WSJ: GOP Lawmakers Condemn Stimulus, Praise It Privately, Grab All the Cash They Can

Something about pots calling kettles something comes to mind here…

From the Wall Street Journal:

Sen. Christopher S. Bond regularly railed against President Obama’s economic stimulus plan as irresponsible spending that would drive up the national debt. But behind the scenes, the Missouri Republican quietly sought more than $50 million from a federal agency for two projects in his state.

Mr. Bond was not alone. More than a dozen Republican lawmakers, while denouncing the stimulus to the media and their constituents, privately sent letters to just one of the federal government’s many agencies seeking stimulus money for home-state pork projects.

The letters to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, expose the gulf between lawmakers’ public criticism of the overall stimulus package and their private lobbying for projects close to home.

“It’s not illegal to talk out of both sides of your mouth, but it does seem to be a level of dishonesty troubling to the American public,” said Melanie Sloan, executive director of the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

Some in the GOP are working to steer money to their home states in a backhanded manner:

But the USDA letters also reveal a more discreet way for lawmakers to try to steer money to home-state projects.

Several Republicans who sent letters to the USDA for home-state projects seeking an infusion of stimulus cash are facing competitive re-election races.

Rep. Joe Wilson, South Carolina Republican who became famous after yelling, “You lie,” during Mr. Obama’s addresses to Congress in September, voted against the stimulus. Nonetheless, Mr. Wilson elbowed his way into the rush for federal stimulus cash in a letter he sent to Mr. Vilsack on behalf of a foundation seeking funding.

“We know their endeavor will provide jobs and investment in one of the poorer sections of the Congressional District,” he wrote to Mr. Vilsack in the Aug. 26, 2009, letter.

So Joe “You lie!” Wilson knows the Democrats are on the right track, that their efforts will provide jobs. And that would be especially nice for Mr. Wilson around election time.

Imagine that.

More GOP hypocrisy at the WSJ

Nod to Jed Lewison at the Daily Kos for this, and to Americablog for the original nod.

Patronage Forever: Cicero Taxpayers Still Paying Health Insurance for Loren-Maltese’s Mom

From the Chicago Tribune:

The mother of former Cicero Town President Betty Loren-Maltese continues to receive health care benefits from the town, even though coverage should have expired when she stepped down as a member of a town commission in 2001.

Kitty Loren, 88, who served on the town’s Police and Fire Commission for 10 years, said today that she is covered by the town and provided documents to the Tribune indicating she currently is in a plan for retirees over 65.

"Betty set up the insurance for me," said Loren at her home in Alabaster, Ala., today. "Nobody ever took it away from me. I didn’t know that I wasn’t supposed to have it."

A town spokesman said the town does offer health care to individuals who serve on commissions and boards, but the coverage ends when their terms are completed.

The spokesman, Ray Hanania, said he "is concerned" and doesn’t know why Loren is getting insurance from the town but said he needs more time to look into the matter.

That’s one way to add to the tax levy.

Patronage never pays.

Weekly Address: President Obama Pledges to Rein in Budget Deficits (Video and Text)

Washington, D.C.–January 30, 2010.

At this time last year, amidst headlines about banks on the verge of collapse and job losses of 700,000 a month, we received another troubling piece of news about our economy. Our economy was shrinking at an alarming rate – the largest six-month decline in 50 years. Our factories and farms were producing less; our businesses were selling less; and more job losses were on the horizon.

One year later, according to numbers released this past week, this trend has reversed itself. For the past six months, our economy has been growing again. And last quarter, it grew more quickly than at any time in the past six years.

This is a sign of progress. And it’s an affirmation of the difficult decisions we made last year to pull our financial system back from the brink and get our economy moving again.

But when so many people are still struggling – when one in ten Americans still can’t find work, and millions more are working harder and longer for less – our mission isn’t just to grow the economy. It’s to grow jobs for folks who want them, and ensure wages are rising for those who have them. It’s not just about improvements we see in quarterly statistics, but ones people feel in their daily lives – a bigger paycheck; more security; the ability to give your kids a decent shot in life and still have enough to retire one day yourself.

That’s why job creation will be our number one focus in 2010. We’ll put more Americans back to work rebuilding our infrastructure all across the country. And since the true engines of job creation are America’s businesses, I’ve proposed tax credits to help them hire new workers, raise wages, and invest in new plants and equipment. I also want to eliminate all capital gains taxes on small business investment, and help small businesses get the loans they need to open their doors and expand their operations.

