Thursday, October 28, 2021

Where Things Stand: The OTHER Reason The Filibuster Is So Devastating

(A lot going on in that photo beyond what the caption says, on so many levels. It is from June 21, 1947, after Senate Democrats spent the previous night filibustering the eventual GOP override of President Truman's veto of Taft-Hartley.)

Set aside for a moment the big issues like democracy reform that we know are stymied by the filibuster — it's a given that its anti-majoritarianism holds up major generational reforms. Its impact goes far beyond that. The ways in which the filibuster infects not just legislating but the basic task of governance is so pervasive that it's become part of the background noise of Washington. We don't notice it anymore, but it's hugely significant.

Take for example the ACA — huge, consequential legislation that remade entire segments of the health care and health insurance industries. It would be impossible to get all the elements of landmark legislation like the ACA exactly right the first time. Mistakes were part of it (remember the mother of all drafting errors?). Unintended consequences creep up. The market, private players, and corporate America react and adapt to new legislation in ways that can be hard to forecast. Adjustments have to be made. But thanks to the filibuster, making those kinds of normal tweaks to legislation, fixing problems with it, adapting to the real world impacts of it as they unfold is often difficult or impossible.

It's coming up now in major ways. It seems to be off the table now, but the clean electricity standard was a great example of the ways in which the filibuster hamstrings everything. Because of the filibuster a normal clean electricity standard wasn't viable so it had to be done via reconciliation. To clear reconciliation's convoluted rules, a whole new version of a clean electricity standard had to be drawn up. Dubbed the Clean Electricity Performance Program, it combined a complicated set of carrots and sticks to induce utilities to generate a bigger share of their electricity from clean energy sources. That became the centerpiece of the Biden climate agenda, but amazingly it was largely unproven! How did we end up staking the U.S. climate policy on an unproven mechanism? The filibuster.

But there's more!

Even if the CEPP more or less worked as intended, there was another wrinkle. It was unlikely to work precisely as intended without further adjustments based on how it performed in the wild. Like the ACA, it was going to need to be tweaked. The mix of carrots and sticks need to be just right. The market might have reacted in unpredictable and hard-to-foresee ways. But would those tweaks have been able to be made in the normal course of governance? Probably not over GOP opposition and the use of the filibuster.

The filibuster forces policymakers into situations where they have to get everything perfect or risk the entire agenda collapsing. It's an impossible standard to meet, but that's where we are.

Another recent example: the billionaire tax (it, too, looks like it may not make it into the final package). It's a huge change to U.S. tax policy. A big risk. The revenue it generates is key to funding Build Back Better. The ability to target extreme wealth successfully will be a key measure of Biden's and Democrats' effectiveness. A lot is at stake! Billionaires will throw millions of dollars at tax lawyers, financial experts and accountants to avoid the billionaire tax. It will be a game of cat and mouse. Except Democrats in future congresses will be hamstrung by the filibuster from making the kinds of tweaks to the law that would naturally need to be made to implement it successfully, adjust to changing conditions, and get the right mix of provisions to make the tax airtight and effective.

I should caveat here that the kinds of tweaks I'm talking about can sometimes be made without a filibuster threat. Sometimes there's bipartisan agreement. Sometimes the tweaks get snuck through on must-pass legislation. But in general, Democrats are operating not just on the presumption that their big stuff will never pass except in reconciliation but that anything they do manage to pass will be forever handcuffed by the filibuster.

See Also: DeSantis reveals how Florida is trying to recruit cops from other states whose jobs are threatened by vaccine mandates

It's a huge impediment to governance, and it fits in perfectly with the GOP vision: keep breaking government until you've convinced everyone government is hopelessly broken.

Where Things Stand: So, Is That It For Biden’s Climate Agenda?

One of the many soft deadlines Democrats are facing as they trudge forward with their reconciliation package is the looming UN Climate Change summit in Glasgow. Last year's Conference of Parties was postponed because of the pandemic, and, with the world now two years deeper into its worsening crisis, this year's gathering is being heralded as the most important since the Paris Agreement was hammered out in 2015.

All that build-up comes as the U.S. Senate struggles to deliver the policies that would fulfill the President's climate agenda.

