In The USA we Americans trust Obama On The Economy, Not Congressional Repubs

Assessing Obama’s Job Approval at the One-Month Mark

Receives solid approval

by Lydia Saad

PRINCETON, NJ — President Barack Obama remains highly popular among the U.S. public at the end of his first month in office. However, the 63% of Americans currently approving of his job performance is down slightly from his initial 68% rating in January. The percentage disapproving has doubled, from 12% to 24%.

Both  Gallup and ABC/WaPo tell the same story the story is the same.

Washington Post:

Head to head, though, Americans put far more faith in Obama than in congressional Republicans: Sixty-one percent said they trust Obama more than the GOP on economic matters; 26 percent side with the Republicans in Congress. On that question, Obama’s advantage is bigger than George W. Bush, Bill Clinton or George H.W. Bush ever had over the opposition party in the legislature.

At Least 22 Lawmakers Have Touted The Money From The Recovery Package They Voted Against

First Republicans demanded and received concessions in the creation of Obama’s economic recovery package. Then once they voted against it (on ideological grounds) they are back home promoting the benefits of the stimulus package. We should be grateful to sites like THINK PROGRESS for keeping track of these phony baloney good-time-rock-en-roll Republican hypocrites.

On Wednesday, ThinkProgress pointed out that several Republican lawmakers who voted against President Obama’s economic recovery package are now touting its benefits to their constituents. The New York Times picked up on the phenomena yesterday, writing that “the temptation to take credit for at least a few of those billions” has proved “irresistible” to the anti-stimulus lawmakers.

For instance, Rep. John Mica (R-FL) gushed after the passage of the bill he voted against, releasing a statement that applauded Obama’s “recognition that high-speed rail should be part of America’s future.” Mica’s chief of staff, Rusty Roberts, defended his boss to the Times, saying that “it’s possible to oppose the entire bill on principle and favor certain sections of it.”

Roberts isn’t alone in this rationalization. Thus far, ThinkProgress has found at least 22 lawmakers who voted against the bill, but have spoken positively about what the money will do for their constituents. Here are a few examples that the New York Times missed:

— Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID) bragged to Idaho lawmakers that “Approximately $400 million plus, maybe as much as $465 million will come to INL right here in Idaho for hundreds of new jobs and a significantly expedited clean up activity.”

– Rep. Heath Shuler (D-NC) defended his vote against the bill on Thursday, but added that he was “prepared to fight” for “Western North Carolina getting its fair share” of the stimulus money.

ThinkProgress will continue to add to our list and follow members of Congress who tout the benefits of the recovery package that they voted again.

Unions Are Good for the American Economy

By David Madland, Karla Walter

February 18, 2009

State fact sheets: Alaska | Nebraska | Pennsylvania |  Wisconsin

U.S. fact sheet (pdf)

Interactive map: Unions Are Good for Workers and the Economy in Every State

Press call: Robert Reich, Beth Shulman, and Karla Walter

The essence of what labor unions do—give workers a stronger voice so that they can get a fair share of the economic growth they help create—is and has always been important to making the economy work for all Americans. And unions only become more important as the economy worsens.

One of the primarily reasons why our current recession endures is that workers do not have the purchasing power they need to drive our economy. Even when times were relatively good, workers were getting squeezed. Income for the median working age household fell by about $2,000 between 2000 and 2007, and it could fall even further as the economy continues to decline. Consumer activity accounts for roughly 70 percent of our nation’s economy, and for a while workers were able to use debt to sustain their consumption. Yet debt-driven consumption is not sustainable, as we are plainly seeing.

What is sustainable is an economy where workers are adequately rewarded and have the income they need to purchase goods. This is where unions come in.

Unions paved the way to the middle class for millions of American workers and pioneered benefits such as paid health care and pensions along the way. Even today, union workers earn significantly more on average than their non-union counterparts, and union employers are more likely to provide benefits. And non-union workers—particularly in highly unionized industries—receive financial benefits from employers who increase wages to match what unions would win in order to avoid unionization.