But as we work to create jobs, it is critical that we rein in the budget deficits we’ve been accumulating for far too long – deficits that won’t just burden our children and grandchildren, but could damage our markets, drive up our interest rates, and jeopardize our recovery right now.

There are certain core principles our families and businesses follow when they sit down to do their own budgets. They accept that they can’t get everything they want and focus on what they really need. They make tough decisions and sacrifice for their kids. They don’t spend what they don’t have, and they make do with what they’ve got.

It’s time their government did the same. That’s why I’m pleased that the Senate has just restored the pay-as-you-go law that was in place back in the 1990s. It’s no coincidence that we ended that decade with a $236 billion surplus. But then we did away with PAYGO – and we ended the next decade with a $1.3 trillion deficit. Reinstating this law will help get us back on track, ensuring that every time we spend, we find somewhere else to cut.

I’ve also proposed a spending freeze, so that as we increase investments in things we need, like job creation and middle class tax cuts – we cut spending on those we don’t, like tax cuts for oil companies and investment fund managers, and programs that are redundant, obsolete, or simply ineffective. Spending related to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will not be affected – and neither will national security – but all other discretionary government programs will.

Finally, I’ve called for a bi-partisan Fiscal Commission – a panel of Democrats and Republicans who would sit down and hammer out concrete deficit-reduction proposals by a certain deadline. Because we’ve heard plenty of talk and a lot of yelling on TV about deficits, and it’s now time to come together and make the painful choices we need to eliminate those deficits.

This past week, 53 Democrats and Republicans voted for this commission in the Senate. But it failed when seven Republicans who had co-sponsored this idea in the first place suddenly decided to vote against it.

Now, it’s one thing to have an honest difference of opinion about something. I will always respect those who take a principled stand for what they believe, even if I disagree with them.

But what I won’t accept is changing positions because it’s good politics. What I won’t accept is opposition for opposition’s sake. We cannot have a serious discussion and take meaningful action to create jobs and control our deficits if politicians just do what’s necessary to win the next election instead of what’s best for the next generation.

I’m ready and eager to work with anyone who’s serious about solving the real problems facing our people and our country. I welcome anyone who comes to the table in good faith to help get our economy moving again and fulfill this country’s promise. That’s why we were elected in the first place. That’s what the American people expect and deserve. And that’s what we must deliver.

Thank you.

Source: whitehouse.gov

Obama Declares ‘I Don’t Quit’ in First State of the Union Address

From the Chicago Sun-Times:

Declaring “I don’t quit,”‘ an embattled President Barack Obama vowed in his first State of the Union address Wednesday night to make job growth his topmost priority and urged a divided Congress to boost the still-ailing economy with fresh stimulus spending. Defiant despite stinging setbacks, he said he would not abandon ambitious plans for longer-term fixes to health care, energy, education and more.

“Change has not come fast enough,” Obama said before a politician-packed House chamber and a TV audience of millions. “As hard as it may be, as uncomfortable and contentious as the debates may be, it’s time to get serious about fixing the problems that are hampering our growth.”

Obama looked to change the conversation from how his presidency is stalling — over the messy health care debate, a limping economy and the missteps that led to Christmas Day’s barely averted terrorist disaster — to how he is seizing the reins.

A chief demand was for lawmakers to press forward with his prized health care overhaul, which is in severe danger in Congress, and to resist the temptation to substitute a smaller-bore solution for the far-reaching changes he wants.

“Do not walk away from reform,” he implored. “Not now. Not when we are so close.”

Republicans applauded the president when he entered the chamber, and even craned their necks and welcomed Michelle Obama when she took her seat. But the warm feelings of bipartisanship disappeared early.

I don’t know how “embattled” President Obama is right now. Every president is “embattled.” I found the tone of the SOTU remarkable. But Congress needs to remember how to be a parliament, and they’re not there yet. Republicans say, “NO!” Democrats let the tail wag the dog and give up the fight. The intelligence factor in Congress is rather low right now, I fear, on both sides of the aisle. Republicans are too dumb to realize that there is more to life than cheap politics, and Democrats are too dumb to know how to make Congress work.

Too bad.

I’m glad this president does not “give up.” We still have work to do.

Weekly Address: President Obama Addresses This Week’s Supreme Court Decision (Video and Text)

Washington, D.C.–January 23, 2010.

