I'm Just Wondering Now..... Now That You're In Charge, Mr. Boehner, Where Are Those Jobs?

The GOP: Still The Party Of No

Fresh off of cutting a deal (also to be read, covering their @$$) to keep the government from shutting down Friday, the GOP is back at saying no to any form of consensus on health care reform.

Sen. Orrin Hatch on Tuesday called President Barack Obama’s endorsement of the Wyden-Brown amendment to increase state flexibility “bull.”
“This date-shift gimmick does nothing to change the fundamental problems of Obamacare,” the ranking member on the Senate Finance Committee told the Federation of American Hospitals conference. “I went on TV yesterday after Secretary [Kathleen] Sebelius and she was going on about how much flexibility this was going to give the states and how much better it was going to be for everyone. That’s bull. States still would have to provide Washington-dictated coverage and waivers fail to give relief on the Medicaid spending mandate.”

“Flexibility … I believe the technical legal term is baloney,” the Utah Republican said.

See, the bill in question would allow states to opt out of the mandate on purchasing care for all citizens, IF they come up with their own way to achieve universal care in a few years. Currently, they get to opt out in 2017, if they have their own plan. This bill would allow that to happen in 2017.

In remarks to the National Governors Association, Mr. Obama said he backed legislation that would enable states to request federal permission to withdraw from the law’s mandates in 2014 rather than in 2017 as long as they could prove that they could find other ways to cover as many people as the original law would and at the same cost. The earlier date is when many of the act’s central provisions take effect, including requirements that most individuals obtain health insurance and that employers of a certain size offer coverage to workers or pay a penalty.
“I think that’s a reasonable proposal; I support it,” Mr. Obama told the governors, who were gathered in the State Dining Room of the White House.

“It will give you flexibility more quickly while still guaranteeing the American people reform.”

If you doubt their extremism:

As [Sen. John] Barrasso and other Republicans argued forthrightly earlier this year, the only opt out provisions they really support are ones that fatally undermine the law.
And even [Sen Scott] Brown, who co-authored this plan has told us that he'd still support full repeal, even if Congress adopted this measure.

At a weekly Capitol briefing with reporters Monday, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said Obama's olive branch really just masks the case for full repeal.

"It is just making our point that not only have we seen a variety of exceptions and waivers issued for the private sector under the act, but now we are seeing how that act is troubling states in a real way as far as their trying to figure out the fiscal situations," he said.

Aside from the stupidity of Cantor's argument on it's face, remember that states like Vermont are just going the "single-payer" route, because they see this as a weaker plan from Washington. The fact is, the GOP is a group of extremists, intent on reverting us to corporate controlled health care. If they get repeal, we're right back where we started.

Speaker Boehner, Where Are The JOBS???

Bunk economics. Where are the jobs Mr. Speaker?

Boehner forwarded a letter to the White House from 150 economists – many with conservative backgrounds – saying: "To support real economic growth and support the creation of private-sector jobs, immediate action is needed to rein in federal spending." The three-paragraph letter did not seek to document a link between lower government spending and increased jobs, and some rival economists said it would be hard to do so.

So, what did the rivals say?

With unemployment at 9 percent, the evidence that federal spending hurts job growth "is thin to nonexistent," said Princeton economist Alan Blinder. If the economy were running at full capacity, he said, Republicans would have a valid argument in saying that an extra federal hire or expenditure might displace a private-sector hire or expenditure. But there's a lot of "slack in the economy," he said.

Alexander J. Field, an economics professor at Santa Clara University, said he had "very little sympathy for the sentiments" in the letter Boehner forwarded. Spending cuts should be pursued when economies are strong, not weak, he said, and the House Republicans' agenda would probably increase unemployment.

And how about the other party?

Senate Democrats said Wednesday the House GOP plan would eliminate nearly $700 million in Title I grants to schools with disadvantaged students, and about "10,000 teachers and aides could lose their jobs." Congressional offices circulated White House budget office estimates saying the Republican bill would cut Head Start by more than $1 billion, leading to the layoffs of about 55,000 teachers and staff.

The liberal Economic Policy Institute says that overall, the House GOP plan "would likely result in job losses of just over 800,000."

Oh, and Eric Cantor gets in on the looking stupid act.

The office of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., criticized the group's use of a "fiscal multiplier" in its analysis. John Irons, an economist and chief researcher for the Economic Policy Institute, said the multipliers are a standard, broadly accepted tool used by the Federal Reserve, Wall Street analysts and others.

Boehner spokesman Mike Steel said, "Our goal is to create the environment for private-sector job creation by ending Washington Democrats' spending binge – because their `stimulus' has utterly failed to create the jobs they promised."

And don't think just the GOP leadership is stupid. Their members are too.

Republican Rep. Jack Kingston of Georgia said his party needs to do a better job of explaining the need for government job cuts.

