Tag: President Obama

Clinton emails

Clinton emails

Anyone who has been near a TV or radio or read a newspaper or magazine lately has probably heard quite a bit about Hillary Clinton’s email problems due to a decision to use a personal email server rather than the official one. The Clinton emails controversy prompted the best line of the Democratic debate when Bernie Sanders said:

“The American people are tired of hearing about your damn emails”

But the fact is that the FBI is investigating the Clinton email situation to see if national security was endangered and criminal charges should result. Continue reading “Clinton emails”

Bipartisan cooperation lost

Bipartisan cooperation lost

Is President Obama already missing the Republican cooperation he enjoyed during the first 6 years of his presidency?

After the recent election, some thought bipartisan cooperation was possible. I’m not sure why. There has been little evidence of bipartisan cooperation in recent years on most issues.

The Republicans warned President Obama not to “poison the well” by using his executive authority on immigration. Yet he did. From listening to reaction, I guess the spirit of bipartisan cooperation was lost. I’m wondering if President Obama already missing the Republican cooperation he enjoyed during the first 6 years of his presidency?

Obama care and Keep your health plan

Obama care and Keep your health plan

I previously discussed that President Obama and the House have proposed 2 different plans to allow you to keep your existing health plan.

In my opinion, neither is a very good idea. Both plans say they allow holders of existing plans that do not meet ACA requirements to keep there existing plans. One problem is that they allow this cannot actually do this since Continue reading “Obama care and Keep your health plan”

2 keep your health plan plans

2 keep your health plan plans

Much has been said about the millions of cancelled health insurance policies. Often the insurance company explains that these plans do not meet the standards of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). There are 2 offered fixes. Continue reading “2 keep your health plan plans”

Fighting for the Press by James Goodale

Fighting for the Press by James Goodale

I read Fighting for the Press: The Inside Story of the Pentagon Papers and Other Battles by James Goodale for several reasons. First there was a radio interview with the author on Radio Times and I listened to the podcast. It I found it very interesting and wanted to buy the book as soon as I could.

Second, I was in college at the time of the Pentagon Papers battles and it was interesting to re-visit this history and learn more about it. And third, this battle over the publication of the Pentagon Papers by the New York Times and other papers during the Vietnam War is very relevant to the freedom of the press disputes today.


James Goodale was the New York Times general counsel at a time when the Pentagon Papers were leaked to the NY Times. The Pentagon Papers was classified Top Secret, although that classification now seems excessive. After internal discussions at the Times, the paper battled Richard Nixon’s Department of Justice for the right to publish and won.

Why was this so important? The Pentagon Papers were a history of our involvement in Vietnam prepared for the government and classified ‘Top Secret’. Thousands of young men were being killed in the Vietnam War and the country was being torn apart with political protests, bombings, etc.

The Pentagon Papers showed that the case the government made for going to war was a pack of lies. These papers were leaked (stolen secrets) and the New York Times wanted to publish and, of course, the Nixon administration wanted to keep the secrets away from the public. It was a great story and is told well in this book.

So this is an insider’s story of what may have been the most important case on First Amendment and freedom of the press. I was expecting the book to be dry and legalistic in parts or even much of the story. I was surprised and pleased and it was not. Although this is a true story, it reads more like a legal thriller and kept me reading.

Most of the book discusses The Pentagon Papers case and other cases related to Richard Nixon’s war on the free press. The last few chapters move us into the present. And there is an extensive set of references. The G.W. Bush and Obama administrations have not been good for ‘freedom of the press‘ issues.

So who would I recommend read this? First, there are journalists and lawyers. Although I must repeat again the book is not at all bogged down by any technical aspects of the law or journalism that would detract from the experience of the general reader. Then anyone with an interest in the time period or freedom of the press issues. I find this last particularly important today since the balance of security, surveillance, privacy, and press freedom is so essential to our society,

Looking at the Amazon page, there are both Kindle and Paperback Editions and the Kindle version is much less than the paperback. I went with the Kindle edition since it was much cheaper and delivery was almost immediate.

National debt crisis solved

National debt crisis solved

It seems to be a repeat of recent events. Congress creates a crisis when there is no need.

Of course the manufactured crisis in the news now is the budget for next year, but that is soon to be followed by a more serious crisis when Congress needs to increase the debt ceiling so we can pay our national bills including interest on the debt and current expenses in excess of revenues.

I am of the opinion that an agreement between the President and Congress the best course but that the President can act by himself and ignore the debt ceiling but that is opinion.

We had a similar crisis just a few years ago. I think the President gave into Congress too easily then.