One of the reasons I ran for President was because I believed so strongly that the voices of everyday Americans, hardworking folks doing everything they can to stay afloat, just weren’t being heard over the powerful voices of the special interests in Washington. And the result was a national agenda too often skewed in favor of those with the power to tilt the tables.

In my first year in office, we pushed back on that power by implementing historic reforms to get rid of the influence of those special interests. On my first day in office, we closed the revolving door between lobbying firms and the government so that no one in my administration would make decisions based on the interests of former or future employers. We barred gifts from federal lobbyists to executive branch officials. We imposed tough restrictions to prevent funds for our recovery from lining the pockets of the well-connected, instead of creating jobs for Americans. And for the first time in history, we have publicly disclosed the names of lobbyists and non-lobbyists alike who visit the White House every day, so that you know what’s going on in the White House – the people’s house.

We’ve been making steady progress. But this week, the United States Supreme Court handed a huge victory to the special interests and their lobbyists – and a powerful blow to our efforts to rein in corporate influence. This ruling strikes at our democracy itself. By a 5-4 vote, the Court overturned more than a century of law – including a bipartisan campaign finance law written by Senators John McCain and Russ Feingold that had barred corporations from using their financial clout to directly interfere with elections by running advertisements for or against candidates in the crucial closing weeks.

This ruling opens the floodgates for an unlimited amount of special interest money into our democracy. It gives the special interest lobbyists new leverage to spend millions on advertising to persuade elected officials to vote their way – or to punish those who don’t. That means that any public servant who has the courage to stand up to the special interests and stand up for the American people can find himself or herself under assault come election time. Even foreign corporations may now get into the act.

I can’t think of anything more devastating to the public interest. The last thing we need to do is hand more influence to the lobbyists in Washington, or more power to the special interests to tip the outcome of elections.

All of us, regardless of party, should be worried that it will be that much harder to get fair, common-sense financial reforms, or close unwarranted tax loopholes that reward corporations from sheltering their income or shipping American jobs off-shore.

It will make it more difficult to pass commonsense laws to promote energy independence because even foreign entities would be allowed to mix in our elections.

It would give the health insurance industry even more leverage to fend off reforms that would protect patients.

We don’t need to give any more voice to the powerful interests that already drown out the voices of everyday Americans.

And we don’t intend to. When this ruling came down, I instructed my administration to get to work immediately with Members of Congress willing to fight for the American people to develop a forceful, bipartisan response to this decision. We have begun that work, and it will be a priority for us until we repair the damage that has been done.

A hundred years ago, one of the great Republican Presidents, Teddy Roosevelt, fought to limit special interest spending and influence over American political campaigns and warned of the impact of unbridled, corporate spending. His message rings as true as ever today, in this age of mass communications, when the decks are too often stacked against ordinary Americans. And as long as I’m your President, I’ll never stop fighting to make sure that the most powerful voice in Washington belongs to you.

Source: whitehouse.gov

Google’s Fourth-Quarter Profit Nears $2 Billion

Google is on fire.

From the Washington Post:

Google Inc. appears to have regained its financial stride after wobbling through most of 2009.

The Internet search leader strutted its stuff in the fourth quarter, producing a profit that blew past analyst estimates while revenue growth accelerated from a leisurely stroll to a quickening gallop.

The results released late Thursday were driven by an upturn in Internet advertising, the main source of Google’s income. More marketing generally coincides with an improving economy, or at least a feeling that things are getting better.

Google also is benefiting from media trends that are shifting more advertising from newspapers and broadcasters to the Internet.

“We are clearly not in a recession right now, but the pace of recovery is different in different markets,” Patrick Pichette, Google’s chief financial officer, said in a Thursday interview.

The United States so far appears to be bouncing back from the recession quicker than Europe, Pichette said.

I hope that’s true. We’re not seeing the jobs yet, at least not in the Chicagoland area.

Here’s to all those who are still out of work…

Kudos to Google.

Maddow: Can Obama Wrest Control From Corporations?

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Barry got his groove back. The president is back in campaign mode, taking on the bankers, for real.

And that’s a good thing.

Look…

The value of the stock of some of the biggest banks took a dive this week. You know what that means?

The value of their collective stocks was just another bubble. It wasn’t real. They’re not really worth that much. And that’s okay. That’s a good thing.

None of the financial institutions of this country should be "too big to fail." No bank should be more important to our economy than pork bellies, or any other bellies.

Weekly Address: Getting Our Money Back from Wall Street

Washington, D.C.–January 16, 2010.

