 2010 but the economy remains relatively weak with unemployment at 9.6 percent.

“The employment gains were concentrated in the private sector–which added 159,000 jobs – especially in service industries. Temporary-help firms added 35,000 positions; health-care employers added 24,000; and the retail sector added 28,000 jobs. The government sector was a drain on employment, shedding 8,000 positions in October,” according to the Washington Post.

“The fact is, an encouraging jobs report doesn’t make a difference if you’re still one of the millions of people who are looking for work,” Obama said

In earlier press conferences after the GOP took over the house, Obama noted both parties must work together to respond issues that are most important to the nation, the economy.

The president warned against partisan gridlock in the wake of this week’s midterm Republican landslide. “The most important competition we face in this new century will not be between Democrats and Republicans,” Obama said. “…Other countries, like China, aren’t standing still, so we can’t stand still either.”

However, The GOP and the Obama’s weakened administration have their own agendas. The Republicans are determined to repeal Obama’s Healthcare reform and even Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell made statements on ending Obama’s chances for a second term.

I feel the possibility of both parties working together is highly unlikely but for the economy’s sake, the two parties must actually work together to turn this economy around.

Staff writer Sam Youngman from the Hill newspaper, reports on President Barack Obama’s planned trip after the mid-term elections. I also got to contribute to the story with some interesting and historic facts. The full article below:

President Obama is giving Republicans a 10-day window to set the agenda for a lame-duck session and the new legislative year by leaving the country right after the midterm elections.

The timing of the president’s trip to Asia is worrying some Democrats, who believe it could cede further momentum to a resurgent Republican Party that might win a House majority on Nov. 2.

“Unless we’re planning to hold the lame duck in India, it makes zero sense to take a 10-day overseas trip right after what could be a disastrous midterm election,” said one Democratic strategist, speaking on background so as not to anger White House officials. “It will demoralize Democrats and needlessly cede message and momentum to Republicans.”

But the White House says the trip, which will also cover Japan, South Korea and Indonesia, is an important part of the president’s effort to strengthen the economy, the issue that has left Obama and his Democratic allies in peril.

“The president understands that his job requires him to focus on more than one important thing at time,” said White House spokesman Josh Earnest. “Make no mistake, a top priority of the president’s trip is ensuring markets in Asia are open to American businesses that are instrumental to creating jobs and growing the economy here at home.”

The trip, moved up a couple of days by the White House, is not without precedent, and a similar decision once resulted in a happy ending for Democrats.

Former President Clinton took a page from a Southwest Airlines “Want to get away?” commercial and left Washington for a summit in Asia immediately after Republicans won House and Senate majorities in a 54-seat tsunami in 1994. Clinton was eviscerated by the press for leaving the country after his party was left in shambles and the future of his presidency was in doubt.

“Bill Clinton’s escape from a shell-shocked White House during the post-election turmoil that descended on his administration and his party serves as a metaphor for his unraveling presidency,” wrote conservative columnist Donald Lambro.

Former Clinton White House officials, however, said time away from the country gave Clinton time to gain perspective and remind voters of the power of the presidency on the foreign policy front.

Dee Dee Myers, Clinton’s press secretary at the time, said that while a lot of people questioned the decision for the president to be out of the country, she thought it was a plus for Clinton to be away to “refocus his mindset beyond the contours of domestic policies.”

“It’s a little counter-intuitive, but it makes sense,” Myers said.

The story turned out well for Clinton, who emerged from his well documented war with Newt Gingrich’s Congress to win reelection in 1996. But Obama faces higher national unemployment figures, a new breed of angry Republican and a media environment that has been on a steady regimen of steroids since the Clinton days.

Obama, who has stayed close to home in 2010 after a whirlwind globe-trotting first year in office his administration said was designed to “restore America’s reputation abroad,” has struggled to maintain message discipline when out of the country.

During the summer of 2009 while the healthcare debate was raging, the president was forced to issue a clarifying statement during a trip in Moscow to walk back remarks then-chief of staff Rahm Emanuel made to The Wall Street Journal about the public health insurance option.

This trip has the potential to be much worse for Obama and Democrats, the Democratic strategist said, by giving Republicans a head-start in pushing for an across-the-board extension of the Bush tax cuts.

“Mark my words, they will seize the moment and ram an extension of the Bush tax cuts down our throats,” the strategist said. “Fair or not, [the trip] is just a terrible idea.”

But Larry Berman, an expert on the presidency and a political science professor at the University of California-Davis, said there is little political risk in Obama’s travel even though the “bloggers and Obama-haters are having a field day.”

Obama has been “putting most of his time and energy these past two months into the elections, trying to re-energize his base and hold losses,” Berman said. “It now makes sense to let the dust settle before returning to what looks certain to be a different political dynamic in D.C.

“Being away will allow for some perspective, perhaps a change in game plan and personnel.”

Jamal Simmons, an aide to Clinton in 1994, said Obama has a job to do as president, and his presence in Washington during the aftermath of this year’s elections is unnecessary.

“The president is not a pundit, so there’s not much use for him to sit around and haggle about the election results,” Simmons said. “Whether the Democrats win or lose, the president ought to be getting back to work governing the country and managing foreign affairs.”

Myers said that while the Washington echo chamber is filled with media and pundit speculation about the meaning of the election results, Obama will at least have the comfort of distance as he waits for the dust to settle.

“It’s not a very productive time to be in Washington,” Myers said. “There’s not much you can do.”

Cross-posted from The Hill