Unfortunately, declining unionization rates mean that workers are less likely to receive good wages and be rewarded for their increases in productivity. The Employee Free Choice Act, which is likely to be one of the most important issues debated by the 111th Congress, holds the promise of boosting unionization rates and improving millions of Americans’ economic standing and workplace conditions.

Unions help workers achieve higher wages

Union members in the United States earn significantly more than non-union workers. Over the four-year period between 2004 and 2007, unionized workers’ wages were on average 11.3 percent higher than non-union workers with similar characteristics. That means that, all else equal, American workers that join a union will earn 11.3 percent more—or $2.26 more per hour in 2008 dollars—than their otherwise identical non-union counterparts.

Yet union coverage rates have been declining for several decades. In 1983, 23.3 percent of American workers were either members of a union or represented by a union at their workplace. By 2008, that portion declined to 13.7 percent.

American workers’ wage growth lags as productivity increases

Workers helped the economy grow during this time period by becoming ever more productive, but they received only a small share of the new wealth they helped create. Throughout the middle part of the 20th century—a period when unions were stronger—American workers generated economic growth by increasing their productivity, and they were rewarded with higher wages. But this link between greater productivity and higher wages has broken down.

Prior to the 1980s, productivity gains and workers’ wages moved in tandem: as workers produced more per hour, they saw a commensurate increase in their earnings. Yet wages and productivity growth have decoupled since the late 1970s. Looking from 1980 to 2008, nationwide worker productivity grew by 75.0 percent, while workers’ inflation-adjusted average wages increased by only 22.6 percent, which means that workers were compensated for only 30.2 percent of their productivity gains.

The cost of benefits—especially health insurance—has increased over time and now accounts for a greater share of total compensation than in the past, but this increase is nowhere near enough to account for the discrepancy between wage and productiv¬ity growth. For example, according to analysis by the Center for Economic and Policy Research, between 1973 and 2006 the share of labor compensation in the form of benefits rose from 12.6 percent to 19.5 percent.

If American workers were rewarded for 100 percent of their increases in labor productivity between 1980 and 2008—as they were during the middle part of the 20th century—average wages would be $28.53 per hour—42.7 percent higher than the average real wage in 2008.

Unionization rewards workers for productivity growth

Slow wage growth has squeezed the middle class and contributed to rising inequality. But increasing union coverage rates could likely reverse these trends as more Americans would benefit from the union wage premium and receive higher wages. If unionization rates were the same now as they were in 1983 and the current union wage premium remained constant, new union workers would earn an estimated $49.0 billion more in wages and salaries per year. If union coverage rates increased by just 5 percentage points over current levels, newly unionized workers would earn an estimated $25.5 billion more in wages and salaries per year. Non-union workers would also benefit as employers would likely raise wages to match what unions would win in order to avoid unionization.

Increased unionization would boost Americans’ annual wages

Union employers are also significantly more likely to provide benefits to their employees. Union workers nationwide are 28.2 percent more likely to be covered by employer-provided health insurance and 53.9 percent more likely to have employer-provided pensions compared to workers with similar characteristics who were not in unions.

Conclusion

Nearly three out of five survey respondents from a Peter Hart Research Associates poll report that they would join a union if they could, but workers attempting to unionize currently face a hostile legal environment and are commonly intimidated by aggressive antiunion employers. The Employee Free Choice Act would help workers who want to join a union do so by ensuring fairness in the union selection process with three main provisions: workers would have a fair and direct path to join unions through a simple major¬ity sign-up; employers who break the rules governing the unionization process would face stiffer penalties; and a first contract mediation and arbitration process would be intro¬duced to thwart bad-faith bargaining.

Passing the Employee Free Choice Act and making it harder for management to threaten workers seeking to unionize would be good for American workers. It would help boost workers’ wages and benefits. And putting more money in workers’ pockets would provide a needed boost for the U.S. economy. Increasing unionization is a good way to get out of our current economic troubles.

State fact sheets: Alaska | Nebraska | Pennsylvania |  Wisconsin

U.S. fact sheet (pdf)

Interactive map: Unions Are Good for Workers and the Economy in Every State

Press call: Robert Reich, Beth Shulman, and Karla Walter

The Center for American Progress would like to thank the Center for Economic and Policy Research for providing the national and state-by-state analysis of the union wage premium.

