It appears that one of the sticking points on the stimulus package was that Senator Susan Collins insisted on stripping whistleblower protections from contractors from the conference report.
Considering the history waste, fraud, and abuse at BIW, the largest private employer in the state, I could see how the distinguished gentlewoman from Maine might not favor transparency.
It looks like executive pay caps in the stimulus will be dropped because the so-called fiscal hawks think that they will cost too much:
Unfortunately, [Representative Brad] Sherman told me that he believes the executive compensation limits added to the Senate’s stimulus are going to get removed during conference talks with the House. The reason: a new Congressional Budget Office estimate that the pay caps will cost the government $10.8 billion in lost tax revenue over the next 10 years.
“The plan is to take out the executive compensation provisions … and blame the Republicans for setting out the level [of $800 billion]” for the final version of the stimulus, Sherman said.
Here, with Kennedy showing up to cast his vote.
Just go and read the shrill one’s latest:
What do you call someone who eliminates hundreds of thousands of American jobs, deprives millions of adequate health care and nutrition, undermines schools, but offers a $15,000 bonus to affluent people who flip their houses?
A proud centrist. For that is what the senators who ended up calling the tune on the stimulus bill just accomplished.
Good writing. Go Read.
So Nancy Pelosi, or actually her staffer Karina, shows us what 3.6 million jobs lost looks like.
It’s falling off a cliff, with no signs of bottoming.
We’ve lost 3.6 million jobs, as opposed to 1.6 in the early 1990s recession, and 2.7 million jobs following the dotbomb bust.
Rachael Maddow on the stimulus.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
The head of the Agriculture committee, Collin Peterson (D-MN-07) is proposing that credit default swaps be treated like the insurance that they are. Here is money quote(PDF):
(h) LIMITATION ON ELIGIBILITY TO PURCHASE A CREDIT DEFAULT SWAP.—It shall be unlawful for any person to enter into a credit default swap unless the person would experience financial loss if an event that is the subject of the credit default swap occurs.
…
EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section shall be effective for credit default swaps (as defined in section 1a(34) of the Commodity Exchange Act) entered into after 90 days after the date of the enactment of this section.
Basically, what this is saying is that you can’t buy insurance on something unless you actually benefit from it.
This was discovered a long time ago, specifically 263 years ago, when the British Parliament passed the Marine Insurance Act of 1746:
In 1746, Parliament passed the Marine Insurance Act, requiring anyone seeking to collect on an insurance contract to have an interest in the continued existence of the insured property. Thus was born the insured-interest doctrine. The indemnity doctrine, which precludes a buyer from insuring property for more than it’s worth, soon followed. The point of these rules is to limit insurance contracts to trading existing risks and not to create new risks by giving buyers of insurance incentive to destroy property. The doctrines have been part of insurance law in both England and the United States (which in 1746 were colonies under English common law) ever since.
Unfortunately, it appears that the distinguished gentleman from Minnesota only intends for this regulation to be temporary, but it’s a good start.
It should be permanent though, there is a reason that this adopted so long ago.
The Senate just voted to add a $15,000 tax credit for home buyers to the bailout program.
It’s a bad idea, which Dean Baker correctly calls it a house flipping subsidy.
You see, a day after being nominated by Obama, Senator Gregg recused himself on all votes on the stimulus package.
The thing is, in order to break a filibuster, you need 3/5 of all senators, so a non vote is the same as a no vote.
So he just announced that he will be voting to support any filibuster on the stimulus package.
First, he demanded that a Republican replace him, and now he has declared that he will support a Republican filibuster.
Now is the time to tell that rat-bastard that you changed your mind, because you heard the rumor about him and the 16 year old boy, Mr. President
With 21 ‘Phants voting against, largely, it appears, because the report in the Moonie Times saying that he would not prosecute torture was in error, and he actually has refused to rule out prosecutions.
It appears that Judd Gregg is demanding a promise that anyone who the (Democratic) governor appoints would caucus with the Republicans, and the word is that the rather Broderiffic Governor of New Hampshire, John Lynch would likely do this anyway.
Screw it. Why give a ‘Phant a leg up in the 2010 election in a state that is increasingly blue.
Update:
OK, the NY Times is reporting that there is a rumor that former NH Senator Warren Rudman would be appointed as a caretaker:
But there are no guarantees that Mr. Lynch would pick a Democrat: New Hampshire prizes its political independence, and the governor is a moderate. Some analysts say he could turn to a well-regarded Republican — former Senator Warren Rudman has been mentioned — to serve as a kind of caretaker to fill out the remainder of Mr. Gregg’s term, which expires at the end of 2010.