It's a familiar story: A Democratic President makes big promises on the global stage related to climate change (the Kyoto Protocol, a cap and trade bill, the U.S. contribution to the Paris Agreement) and the legislature is unable to deliver the laws that would make it so. That's never the end of the story — Obama was able to put in place some hefty climate policies through executive action, but the speed with which they were undone during the Trump administration shows why legislative action is very much preferred when you're trying to make international commitments in the hope of spurring similar efforts by other polluting nations.

We're seeing the Senate's traditional climate stumbles play out in an acute form this week with Sen. Joe Manchin stripping both the Clean Electricity Performance Program, and, potentially, a methane fee from the reconciliation package. Neither of these are small losses. The CEPP was designed to function like a Clean Energy Standard; the methane fee, according to an analysis by Energy Innovation, would remove the equivalent of 11 percent of today's U.S. industrial sector emissions, or the annual emissions of 36 million vehicles.

"By 2050, the methane fee reduces industrial GHG emissions by 172 MMT CO2e per year, equivalent to 11 percent of today's U.S. industry sector emissions, or the annual emissions from more than 36 million gasoline-powered passenger vehicles. Cumulatively through 2050, the methane fee is responsible for 65 percent of the Build Back Better Act's total industrial GHG emissions reductions." (Source: Energy Innovation)...LESS

(Manchin's ability to block these provisions while possessing what seems to be only a surface-level understanding of them underscores the tragedy of Cal Cunningham not exercising greater discretion — or just, you know, checking his impulses entirely — while running for Senate, but here we are: a 50-50 Senate, where every Democratic-caucusing vote counts.)

So that brings us back to the upcoming UN summit. Can Biden tout his promise to cut greenhouse gas emissions 50% by 2030, even without a methane fee or the CEPP? Meeting the goal is not impossible, an analysis by the Rhodium Group finds — it's doable, but it's not easy. It would take aggressive actions by forward-thinking states, corporate entities, and the executive branch, as well as a Congress willing to make use of tax credits for such things as nuclear energy, hydrogen fuels, and forest restoration.

As is so often the case with climate change, we now have a goal that is only achievable with heroic effort. We can get there, but Manchin's personal branding exercise has made doing so quite a bit harder.

Who is Terry McAuliffe, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate in Virginia?

Washington, DC (CNN)Terry McAuliffe, the former governor of Virginia, is vying for another shot at leading the commonwealth, a place which bars governors from serving successive terms.

Earlier this year, the seasoned candidate -- whose story in the Democratic Party is defined by millions of dollars raised, the Clintons, and a tenure as chair of the Democratic National Committee -- held his ground among a primary field of younger, more liberal challengers, proving, at least in Virginia, Democrats are not yet tired of longtime politicians.

McAuliffe has rolled out policy after policy, aiming to both burnish his progressive credentials and argue because Virginia's legislature is now in Democratic control, something he did not enjoy during his tenure, he will be able to get more done the second time around.

Both Democratic politics and Virginia have changed since McAuliffe's successful 2013 run, a shift exemplified by the state's Democratic legislature -- which went blue in 2019 with McAuliffe's help. Since Democrats won control, they have moved to abolish the death penalty, tighten gun laws and reckon with the legacy of the Confederacy.

Running on a platform which prioritizes rebounding from the Covid-19 pandemic when it comes to both the economy and access to quality health care, housing and educational opportunities, McAuliffe has firmly stated he is pro-vaccine requirements and lambasted his opponent, Glenn Youngkin, over the Republican's opposition to mandating Covid-19 vaccines for state workers.

See Also: DeSantis reveals how Florida is trying to recruit cops from other states whose jobs are threatened by vaccine mandates

He also believes in the need for affordable health care, wants to lower prescription drug costs, end gun violence and move Virginia toward clean energy while promoting green jobs.

A staple in Democratic politics

McAuliffe, who served as governor of Virginia from 2014 to 2018, has been a staple in Democratic politics for decades. Before putting his own name on the ballot, McAuliffe had long been a prolific Democratic fundraiser and adviser, with close ties to Bill and Hillary Clinton. McAuliffe would often boast of raising around $275 million for an assortment of Clinton efforts, including both of Bill Clinton's presidential campaigns and Hillary Clinton's first Senate campaign.

He later was chair of the Democratic National Committee from 2001 to 2005, before serving as chair of Hillary Clinton's failed 2008 presidential bid.