Politico’s David Rogers Catches Republicans Lying About High-Speed Rail, Won’t Call Them Liars

From YGLESIAS:

David Rogers has a piece in Politico that offers a nice summary of the recovery plan’s actual high-speed rail provisions and the direct role of the White House in securing them:

The $787.2 billion economic recovery bill — to be signed by President Barack Obama on Tuesday — dedicates $8 billion to high-speed rail, most of which was added in the final closed-door bargaining at the instigation of White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel. […] The same Maine and Pennsylvania Republican moderates who had criticized Obama’s school construction initiative were more accepting of the rail funds, since the Northeast corridor has a major stake in more improvements. To help pay for the added cost, a business tax break — providing a five-year carry back for net operating losses — was narrowed to keep the focus more on smaller firms with receipts of less than $15 million.

Needless to say, this reality is at odds with the made-up story conservatives have been telling all weekend about $8 billion being earmarked for a train to Las Vegas. And Rogers, as we’ll see, knows what the truth is, knows what conservatives have been saying, and knows that the two are different things, but he can’t quite seem to describe what’s happening with regular English words:

At the same time, conservative Republicans seemed almost blind to Obama’s role. Instead, in their campaign to find pork barrel projects in the stimulus bill, they painted the whole funding as a scheme by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on behalf of Las Vegas interests seeking a rail link to Los Angeles. “Sin City to Tomorrow Land” was one description.

Here is Rep. Candice S. Miller (R-Mich.) explaining her vote against the bill Friday despite the benefits to her home state: “Michigan is a state of about 10 million people, and we are the hardest hit, as I said, by this economy. And yet we are expected to get approximately $7 billion from this bill. And apparently the Senate majority leader has earmarked $8 billion for a rail system from Las Vegas to Los Angeles? You have got to be kidding. You have got to be kidding.”

Rep Miller wasn’t “explaining” anything, she was lying to her constituents. Nor were conservatives running a “campaign to find pork barrel projects int he stimulus bill” they were inventing fictional projects. Nor were obscure House backbenchers like Miller running a rogue operation here. House Minority Leader John Boehner led the charge on peddling this lie, and Senator Jim Demint was on the case as well.

Conservatives/Repubs were silent over Bush’s misuse of taxpayer money for years. Now they are enraged with Obama: why? Politics.

It has amazed me for a long time how Conservatives/Repubs so upset over domestic spending have recurrently turned a blind eye to the massive miss-spending in the Iraq War. Tax money that goes to rebuild America’s infrastructure, save the auto industry or create jobs is branded as pork. Yet billions of tax dollars lost, stolen or squandered in Iraq generate nary a word from the righties. Early in the war cash was dispersed with little or no accountability. This trend continues to one degree or another today. According to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform:

Lapses in Multiple Funds, all sorts of interesting examples were offered by the representative from the Inspector General’s office that made earlier disclosures as to misspent funds in Iraq seem benign. The words used to describe the hearing are technical terms for which an explanation is needed. “

Accountability Lapses.” Monies belonging to the Iraqi government known as “Seized and Vested Assets” were also victims of these lapses. The audit found that $1.8 billion in Iraqi assets over which the United States had disbursal authority was paid out in cash with no record of who the recipients were.

Ms. Ugone told the committee that the Department of Defense had been appropriated $492 billion to support Operation Iraqi Freedom and that $2.8 billion of Seized and Vested Assets were to be returned to Iraq to “help rebuild its infrastructure and economy.” Ms. Ugone said that $1.4 billion in contract and vendor payments and $6.3 billion in commercial payments lacked minimum supporting documentation and information for proper payment.

Richard Walker openly asks:

Will Obama go after Bush for the $12 billion missing in Iraq? Should Bush be charged criminally for missing money in Iraq?

America is in a financial meltdown, a lot having to do with the Bush administration. We now are arguing over whether to bailout the auto-industry, but let’s not forget the mountains (billions) of cash lost and unaccounted for in Iraq

While most of the American Right has been deafeningly silent about the rampant Iraq related corruption and massive misuse of American tax payer money The American Conservative Magazine did tackle the issue in 2005 by saying:

The (Bush’s) American-dominated Coalition Provisional Authority could well prove to be the most corrupt administration in history, almost certainly surpassing the widespread fraud of the much-maligned UN Oil for Food Program.