This might work, as Rudman is fairly clearly a vote against cloture almost all the time, and he won’t run in 2010.
Mark Steyn supports Syphilis and other STDs because they might prevent people from having sex outside of wedlock:
Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, is on TV explaining the (at this point the congregation shall fall to its knees and prostrate itself) “stimulus.” “How,” asks the lady from CBS, “does $335 million in STD prevention stimulate the economy?”
“I’ll tell you how,” says Speaker Pelosi. “I’m a big believer in prevention. And we have, er… there is a part of the bill on the House side that is about prevention. It’s about it being less expensive to the states to do these measures.”
Makes a lot of sense. If we have more STD prevention, it will be safer for loose women to go into bars and pick up feckless men, thus stimulating the critical beer and nuts and jukebox industries. To do this, we need trillion-dollar deficits, which our children and grandchildren will have to pay off, but, with sufficient investment in prevention measures, there won’t be any children or grandchildren, so there’s that problem solved.
I really cannot read this as anything but an endorsement of STDs, and this is not The Onion.
H/t Booman Tribune.
Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) has proposed a bill that would cap salary, bonuses and stock options at $400,000.00/year, the salary of the President of the United States, for any company that took federal bailout money.
It’s not gonna happen. It’s political grandstanding.
And I like it….A lot….
After the stimulus proposal got no Republican votes at all, it appears that the rank and file house Democrats are telling their leaders that they have no interest at all in making nice:
Rank-and-file Congressional Democrats had been willing to give Republicans the business tax cuts and other provisions they wanted in the stimulus. That is, up until every single one voted against the bill on the House floor Wednesday.
Now, in both the House and the Senate, angry members are lobbying Democratic leaders to yank those tax breaks back.
I would agree. All that kowtowing to the ‘Phants does is make your policy prescriptions worse.
There is no common ground on which to negotiate. Republicans at the national level, particularly in the House of Representatives, have no interest in making things better while they are in the minority.
We are hearing reports that New Hampshire Senator Judd Gregg (R) is being considered for Secretary of Commerce.
This is interesting for a number of reasons:
If this is true, then, once the Norm Coleman clown show is done, we would have 60 votes against a filibuster, assuming, of course, that Joe Lieberman doesn’t knife the Dems in the back.
Well, we just had another example of one of Coleman’s hand picked witnesses saying something that they shouldn’t, though this time, it was under cross, as opposed to direct, examination.
Peter DeMuth admitted that the Coleman challenge team cherry picked him, even though they have maintained that there has been no such activity:
Upon cross-examination by Franken attorney Kevin Hamilton, DeMuth said he was contacted by the Republican Party and told about the problem. “They asked me if I knew my absentee ballot had been rejected. I said no,” said DeMuth. “They asked me if I was a supporter of Norm Coleman, and I said yes, and they proceeded to ask me if I would like to go further.”
Let’s think about this for a moment: Over the last several days, the Coleman camp has said repeatedly that they are not cherry-picking who they’re helping out, that they don’t know who the people they’re advocating for actually supported, and for all they know they’re helping out Franken-voters.
This is becoming really pathetic.
I’m not sure why Norm Coleman and His Evil Minions&trade are doing this…My best guess, based on nothing, is that they figure that they will have a donation list that they can use in the future that is, as Rod Blagojevich would say, is “Bleeping Golden.”
One interesting thing is that ‘Phant support for the bill has plummetted, because the prior times that they voted, they knew that Bush would veto, so there was no chance of it becoming law.
The Republican Party, opposing healthcare for children since 1945.
The GOP claimed that it was about providing healthcare to the children of legal immigrants, but really, it’s another case of their opposing a program because it will work, albeit imperfectly, as it will still leave about 5 million children without health insurance.
A similar measure has already passed the house.
The Hedge Fund Transparency Act would force hedge funds to register with regulators, file annual disclosures, and cooperate with SEC investigators.
It’s a start.
The most worrisome thing, Madoff not withstanding, is not how hedge funds can break the law, but how much of what they do is legal, since a lot of it appears to be market manipulation and insider trading to my untrained eye.
An unnamed Holder aide is denying that he made any promise not to prosecute torture:
Eric Holder has not made any commitments about who would or would not be prosecuted. He explained his position to Senator Bond as he did in the public hearing and in his responses to written questions.
So it appears that Kit Bond’s statements to the Washington Times are now in dispute.
I really think that Eric Holder and Barack Obama both need to publicly disavow the news report.
The vote was 17-2.
Full Senate approval as Attorney General looks to be a cinch.