The former governor's 2021 bid will be his third for governor. McAuliffe mounted a failed bid in 2009, losing the Democratic primary to state Sen. Creigh Deeds (who went on to lose to Republican Bob McDonnell). Four years later, McAuliffe ran unopposed in the Democratic primary.

He focused intently on bringing business to Virginia during his four years in office, often touting the economic success he had during his tenure, such as bringing 200,000 new jobs to Virginia, he says. He often sparred with the state's Republican-controlled legislature, vetoing a record number of bills. He ended his time in office by restoring voting rights for thousands of formerly convicted felons in Virginia. And McAuliffe, who was governor when Donald Trump was elected to the presidency in 2016, became one of many Democratic governors who worked to oppose much of what Trump's administration attempted.

Following his time as governor, he was also a CNN commentator.

McAuliffe, after considering a presidential run himself, endorsed Joe Biden during the 2020 Democratic primary and was considered for a Cabinet post in the Biden administration. In 2020, Biden referred to McAuliffe as the "once and future governor of Virginia."

He has beaten the odds before

Since the 1970s, the winner of Virginia's gubernatorial election came from the party opposite the one that had won the White House. The lone exception was when McAuliffe was elected in 2013, a year after Barack Obama had won his second term, a fact the former governor has often used on the campaign trail.

Despite a number of primary challengers eager to knock down the old guard, the former governor entered the Democratic primary race as the clear front-runner, boasting strong fundraising numbers, a long list of endorsements and near-total name recognition he carried through to clinch the primary election.

Wednesday, October 27, 2021

Chris Wallace shocked Fox News viewers by calling Jen Psaki “the best Press Secretary ever”. Who agrees with him wholeheartedly? 👏

Chris Wallace shocked Fox News viewers by calling Jen Psaki “the best Press Secretary ever”. Who agrees with him wholeheartedly? ��

Posted: 26 Oct 2021 10:12 PM PDT

Chris Wallace just called Jen Psaki "one of the best press secretaries ever" and MAGA world is having a complete meltdown. <!-- Global Variables...

Thank you for spending some time at my site : www.tranganhnam.xyz and in my blog : http://hocdethi.blogspot.com/. I hope you come to visit again soon!

Tuesday, October 26, 2021

Who is Sen. Kyrsten Sinema?

Posted: 26 Oct 2021 05:49 AM PDT

//<![CDATA[ // Global variables with content. "Available for Edit" var monthFormat = ["01", "02", "03", "04", "05", "06", "07", "08",...

Thank you for spending some time at my site : www.tranganhnam.xyz and in my blog : http://hocdethi.blogspot.com/. I hope you come to visit again soon!

Biden’s Treasury Secretary wants to tax the ‘unrealized capital gains’, but here’s why that’s a terrible idea

Biden's Treasury Secretary said yesterday that she wants to tax the 'unrealized capital gains' in order to pay for Biden's 3.5 trillion dollar agenda: Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen tells CNN's Jake Tapper that former Clinton and Obama economic official Larry Summers is wrong on his warnings about rising inflation.

Washington Post columnist Henry Olsen explains why this is not only a terrible idea, but also unconstitutional:

The Biden administration's idea to tax billionaires' unrealized capital gains may sound good to the tax-the-rich crowd. In practice, it would be an unworkable and arguably unconstitutional mess that could harm everyone.
In theory, the idea is seductively simple and appealing. Billionaires and the super-rich possess massive amounts of wealth in the form of stocks, businesses and frivolous baubles such as famous paintings or yachts. These assets appreciate in value, but their owners pay no tax on that value unless they sell it — or "realize the gain," as tax lawyers put it. Only by selling the asset would a person be able to convert the asset into taxable income. This means billionaires with appreciating assets can become hundreds of billions of dollars wealthier each year, but the government gets nothing.

If that sounds too good to be true, it's because it is. To start, not all assets are as easy to value as publicly traded stocks. Privately held companies, such as Charles Koch's Koch Industries, are notoriously difficult to value. Rare but valuable items are even more difficult to fix an annual price. Someone who owns a Leonardo da Vinci or Picasso artwork likely paid more than $100 million for it at auction, but it's almost impossible to assess what a unique work of art would sell for at the end of each tax year. Billionaires are precisely the people with the motive and the means to hire the best tax lawyers to fight the Internal Revenue Service at every step of the way, surely subjecting each tax return to excruciatingly long and expensive audits.
Then there's the question of what to do with capital losses. Expensive assets can go down in value, too, and billionaires would rightly insist that the IRS account for those reversals of fortune. This would lead to some politically uncomfortable acts if, say, a market downturn coincides with the end of the tax year, as happened during the Great Recession. The U.S. stock market declined by roughly a third in 2008, with the low point at year's end — exactly when valuations for an unrealized gain tax would be determined. This would have led to billionaires marking up massive amounts of unrealized losses. Would the IRS have to issue multi-billion dollar refund checks to return the billionaires' quarterly estimated tax payments from earlier in the year? No president will want to be in charge when their IRS has to give billions of dollars back to Warren Buffett or Bill Gates.