But are good arguments on both sides. And it could be that neither side really want to push their arguments too hard as they might lose the court case and be much worse off than having this ambiguous situation. So here are the Arguments:

Article 2 Section 3 of the Constitution says of the President:
… “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” …

So if Congress passes a budget that requires borrowing by spending more than revenues, the President has a duty to borrow so he may execute the laws. It would seem unfair and perhaps unconstitutional to limit his abilities.

The President has an obligation to execute the laws. It is impossible to execute all laws since the debt ceiling law denies him the money to execute many laws, and so he has no choice but to ignore the debt ceiling law unless Congress increases the debt ceiling. By failing to increase the debt ceiling in a timely manner, Congress is blocking his constitutional obligation.

So it seems to me there are 2 good arguments in favor of this. First, the President is in a situation where he cannot execute all the laws so he must pick either this one debt ceiling law or all the others. The second is that the debt limit law is unconstitutional since it prevents the President from carrying out duties specified in the Constitution.

On the other hand, Article 1 Section 8 of the same Constitution gives Congress the power “to pay the Debts” and “To borrow Money on the credit of the United States” so maybe there is a Constitutional case for the debt ceiling. But then nowhere does it say that Congress can refuse to pay debts or limit the ability of the President to carry out the laws that they passed.

But then we have Amendment 14, Section 4:

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. …

Here is a part of the Constitution that would seem to suggest that this should not be an issue.

Is Obamacare and employer-provided insurance pro-business or anti-business?

Is Obamacare and employer-provided insurance pro-business or anti-business?

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (PPACA), commonly called the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or Obamacare, is controversial. Republicans consider it anti-business; Democrats not so much. But is it really more pro-business or anti-business than our present system ?

Employer-provided health insurance began during World War II as a way of getting around wage controls on businesses. Currently most of the insured under 65 have employer-provided insurance. Obamacare is similarly dependent on employer-provided insurance. Sort of a doubling down on the idea by mandating that employers provide insurance or pay a penalty.

But is employer-provided insurance a good thing? Or would we be better off if the insurance was provided by another method ? And how do we pay for it ?

So many questions. Are there good answers? What do you think?

Women are people, too.

Women are people, too.

Women are people. You would think that was obvious. But to some people it is not. And some of those people are important.

A couple years ago I was shocked to learn that a Supreme Court Justice does not include women in the category of “all persons” with rights expressed in the 14th Amendment to the US Consitution (see Are you smarter than a Supreme Court justice). Justice Scalia is a smart guy so this can’t be dismissed a crazy position but I’ll just say I don’t understand his reasoning.

So in order to make sure that it is absolutely clear that “all persons” includes women, we should pass the Equal Rights Amendment

The ERA: A Brief Introduction

Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

These simple words comprise the entire text of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), affirming the equal application of the U.S. Constitution to both females and males.

Quote from http://www.equalrightsamendment.org/overview.htm

If you think our laws should consider women to be people, please sign the petion on the White house website. Maybe this will motivate President Obama to push for the ratification of this simple and important amendment.

Implement and Improve the Affordable Care Act (ACA)

Implement and Improve the Affordable Care Act (ACA)

Now that the election is over and Democrats remain in control of the Senate and President Obama occupies the Whitehouse, it should be clear to everyone that repeal of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is extremely unlikely and House Republicans can stop wasting their time with this repeal and replace nonsense for at least the next 4 years.

There are many good things about the law. Or at least I think it is good that insurance companies cannot exclude people who they think will be expensive because of preexisting conditions. I think it is good that they cannot cap the benefits someone who gets seriously sick can receive. But I do not believe the law is perfect.

There are also a good number of things that do not seem like great ideas. And people will differ in opinions as to what those are. For example, many oppose the individual mandate to have health insurance. Others may think the free rider provision for employers is not such a great idea.

You can disagree with some provisions of the law without disliking all of it.

But the ACA is law and there is almost no chance of that changing. I see lots of good things but there are also problems, or at least provisions that some people see as problems. Unless you are happy with all of it, actively encourage your Representatives, Senators, and President to improve the ACA.

Bipartisan Cabinet

Bipartisan Cabinet

It has been suggested that President Obama could have a bipartisan cabinet for his second term. Here is an example of 2 Republicans who could be great additions to the cabinet.