As the right moans and groans about the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, they have mostly been quiet about the extensive misuse of taxpayer money by the Bush Administration (with a few notable exceptions). Clearly, the lack of criticism of Bush’s abuse of US taxpayer monies limits considerably the credibility of the American Right’s criticism against the Obama Administration.

READ MORE ON THIS ISSUE:

• So, Mr Bremer, where did all the money go? At the end of the Iraq war, vast sums of money were made available to the US-led provisional authorities, headed by Paul Bremer, to spend on rebuilding the country. By the time Bremer left the post eight months later, $8.8bn of that money had disappeared.

• Audit: U.S. lost track of $9 billion in Iraq funds

• Inquiry on Graft in Iraq Focuses on U.S. Officers

Anti-Stimulus Phony-Republicans now praise Obama’s Stimulus

Well it has happened. We knew the Republicans only opposesed the stimulus package as they thought it would help them politically. But now these fake conservatives concerned with out of control spending are now touting Obama’s stimulus back in their home districts:

“I applaud President Obama’s recognition that high-speed rail should be part of America’s future,” the Florida Republican beamed in a press release. - Rep. John Mica (R) (Yet Mica had just joined every other GOP House member in voting against the $787.2 billion economic recovery plan.)

But Mica wasn’t alone in touting what he saw as the bill’s virtues. Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, also had nice things to say in a press release. Young boasted that he “won a victory for the Alaska Native contracting program and other Alaska small business owners last night in H.R. 1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.”

American’s have caught onto the hijinks of these republican phonies in congress. In the next election congressional republicans who oppose the stimulus will take the shellacking they deserve. Finally, America can see through this self serving phony baloney good-time rock ’n’ roll republicans. With the passage of the stimulus truth, justice and the American way have triumphed over right-wing hate radio!

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), who broke with his party to support President Obama’s stimulus package last week, said before the final vote Friday that more of his colleagues would have joined were they not afraid of the political consequences.

“When I came back to the cloak room after coming to the agreement a week ago today,” said Specter, “one of my colleagues said, ‘Arlen, I’m proud of you.’ My Republican colleague said, ‘Arlen, I’m proud of you.’ I said, ‘Are you going to vote with me?’ And he said, ‘No, I might have a primary.’ And I said, ‘Well, you know very well I’m going to have a primary.’” (READ MORE CLICK HERE)

Will Bush get away with torture, warrantless wiretapping, etc..

Actions speak louder than words. If we are to regain any respect in this world, you know that respect that BushCo pissed all over, we must grow up and demonstrate that the majority of Americans do value the rule of law.

President Obama, you said that no one is above the law. So do something, please. - spencers mom

Two-Thirds of Americans Want to See Bush Investigations for Torture and Wiretapping; 40 Percent Want Prosecutions

February 12, 2009, New York – In a USA Today Gallup poll released today, two-thirds of Americans say they want investigations into the role of Bush administration officials in torture and warrantless wiretapping, and 40…  (READ MORE CLICK HERE)

Special Prosecutor for Bush War Crimes - Sign the petition (click here)

Does some “Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy” control much of the mainstream media?

I used to drive a great deal across country for my job. Before there were progressive radio alternatives I often listen to right-wing radio shows. Hey, I love politics and it was the only thing on. So from Limbaugh and crew to local folks like Rochester’s local blowhard Bob Lonsberry, everyday I put myself through the torture and played the righty radio during my travels. (I am sure I was quite a sight driving down the road screaming back at my radio).

I  discovered a frequent pattern of different righties on the radio addressing the same issues on the same day. I even noticed  this trend with the local righty radio shows. I often wondered how so many different right-wing radio talking heads could be talking about the same subject on the same day (usually it involved Clinton bashing at the time) making the same points. I used to think to myself  that these righty talking heads were using the same script. The same “talking points” issued by the RNC. No, couldn’t be.

