Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
E.J. Dionne and Robert Borosage agree: push the President's best initiatives.
E.J. Dionne:
Similarly, it’s worth asking why so many of Obama’s initiatives have dropped out of public view. Obama has called for raising the minimum wage to $9 an hour. Many Democrats in Congress think, correctly, that it should be set at $10. Would it be so hard for Obama to come out fighting for the minimum-wage increase — and for other steps to bolster the incomes of those stuck at the bottom of the economy? Why not expose that none of this is happening because of GOP opposition?
Obama wants to provide universal pre-K education. That ought to be a bipartisan idea. Many Republican governors have embraced the concept in their states. Shouldn’t the president be pushing harder to get it on the media’s radar by way of forcing a debate in Congress?
The president believes we need to spend more on our infrastructure to boost job creation now and to make us competitive for the long run. He’s right. But he needs to make clear it is something that’s genuinely important to him.
It’s true that Obama spoke about both his investment agenda and preschool plans at last week’s much-maligned news conference. And the White House announced on Sunday that he would embark on a series of “middle class jobs and opportunity tours.” These should be shaped by a consistent, driving theme: that the stakes in this debate are larger than the day-to-day drone of partisan invective suggests.
Obama wants to provide universal pre-K education. That ought to be a bipartisan idea. Many Republican governors have embraced the concept in their states. Shouldn’t the president be pushing harder to get it on the media’s radar by way of forcing a debate in Congress?
The president believes we need to spend more on our infrastructure to boost job creation now and to make us competitive for the long run. He’s right. But he needs to make clear it is something that’s genuinely important to him.
It’s true that Obama spoke about both his investment agenda and preschool plans at last week’s much-maligned news conference. And the White House announced on Sunday that he would embark on a series of “middle class jobs and opportunity tours.” These should be shaped by a consistent, driving theme: that the stakes in this debate are larger than the day-to-day drone of partisan invective suggests.
From the piece posted here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022804188
Robert Borosage:
The only hope for Democrats is to make it clear which party is for jobs and which party is standing in the way. That requires more than rhetoric in an election campaign. Democrats have to champion jobs measures visibly again and again, drive them into the House Republican majority, and show over and over which party is blocking progress.
That can begin by taking up the popular parts of the agenda the president put forth in his State of the Union. Push to pass an increase in the minimum wage in the Senate. Start a discharge petition in the House, mobilize activists to demand that every legislator of both parties sign up to put the measure before the House. Engage Organizing for America in a fight that will rouse the Democratic base.
Push an education package that pays for universal preschool by closing tax havens abroad, and provides resources to put teachers back to work. Wage a campaign across the country for an infrastructure bank that will rebuild our decrepit infrastructure, as a centerpiece of a strategy to revive manufacturing in the U.S. Take up the president’s call for retrofitting buildings and stump on it across the country.
That can begin by taking up the popular parts of the agenda the president put forth in his State of the Union. Push to pass an increase in the minimum wage in the Senate. Start a discharge petition in the House, mobilize activists to demand that every legislator of both parties sign up to put the measure before the House. Engage Organizing for America in a fight that will rouse the Democratic base.
Push an education package that pays for universal preschool by closing tax havens abroad, and provides resources to put teachers back to work. Wage a campaign across the country for an infrastructure bank that will rebuild our decrepit infrastructure, as a centerpiece of a strategy to revive manufacturing in the U.S. Take up the president’s call for retrofitting buildings and stump on it across the country.
From the piece posted here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022806455
So here are some of the best proposals in the President's budget.
Obama budget is a disaster for drugmakers
Posted by Sarah Kliff
Brad wrote earlier this week about how pharmaceutical companies were one of the biggest losers in President Obama’s budget. This BGov graph shows how much, exactly, they’re losing by — a lot.
The Obama budget cuts for pharmaceuticals work out to $164 billion, just under half the total health-care budget cuts the president is seeking.