Over the past two years, more than seven million Americans have lost their jobs. Countless businesses have been forced to shut their doors. Few families have escaped the pain of this terrible recession. Rarely does a day go by that I do not hear from folks who are hurting. That is why we have pushed so hard to rebuild this economy.

But even as we work tirelessly to dig our way out of this hole, it is important that we address what led us into such a deep mess in the first place. Much of the turmoil of this recession was caused by the irresponsibility of banks and financial institutions on Wall Street. These financial firms took huge, reckless risks in pursuit of short-term profits and soaring bonuses. They gambled with borrowed money, without enough oversight or regard for the consequences. And when they lost, they lost big. Little more than a year ago, many of the largest and oldest financial firms in the world teetered on the brink of collapse, overwhelmed by the consequences of their irresponsible decisions. This financial crisis nearly pulled the entire economy into a second Great Depression.

As a result, the American people – struggling in their own right – were placed in a deeply unfair and unsatisfying position. Even though these financial firms were largely facing a crisis of their own creation, their failure could have led to an even greater calamity for the country. That is why the previous administration started a program – the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP – to provide these financial institutions with funds to survive the turmoil they helped unleash. It was a distasteful but necessary thing to do.

Many originally feared that most of the $700 billion in TARP money would be lost. But when my administration came into office, we put in place rigorous rules for accountability and transparency, which cut the cost of the bailout dramatically. We have now recovered most of the money we provided to the banks. That’s good news, but as far as I’m concerned, it’s not good enough. We want the taxpayers’ money back, and we’re going to collect every dime.

That is why, this week, I proposed a new fee on major financial firms to compensate the American people for the extraordinary assistance they provided to the financial industry. And the fee would be in place until the American taxpayer is made whole. Only the largest financial firms with more than $50 billion in assets will be affected, not community banks. And the bigger the firm – and the more debt it holds – the larger the fee. Because we are not only going to recover our money and help close our deficits; we are going to attack some of the banking practices that led to the crisis.

That’s important. The fact is, financial firms play an essential role in our economy. They provide capital and credit to families purchasing homes, students attending college, businesses looking to start up or expand. This is critical to our recovery. That is why our goal with this fee – and with the common-sense financial reforms we seek – is not to punish the financial industry. Our goal is to prevent the abuse and excess that nearly led to its collapse. Our goal is to promote fair dealings while punishing those who game the system; to encourage sustained growth while discouraging the speculative bubbles that inevitably burst. Ultimately, that is in the shared interest of the financial industry and the American people.

Of course, I would like the banks to embrace this sense of mutual responsibility. So far, though, they have ferociously fought financial reform. The industry has even joined forces with the opposition party to launch a massive lobbying campaign against common-sense rules to protect consumers and prevent another crisis.

Now, like clockwork, the banks and politicians who curry their favor are already trying to stop this fee from going into effect. The very same firms reaping billions of dollars in profits, and reportedly handing out more money in bonuses and compensation than ever before in history, are now pleading poverty. It’s a sight to see.

Those who oppose this fee say the banks can’t afford to pay back the American people without passing on the costs to their shareholders and customers. But that’s hard to believe when there are reports that Wall Street is going to hand out more money in bonuses and compensation just this year than the cost of this fee over the next ten years. If the big financial firms can afford massive bonuses, they can afford to pay back the American people.

Those who oppose this fee have also had the audacity to suggest that it is somehow unfair. That because these firms have already returned what they borrowed directly, their obligation is fulfilled. But this willfully ignores the fact that the entire industry benefited not only from the bailout, but from the assistance extended to AIG and homeowners, and from the many unprecedented emergency actions taken by the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, and others to prevent a financial collapse. And it ignores a far greater unfairness: sticking the American taxpayer with the bill.

That is unacceptable to me, and to the American people. We’re not going to let Wall Street take the money and run. We’re going to pass this fee into law. And I’m going to continue to work with Congress on common-sense financial reforms to protect people and the economy from the kind of costly and painful crisis we’ve just been through. Because after a very tough two years, after a crisis that has caused so much havoc, if there is one lesson that we can learn, it’s this: we cannot return to business as usual.

Thank you very much.

Source: whitehouse.gov

Study Says Chicago Wal-Mart Bad for Area Jobs

According to a new study, Wal-Mart is bad for jobs in Chicago, ABC 7 Chicago reports.

From WLS:

A new study out shows the one and only Wal-Mart in the city of Chicago may not be a job-generating machine like many supporters claim. But some question the conclusions reached by local researchers.