Now it is discovered that I was right all along and they were getting their daily talking points from the RNC or some other GOP controlled group. And to think they laughed at Hillary when she claimed that her husband was being attacked by a huge “right-wing conspiracy”. Funny, Hillary was right after all. - Robert

From Media Matters:

Caught red-handed using GOP talking points, Fox caves with apology … for typo

Published Wed, Feb 11, 2009 2:24pm ET by Karl Frisch

Yesterday, Media Matters noted:

In purporting to “take a look back” at how the economic recovery plan “grew, and grew, and grew,” Fox News’ Jon Scott referenced seven dates, as on-screen graphics cited various news sources from those time periods — all of which came directly from a Senate Republican Communications Center press release. A Fox News on-screen graphic even reproduced a typo contained in the Republican press release.

My, how a day of criticism from media critics and progressive bloggers changes things – even at Fox News. Today, Scott offered… an apology of sorts (emphasis added):

Yesterday on Happening Now we showed you how the stimulus bill has grown over time. Our story prompted by a news release from the Senate Republican Communication Center. There point that a $56 billion proposal in September has grown to $838 billion in five months. In compiling the story, our producers and researchers did what we always do — we verified the accuracy of the material. But in double checking the newspaper quotes referenced in that news release we made the same mistake they did. We labeled a Wall Street Journal article as having run in 2009 when in fact it was 2008. That was our error, and we apologize.

Of course, I’m kidding.

See what Scott does there? He apologizes, not for passing along a one-sided argument made in a Senate Republican Communications Center’s press release as Fox News’ original reporting, but for reporting the typo.

In his initial report, Scott didn’t tell his audience that the citations in his report were based entirely on a press release from the Senate Republicans – a fact he glosses over in his half-hearted apology for the typo.

I’d question Fox News’ journalistic integrity; that is of course if they had any to question in the first place.

(See the video by cliking here)

Check out Blinded by the Right, by reformed righty David Brock.

The mainstream media and the ‘liberal bias” myth exposed again!

I have written for years about the “Liberal Media Bias” myth. As you see below there is fresh evidence that there is no such thing as a bias from the left in mainstream media. Since all the mainstream media outlets are corporate owned entities, they skew the news to the right. Always have and always will.

The idea of a “Liberal Media Bias” is so deep in the American psyche that even progressives and lefty’s buy the lie (i.e. Joseph Goebbels). The Right’s propaganda machine has churned out this lie for so long it seems to be accepted as just a fact of life.  Anyway, I’ll keep spouted the truth and maybe someone will listen. If you want to read more about the liberal media myth I would recommend Eric Alterman’s What Liberal Media? - Robert

REPORT: GOP Lawmakers Outnumber Dem Lawmakers By Almost 2 To 1 In Cable News Stimulus Debate Again»

Last week, ThinkProgress released a report showing that, in the debate over the House economic recovery bill on the five cable news networks, Republican members of Congress outnumbered their Democratic counterparts by a ratio of 2 to 1. The analysis tallied interview segments about the stimulus on CNBC, Fox Business, Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC during a three-day period, finding that the networks had hosted Republican lawmakers 51 times and Democratic lawmakers only 26 times. (READ MORE CLICK HERE)

Have Congressional Republicans become “Taliban” like obstructionists?

Republicans must think the American people are idiots. They can only oppose, oppose, oppose. Do they think we will forget who caused the current economic crisis? Republicans seem to think they can gain an electoral advantage by posturing and obstructionism. All indications are that their tactics are failing:

Even the U.S. Chamber of Commerce an unfailing bastion of republican/conservative thinking is exhorting Senators to approve the economic recovery bill “without delay.”

A new Gallup poll reports that the GOP is “taking the hit” for resisting the recovery bill.

Here is a message for my republican friends: LEAD, FOLLOW, or GET OUT OF THE WAY!  - Robert

Uncompromising Conservatives Blast Obama For Failure To Act In Bipartisan Fashion»

For the past two months, President Obama has bent over backwards to act in a bipartisan manner to solicit Republican support for an economic recovery package. “The monopoly on good ideas does not belong to a single party,” Obama told Republican and Democratic leaders in a closed-door meeting before his inaugration. “If it’s a good idea, we will consider it.”