Most of this grows out of the White House proposal to change the way Medicare pays for drugs to make it look more like the Medicaid program...Medicaid gets a great deal on drugs: Pharmaceutical companies must sell prescriptions to the entitlement program at the very best price they offer private insurance plans, or 23.1 percent lower than the average price...The Office of the Inspector General at Health and Human Services estimates that the provision has reduced Medicaid spending on drugs by 45 percent.
Medicare Part D, which covers prescriptions for seniors, does have the power to negotiate with drug companies. But that same OIG report found that that tends to lead to smaller discounts: 19 percent vs. the 45 percent reduction that Medicaid receives.
- more -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/04/12/obama-budget-is-a-disaster-for-drugmakers/
Posted by Sarah Kliff
Brad wrote earlier this week about how pharmaceutical companies were one of the biggest losers in President Obama’s budget. This BGov graph shows how much, exactly, they’re losing by — a lot.
The Obama budget cuts for pharmaceuticals work out to $164 billion, just under half the total health-care budget cuts the president is seeking.
Most of this grows out of the White House proposal to change the way Medicare pays for drugs to make it look more like the Medicaid program...Medicaid gets a great deal on drugs: Pharmaceutical companies must sell prescriptions to the entitlement program at the very best price they offer private insurance plans, or 23.1 percent lower than the average price...The Office of the Inspector General at Health and Human Services estimates that the provision has reduced Medicaid spending on drugs by 45 percent.
Medicare Part D, which covers prescriptions for seniors, does have the power to negotiate with drug companies. But that same OIG report found that that tends to lead to smaller discounts: 19 percent vs. the 45 percent reduction that Medicaid receives.
- more -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/04/12/obama-budget-is-a-disaster-for-drugmakers/
President Obama's Tax Proposals in his Fiscal 2014 Budget Plan
<...>
Here are the percentage changes in federal taxes that Obama proposes over the upcoming decade by type of tax:
■ Personal income taxes, mostly on the wealthy, would go up by 4 percent.
■ Corporate taxes would increase by 1 percent.
■ Excise taxes would increase by 10 percent.
■ Estate and gift taxes would go up by 40 percent.
In total, federal revenues would increase by 2.8 percent over 10 years.
Except for the excise tax increases (mainly almost a $1 per pack tax hike on cigarettes), most of the President’s proposed net tax increases would fall on the very well off.
- more -
http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2013/04/president_obamas_tax_proposals_in_his_fiscal_2014_budget_plan.php
<...>
Here are the percentage changes in federal taxes that Obama proposes over the upcoming decade by type of tax:
■ Personal income taxes, mostly on the wealthy, would go up by 4 percent.
■ Corporate taxes would increase by 1 percent.
■ Excise taxes would increase by 10 percent.
■ Estate and gift taxes would go up by 40 percent.
In total, federal revenues would increase by 2.8 percent over 10 years.
Except for the excise tax increases (mainly almost a $1 per pack tax hike on cigarettes), most of the President’s proposed net tax increases would fall on the very well off.
- more -
http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2013/04/president_obamas_tax_proposals_in_his_fiscal_2014_budget_plan.php
http://ctj.org/images/2013/obamafy2014budget.pdf
Obama budget adds domestic same-sex partners to Obamacare
Posted by
CNN White House Producer Adam Aigner-Treworgy
Washington (CNN) – Buried deep inside President Obama's 2014 budget released on Wednesday is a new proposal to expand federal health insurance benefits to same-sex domestic partners.
Framed as a measure to reduce the deficit, the proposal would amend the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program beginning in 2015 to add a "self plus one" enrollment option in addition to the "self" and "family" options. Like the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act that the administration has endorsed in prior budgets, this new FEHB formulation would work within the current legal constraints of the Defense of Marriage Act by adding a new classification for additional enrollees beyond family.