As early as next week, the City Council is expected to revive the debate over plans for a new Wal-Mart on the South Side. But a conveniently timed study says the retailing giant leaves less of an economic footprint than you may expect.

"Usually by this time of year we have a lot. But, as you can see, it’s empty," said Mike Ramirez, thrift store assistant manager.

Mike Ramirez says given the recession, business at his West Side thrift shop should be booming. It’s not. And he blames his new neighbor.

"This new Wal-Mart is taking a lot of my customers away," said Ramirez.

The city’s one and only Wal-Mart opened in the Austin neighborhood in 2006. A new study study by researchers from Loyola and UIC claims 82 businesses within a four-mile radius of the store have closed, thanks -at least in part- to the mega retailer’s presence. That, the study’s authors say, has cost the community nearly 300 jobs, about as many as Wal-Mart added.

The WLS report says the Chicago City Council will probably consider concerns of organized labor, however, Chicago should also consider Walm-Mart’s pitiful record on diversity. The Human Rights Campaign gives Wal-Mart a low 40/100 on the Corporate Equality Index criteria. Go here for the HRC’s complete analysis.

Click here to read the study.

On the Complete Disintegration of the Village of Matteson

Matteson fractured

The Southtown Star reported today that the Village of Matteson layed off 22 employees without warning Tuesday, the result of a reported $2.3 million budget gap. The Matteson Village Board hired financial consulting firm Theobald Associates in April at an estimated cost of over $200,000. Estimates are that the 22 layoffs will save the village $900,000 per year.

This is astounding, and the entire South Suburbs should be very concerned.

From the Southtown Star:

WHO GOT THE AX?

On Tuesday, Matteson laid off 22 village employees in efforts to trim a $2.3 million budget deficit. Those let go included two building inspectors, a building permit technician, two secretaries, a clerk, three administrative assistants, two customer service representatives, a community affairs coordinator, a community affairs assistant, a fire inspector, a community service officer, a building maintenance worker, four park maintenance workers and a park maintenance supervisor.

AFFECTING OPERATIONS

Matteson deputy village administrator Brian Mitchell said the layoffs this week of 22 employees might result in longer waits to pay village bills and the cancellation of some village-sponsored events, such as the Taste of Matteson. Additionally, he said, the firings will affect the village’s ability to plow snow. Although main thoroughfares always will be plowed no matter the time of day, “curb-to-curb” snow removal on the side streets will wait until morning if it snows overnight.

It is of interest that the mayor’s wife, Toni Ashmore, was not let go.

Morale at Matteson Village Hall is understandably low:

Matteson resident Matt Stipek said he witnessed the ugly, post-layoff scene after stopping by village hall Tuesday morning to pick up recycling bags.

“The lady there at the counter was crying, and the other ones looked like they just saw a murder,” he said. “The one lady who was trying to get recycling bags for me was catatonic.”

Matteson is a crucial business hub for surrounding communities. The intersection of Lincoln Highway and Cicero has been a long time coming back. Lincoln Mall is at a crucial juncture right now. The out lots are doing well, but the mall itself needs nurturing and attention.

Just a few years ago, Matteson hosted a “Green Day,” touting the opening of new businesses. Then U.S. Senate candidate Barack Obama was in attendance. Things looked so promising, before the Great Bush Recession.

Matteson residents should be concerned. Crisis necessitates a cohesive board which clearly has the interests of the residents at heart. Matteson’s board has been combative for far too long.

In November, Matteson fired the village administrator, an incredibly stupid move, as I’ve already noted. Haney was clearly not fired for cause.

That leaves politics.

According to some close to the village, the former village administrator would not* give his public blessing to the most recent raise the mayor intended to give his wife, the Director of Community Affairs.  If so, kudos to him.

When Andre Ashmore ran for mayor, he promised that his wife would not be employed long with the village. This week, he told the Star:

“We’re looking at all contracts, services, stuff that we contract out,” Ashmore said. “When I say everything is on the table, everything is on the table.”

Why, then, is the mayor’s wife still employed with the village?

I’m hoping groups of citizens are organizing now, preparing to put good, ethical people on the ballot.  Matteson has not completely disintegrated yet, but it is not now in a good place.

The South Suburbs need Matteson to recover.

* Errata: This posting originally said that the former village administrator would give his blessing to the most recent pay raise the mayor intended to give his wife.  That is incorrect.  We regret the error and we are grateful to a reader for bringing that error to our attention.