True to his word, Obama has gone to great lengths to demonstrate his commitment to bipartisanship:

– He attended a House GOP conference meeting to make an in-person appeal, “an exceptional gesture for any president.”
– He then joined a Senate Republican luncheon, spending “two hours and 37 minutes at the Capitol entirely with Republicans.”
– He hosted an inauguration dinner in honor of his Republican opponent John McCain. Obama also invited Republican and Democratic lawmakers to a White House “happy hour” after the House vote on the stimulus.
– He scheduled numerous White House meetings, including “one-on-one meetings” with GOP centrists in the Oval Office.
– Rahm Emanuel “invited a group of moderate Republicans to a private White House meeting.”
– Obama even welcomed a bipartisan group to the White House to watch the Super Bowl.

Obama’s actions were more than mere symbolic gestures. He introduced a package with over $300 billion in tax cuts to win conservative support. To win House GOP support, he responded to their concerns by stripping a sensible family planning provision and a jobs-creating provision to restore the National Mall. To win Senate GOP support, the White House and Democratic leaders accepted Republican amendments to the bill, including three amendments offered by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK).

According to a CBS poll, 81% of the public understands Obama “is trying to work with Republicans in Congress in order to get things done.” Nevertheless, many conservatives refuse to appreciate the efforts. On the Sunday shows yesterday, a host of right-wing Republicans took to the air waves to blast President Obama for not achieving bipartisan consensus on the economic recovery package.

ENSIGN: We should have put the best ideas on the table. This was one-party rule.

CORNYN: This is hardly a bipartisan effort. I think it’s a disappointment, it surely must be for President Obama.

McCAIN: This agreement is not bipartisan.

GINGRICH: The result has been a very partisan process.

While conservatives in the House and Senate engage in pure political theater, Obama has decided to go around them, appealing directly to the American public. Obama will visit Indiana today and Florida tomorrow to rally support for the recovery package.

“Insurgency, we understand perhaps a little bit more because of the Taliban,” - Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Tex.)

Now some in the GOP compare themselves to the Taliban. If a Liberal had said that the right-wing blogasphere would have exploded. The Republican opposition is looking more like an insurgency then the ‘loyal opposition” one had hoped for. As Democrats attempt to repair an economy ravished by irresponsible republican deregulation all the fat cats can do is try and maneuver themselves into a better electoral position. Pathetic really. - Robert

Monday’s Washington Post has a story on the resurgent Republicans by Alec MacGillis and Perry Bacon Jr. The home-page headline was “GOP as an Insurgent Opposition.” It puts an off-putting GOP gaffe on the front page: “Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Tex.) suggested last week that the party is learning from the disruptive tactics of the Taliban, and the GOP these days does have the bravado of an insurgent band that has pulled together after a big defeat to carry off a quick, if not particularly damaging, raid on the powers that be.”

Sessions said what? The Writers over at the Think Progress blog leaped on this interview with National Journal’s Hotline last week:

“Insurgency, we understand perhaps a little bit more because of the Taliban,” Sessions said during a meeting yesterday with Hotline editors. “And that is that they went about systematically understanding how to disrupt and change a person’s entire processes. And these Taliban — I’m not trying to say the Republican Party is the Taliban. No, that’s not what we’re saying.

I’m saying an example of how you go about [sic] is to change a person from their messaging to their operations to their frontline message. And we need to understand that insurgency may be required when the other side, the House leadership, does not follow the same commands, which we entered the game with.”

Dallas store offers W a job as their door greeter

This is too cool not to pass along. A Dallas hardware store scored some major news coverage by offering George Bush a job as their door greeter.

Elliot’s Hardware — a local Dallas hardware store — has “appealed to former President George W. Bush to spend his new-found retirement working as a part-time greeter at its Maple Avenue store.” “Our greeters are a legendary part of our customer service,” said Kyle Walters, Elliott’s Hardware president and CEO. “And we are offering the position to Mr. Bush in all sincerity. We think it would be a great fit for him as he settles back into life in Dallas.” If he chooses to take the position, Bush will enjoy company perks such as “a flexible part-time schedule (to allow travel to Crawford),” a parking space, and an employee discount.