<...>
According to language in the budget, the proposed changes would allow the OPM to contract with "modern types of health plans rather than being limited to the current four statutorily-defined plans reflective of the 1950s insurance market."
"The health insurance marketplace has changed significantly since the FEHBP was enacted in 1959, and the current governing statute leaves little flexibility for the program to evolve with the changing market," the budget reads.
- more -
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/10/obama-budget-adds-domestic-same-sex-partners-to-obamacare/
Posted by
CNN White House Producer Adam Aigner-Treworgy
Washington (CNN) – Buried deep inside President Obama's 2014 budget released on Wednesday is a new proposal to expand federal health insurance benefits to same-sex domestic partners.
Framed as a measure to reduce the deficit, the proposal would amend the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program beginning in 2015 to add a "self plus one" enrollment option in addition to the "self" and "family" options. Like the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act that the administration has endorsed in prior budgets, this new FEHB formulation would work within the current legal constraints of the Defense of Marriage Act by adding a new classification for additional enrollees beyond family.
<...>
According to language in the budget, the proposed changes would allow the OPM to contract with "modern types of health plans rather than being limited to the current four statutorily-defined plans reflective of the 1950s insurance market."
"The health insurance marketplace has changed significantly since the FEHBP was enacted in 1959, and the current governing statute leaves little flexibility for the program to evolve with the changing market," the budget reads.
- more -
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/10/obama-budget-adds-domestic-same-sex-partners-to-obamacare/
Support Federal Employee Domestic Partner Benefits. The Budget proposes a change to the Federal Employee Health Benefits (FEHB) program that would create a new “self plus one” option for FEHB coverage for Federal employees. Same-sex domestic partners of Federal employees would be among those eligible to receive coverage under this new option. This proposal would align the FEHB program with best practices in the private sector as larger employers competing for talent are increasingly offering domestic partner benefits. The Administration also continues to support the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act, which provides the same benefits to same-sex domestic partners of Federal employees as those provided to married heterosexual partners of Federal employees, including not only health insurance, but also survivor annuities, compensation for work-related injuries, travel and relocation benefits, life insurance, and vision and dental benefits. In addition, the Administration has also, to the extent permissible by current law, expanded benefits for same-sex partners of Federal employees.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/factsheet/strengthening-the-economy-for-the-lgbt-community
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/factsheet/strengthening-the-economy-for-the-lgbt-community
<...>
Maintains Strong Support for Worker Protection. The Budget includes nearly $1.8 billion for DOL’s worker protection agencies, putting them on sound footing to meet their responsibilities to protect the health, safety, wages, working conditions, and retirement security of American workers. The Budget preserves recent investments in rebuilding DOL’s enforcement capacity and makes strategic choices to ensure funding is used for the highest priority activities.
- more -
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2014/assets/labor.pdf
Maintains Strong Support for Worker Protection. The Budget includes nearly $1.8 billion for DOL’s worker protection agencies, putting them on sound footing to meet their responsibilities to protect the health, safety, wages, working conditions, and retirement security of American workers. The Budget preserves recent investments in rebuilding DOL’s enforcement capacity and makes strategic choices to ensure funding is used for the highest priority activities.
• Strengthens Enforcement of Wage and Hour and Family Leave Laws. The Budget provides an increase of $3.4 million for the Wage and Hour Division (WHD) for increased enforcement of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act, which ensure that workers receive appropriate wages, overtime pay, and the right to take job-protected leave for family and medical purposes. The Budget also provides $5.8 million for WHD to develop a new integrated enforcement and case management system to allow investigators to capture higher quality and more timely data to analyze trends in labor law violations, target investigations and compliance assistance efforts, and evaluate the impact and quality of enforcement.
• Promotes Worker Health and Safety. The Budget provides $571 million for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), allowing OSHA to inspect hazardous workplaces and work with employers to help them understand and comply with safety and health regulations. The Budget includes an additional $5.9 million to bolster OSHA’s enforcement of the 21 whistleblower laws that protect workers and others who are retaliated against for reporting unsafe and unscrupulous practices.