BUT there is a school of thought that IF President Obama wanted to show bipartisanship, he could do what Franklin D. Roosevelt did in World War II–pick Republicans who are intelligent, sane, responsible, and who are no longer serving in the Senate, to serve in his cabinet, and the State Department would offer a great location to put soon to be former Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana, an acknowledged foreign policy expert, and a man who has worked well with Obama when they were both Senators, and went off to Russia to promote the safe collection of nuclear weapons stockpiles in 2005-2006. Lugar is a wonderful statesman, and would fill the job with excellence and professionalism. And he has been, like Kerry, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman in the past, and is still the ranking member of the committee until he leaves the Senate in January.

Additionally, as suggested earlier, former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, a Vietnam War veteran and military expert, would be an excellent choice to serve in the Pentagon as Secretary of Defense. Always highly regarded and respected, Hagel would add stature to our Defense Department.

Such appointments would neutralize, to a great extent, Republican attacks on President Obama in the areas of foreign policy, national security, and defense policy.

See http://www.theprogressiveprofessor.com/?p=20041 for the full article.

I would like to add a suggestion, Jon Huntsman, former governor and ambassador, as Treasury Secretary.

It may be a good time to do some actual governing

It may be a good time to do some actual governing

Now that the election is over, it may be a good time to do some actual governing. Seems the parties need to find enough common ground to reach a compromise and prevent us from falling off a fiscal cliff on this next January. Refusal to compromise could put us back in recession ( http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20121107-720595.html )

this election, you dislike both, 3rd party candidates

this election, you dislike both, 3rd party candidates

Just to quickly review what I’ve had to say about this election, see http://www.jackreidy.com/blog/tag/mitt-romney/.

Also if you are undecided between the 2 major candidates because you dislike both, have a look at 3rd party candidates in your state.

Obama, Romney, campaign promises, be afraid

Obama, Romney, campaign promises, be afraid

Obama says stuff; Romney says stuff. You might think of them as campaign promises. But there is a difference –

With Obama, you might be afraid he won’t deliver on all his promises.

With Romney, you worry that he might deliver on some.

Be afraid, very afraid.

Only 12 Million jobs, Governor Romney

Only 12 Million jobs, Governor Romney

Mitt Romney has mentioned many times that his policies will add 12 million jobs.

I wrote about this before but thought an update is in order.

He says this will happen over his 4 year administration and it will be due to his five-point plan.

Or at least that is what he seems to be saying.

Turns out there is no strong tie to his 5 point plan, just a tie to average growth returning. Over 4 years this breaks down to a quarter million jobs added per month.

When Obama took over as President we were losing over 800,000 jobs per month. He turned that around and we have been gaining jobs since early 2010. The figures bounce around from month to month but have been over a quarter million some months and significantly less others but always positive. (See Is the Obama job recovery really so bad? And the stimulus worked ).

Is it better to trust the man who got us out of the job decline and is actually gaining jobs or the man who says he is going to do somewhat better but has no evidence to back-up his claim?

Is the Obama job recovery really so bad? And the stimulus worked

Is the Obama job recovery really so bad? And the stimulus worked

There has been much complaint about the Obama job recovery and many think we should trust our economy to Governor Romney because President Obama is doing such a bad job. His stimulus failed they say.

In my view President Obama is doing a good job considering where we came from 4 years ago and the lack of cooperation from Republicans in Congress who have blocked many of his attempts in the past 2 years to fix the jobs situation.

There is absolutely no credible evidence that Republican ideas would help the job market. Well, there are theories and “Atlas Shrugged” but no real evidence. After all, Republican ideas were put into effect in the years before the economic melt-down and we saw the result. Why are these ideas and this party going to fix things now?

So I thought it would be a good idea to revisit an old post from over a year ago and update it with new job figures.

The graph below shows the month to month change in private employment during the months from January 2008 to October 2012. The numbers on the right indicate thousands of jobs gained or lost each month. All numbers and the graph are from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) of the U.S. Department of Labor.

The graph clearly shows accelerating job loss in 2008 hitting over 800,0000 jobs lost in January 2009, staying in that area for several months, followed by a decreasing job loss, and emerging into positive job growth in early 2010. The job growth is too small bring down our stubbornly high unemployment rate but it is moving in the right direction. We need to create more jobs to keep up with the constantly growing labor force. Total job figures are a bit lower as we have the number of jobs in the public sector decreasing in many months.

Jobs Chart BLS OCT 2012

There are quite a few things that could influence the economy in this time. The slow-down in job decline in early 2009 seems to suggest that stimulus plan seems to have worked but is now slowing down. The TARP program passed in late 2008 may have helped this recovery. And one could argue that things would be better or worse if we had followed a different plan.

So President Obama seems to be doing as well as could be expected and it seems the most sensible course would be to re-elect him and re-elect fewer Republicans to Congress.