"The Constitution may not even permit taxation of unrealized gains…"

The Constitution may not even permit taxation of unrealized gains. The 16th Amendment authorizes taxation of "income," and the definition of that seemingly simple word has spawned a long history of complicated case law. Whether something is defined as income often has to do with whether a person has complete control over a source of money that can then be used in trade to purchase or invest as one sees fit. Unrealized gains don't fit under that rubric because the wealth is on paper, not in the hands of the owner to use as she wants. In 1920, the Supreme Court ruled that stock dividends or splits can't be taxed because they are not income. That is just one example of a torturous series of cases that the Supreme Court would inevitably have to consider to determine if Congress even has the power to tax unrealized gains.
If Congress does have that power, however, it will only be a matter of time before lawmakers apply the tax to ordinary Americans. Anyone who owns a house or has a retirement account has unrealized capital gains. Billionaires get all the attention, but the real money is in the hands of the broader public, as the collective value of real estate and mutual funds dwarfs what the nation's uber-wealthy hold. The government would love to get 25 percent of your 401(k)'s annual rise, and our nation's massive annual deficits and cumulative debt means it will need that money sooner rather than later.
Taxing unrealized capital gains will unlock a Pandora's box of problems. Better to keep them under lock and key.

The Biden administration could care less about the constitutionality of doing this, and when it comes to taxing the rich, they'll try and steal whatever money they can under the guise of 'taxes'.

This is what socialism looks like and it will end up bankrupting America if we let it continue.

Sunday, October 24, 2021

Pelosi Signals Openness To Filibuster Carveout For Voting Rights

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) on Sunday signaled openness to reforming the filibuster to protect voting rights after President Biden suggested he might be open to eliminating the procedure entirely.

During a CNN town hall last week, the President was asked whether he would entertain the notion of doing away with the filibuster on voting rights. Biden replied "and maybe more." The President's comments supporting potential changes to the filibuster were issued a day after Senate Republicans blocked Democrats' voting rights bill, which prevented it from getting a floor debate before the final vote.

Appearing on CNN, Pelosi was asked whether she agrees with the President on getting rid of the filibuster to push policy proposals forward.

The House speaker signaled that reforming the filibuster is crucial to protect voting rights.

"The most important vote right now in the Congress of the United States is the vote to respect the sanctity of the vote, the fundamental basis of our democracy," Pelosi said. "If there were one vote that (reforming) the filibuster could enable to go forward, that would be the vote."

Exchange to Sell Ethereum with Paypal

Thursday, October 28, 2021

Where Things Stand: The OTHER Reason The Filibuster Is So Devastating

See Also: DeSantis reveals how Florida is trying to recruit cops from other states whose jobs are threatened by vaccine mandates

Where Things Stand: So, Is That It For Biden’s Climate Agenda?

Who is Terry McAuliffe, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate in Virginia?

See Also: Here's the Story with Kyrsten Sinema

See Also: DeSantis reveals how Florida is trying to recruit cops from other states whose jobs are threatened by vaccine mandates

A staple in Democratic politics

He has beaten the odds before

Wednesday, October 27, 2021

Chris Wallace shocked Fox News viewers by calling Jen Psaki “the best Press Secretary ever”. Who agrees with him wholeheartedly? 👏

Chris Wallace shocked Fox News viewers by calling Jen Psaki “the best Press Secretary ever”. Who agrees with him wholeheartedly? ��

Tuesday, October 26, 2021

Who is Sen. Kyrsten Sinema?

Who is Sen. Kyrsten Sinema?

Biden’s Treasury Secretary wants to tax the ‘unrealized capital gains’, but here’s why that’s a terrible idea

Sunday, October 24, 2021

Pelosi Signals Openness To Filibuster Carveout For Voting Rights