• Protects the Health and Safety of the Nation’s Miners. The Budget provides $381 million for the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), including additional funding for MSHA’s enforcement programs to enforce and promote mine safety and health laws and to implement recommendations from the Internal Review conducted in the wake of the Upper Big Branch mine disaster.
• Detects and Deters the Misclassification of Workers as Independent Contractors. When employees are misclassified as independent contractors, they are deprived of benefits and protections to which they are legally entitled, such as minimum wage, overtime, unemployment insurance, and anti-discrimination protections. Misclassification, together with the underreporting of cash income for those paid as independent contractors, also costs taxpayers money in lost funds for the Treasury and in Social Security, Medicare, the Unemployment Trust Fund, and State programs. The Budget includes approximately $14 million to combat misclassification, including $10 million for grants to States to identify misclassification and recover unpaid taxes and $4 million for personnel at WHD to investigate misclassification.
- more -
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2014/assets/labor.pdf
A Budget Focus on Inequality
By ANNIE LOWREY
The great economic focus of the White House, the financial crisis and recession aside, has been inequality...The Obama budget proposal released Wednesday, like other White House budgets before it, also emphasizes the problem of inequality and the failure of the American economy to promote a thriving middle class.
<...>
The budget includes several proposals to tackle inequality and wage stagnation.
You might not think that the Affordable Care Act had much to do with inequality – it is a health care bill, after all – but it did. Rising insurance costs have eaten away at workers’ wages; the law has a number of provisions to try to bend the cost curve. Medical bills are a primary driver of bankruptcy for middle-class families; the law removes the lifetime benefit limit, ends denial of coverage for pre-existing conditions and contains other rules that might help reduce the number of bankruptcies.
Moreover, the law provides free or low-cost access to health coverage to tens of millions of Americans, financed by the government. That might not address the problem of income inequality. But it does address the problem of consumption inequality and perhaps even economic mobility.
- more -
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/10/a-budget-focus-on-inequality/
By ANNIE LOWREY
The great economic focus of the White House, the financial crisis and recession aside, has been inequality...The Obama budget proposal released Wednesday, like other White House budgets before it, also emphasizes the problem of inequality and the failure of the American economy to promote a thriving middle class.
<...>
The budget includes several proposals to tackle inequality and wage stagnation.
- Increasing the federal minimum wage to $9 an hour from its current rate of $7.25, and indexing it to inflation. The White House asserts that this would lift the wages of about 15 million low-wage workers.
- Creating a “Preschool for All” initiative to provide early childhood education to 4-year-olds from low- and middle-income families. The big idea is that this might improve economic mobility in the future.
- Increased taxes on wealthy Americans, including taxing carried interest as ordinary income. Hedge-fund managers and the like use the carried interest loophole to pay preferential rates on their earnings.
- Increased support for manufacturing, which the White House argues might be an important source of middle-class jobs.
- Making permanent the expansion of the earned income tax credit and child credit, which were due to expire in 2017. The proposal also makes permanent the American Opportunity Tax Credit, which helps families with students pay for college.
You might not think that the Affordable Care Act had much to do with inequality – it is a health care bill, after all – but it did. Rising insurance costs have eaten away at workers’ wages; the law has a number of provisions to try to bend the cost curve. Medical bills are a primary driver of bankruptcy for middle-class families; the law removes the lifetime benefit limit, ends denial of coverage for pre-existing conditions and contains other rules that might help reduce the number of bankruptcies.
Moreover, the law provides free or low-cost access to health coverage to tens of millions of Americans, financed by the government. That might not address the problem of income inequality. But it does address the problem of consumption inequality and perhaps even economic mobility.
- more -
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/10/a-budget-focus-on-inequality/
12 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
...and Rec.
DU'ers do it all the time, just like this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022805501#post14