"The private sector has had to reduce the number of jobs in order to be competitive," he said, "and I think now the public sector is going to have to reduce some of their jobs in order to stay lean, or try to get lean."

Besides, Kingston said, government workers "tend to justify their jobs by coming up with more regulations on the private sector, and that kills jobs."

In other words, we need to accept 10% unemployment as a norm to be competitive in Congressman Kingston's America. What the hell is the point of being competitive in that way, for those of us who don't have a silver spoon in our mouth from birth? Why should we accept this?

The GOP members in Congress do not give a damn about you or your job, unless you're rich. They fundamentally believe the economy is driven by the wealthy- they believe "capitol" is superior to "labor." These beliefs are just false. Demand drives the American economy, not supply. Even as late as the Gingrich years, supply-side Congressmen still understood you had to do some things for workers, and to spur consumption by the middle class. Not today's GOP. If it's not corporate, John Boehner don't like it. 

The GOP's Health Care Mishaps

It's not a matter of opinion. Republicans won big, in the Congress and the State Houses in 2010, because people were unhappy with the economy. Eric Cantor is now the Majority Leader of the House because people wanted to see JOBS.

He didn't get the memo. Leader Cantor is now saying the GOP will "forbid funding" for "ObamaCare" out of the House. This is just full of stupidity in the whole comment. First off, he made sure to say they would forbid funding in the House bill. In other words, he knows the Senate is going to pass a bill that funds the bill, one way or the other. We all know that the President won't sign a bill that de-funds his main initiative. So, not only is Cantor ignoring the most important issue facing the people that elected him MAJORITY Leader, he's ignoring it to "chase windmills" on a fool's errand that will not be successful.

He's not alone though. In Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, the State House of Representatives went Republican after four years of Democratic control. The State House Health Committee, chaired by Rep. Matthew Baker (R-Tioga) isn't just defunding it. He is asserting "states rights" to nullify federal laws.

The state House Health Committee passed a bill Monday to remove Pennsylvania from the individual mandate portion of the nation health care reform law with a party-line vote.

The bill, H.B. 42, would prohibit the government from enacting or adopting any law to penalize any individual, employer or health care provider for participating in a health care system of their choosing. Health Committee Chair Matthew Baker (R-Tioga), the bill's sponsor, said it protects Pennsylvania citizens from potential federal penalties if they choose to ignore the individual mandate in the federal health care law passed last year.

"It protects a person's right to participate, or not, in any health care system," said Mr. Baker. "It provides a state-level defense against the federal government's excessive power."

Right. It's also not legal. States cannot undo federal laws. This assertion of "states' rights" might be popular with the base, but we've fought WARS over it. Your side lost. This isn't something we need to re-hash.

Now, the bottom line is this: The GOP won, both nationally and in Pennsylvania in 2010 because people wanted JOBS. They can put the word "job-killing" in anything they want, the fact is that continuing to fight health care reform will not create the jobs they promised. They can fight this fight if they'd like, and Democrats like myself prefer that they do. Eric Cantor can be sent back to the minority if he'd like, and Governor Corbett can be replaced with Joe Sestak, Rob McCord, or anyone else the Democrats would like. Frankly, I'd rather they succeed in creating jobs, but if not, I'll take the future electoral wins for my party.

They Must Be So Proud....

It appears that the "Repeal of the Job-Killing Health Care" Act has passed the U.S. House by a 245-189 vote. Three Democrats joined all of the Republicans in voting for the repeal. We'll have more on who later.

This vote is a joke. This "bill" is a joke that will not ever even reach the floor of the U.S. Senate. Majority Leader Eric Cantor is complaining about Senate Democrats "blocking a vote" on this bill, after watching the GOP block lots of votes the last two years. I find it amusing that this vote isn't even grabbing the headlines on a day when Senators are retiring and announcing re-election plans, and in fact, the President's meetings with the Chinese President is dominating the headlines. Everyone knows this bill is dead, was pointless, and was little more than a payout to their base.

I'm sure they're proud in Speaker Boehner's office. I'm sure they're proud in Majority Leader Cantor's office. Most of the country either liked this bill, or thought it didn't go far enough. They said "Repeal and Replace." If the House GOP was serious about that, and wants today's vote to be remembered as a serious vote, they now must show what "replace" means. If it's simply "medical malpractice reform, allowing people to cross state lines to buy care, and health savings accounts," they are unlikely to be taken serious. We've heard these ideas before, some of them work decently, others have serious question marks.

I have a hope in this though. I actually hope the GOP lead House makes some serious proposals. The things above could possibly be worked, with some serious compromise. There are things to fix in the original bill. There's lots of possibilities here. I don't believe John Boehner's House will do anything serious about Health Care Reform. I hope they do.