The L shaped recovery and a Bogus Debt Crisis

Our economy continues to scuttle across a bottom set by the huge drop in performance during the Great Recession. This economist was not surprised by the lackluster GDP report released today.  No one has used the correct fiscal policy prescription in this country since 1999.  The current batch of Washington nimrods are going to set us at a new low shortly.  We’ll be lucky to see nasty numbers like these a year from now.  It’s as if tanking the economy is job 1 now.

Gross domestic product climbed at a 1.3 percent annual rate following a 0.4 percent gain in the prior quarter that was less than earlier estimated, Commerce Department figures showed today in Washington. The median forecast of economists surveyed by Bloomberg News called for a 1.8 percent increase. Household purchases, about 70 percent of the economy, rose 0.1 percent.

Treasuries rose as the report dimmed prospects for faster growth in the rest of 2011. The faltering economy may get another blow from spending cuts being negotiated in Congress, keeping pressure on Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke to hold interest rates near zero.

“The second-half rebound is melting away,” said Nigel Gault, chief U.S. economist at IHS Global Insight in Lexington, Massachusetts, the only forecaster polled to correctly estimate the gain in GDP. “It’s a very, very difficult situation for policy makers. The Fed could give a pretty strong signal that they are not likely to move on interest rates for a very long time.”

The yield on the benchmark 10-year note decreased to 2.85 percent at 1:22 p.m. in New York from 2.95 percent late yesterday. Stocks pared earlier losses on signs that House Speaker John Boehner’s plan to raise the debt ceiling was gaining support. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index fell 0.3 percent to 1,296.42 after falling as much as 1.4 percent.

Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich tells it like it is in a post that might as well be entitled “It’s the jobs, stupid”.  Too bad he’s not up for the Treasury position now occupied by Secretary Slave to Investment Banks.  There’s a false equivalency being spread about raising the debt ceiling and increasing the deficit that’s really hampering policy discourse right now.  The two things aren’t the same.  The debt is the amount we owe and it builds each year when there is a deficit or when interest accumulates.  The deficit is a shortage in one year’s budget.  The only real crisis we have right now is a jobs crisis and a complete lack of demand. Again, no business person in their right mind is going to create anything if there’s no customers. Oh, there’s also a confederacy of dunces in the US House of Representatives.  But, I won’t go there right now.

Get it? We’re really in a “jobs and growth” crisis – not a budget crisis.

And the best way to get jobs and growth back is for the federal government to spend more right now, not less – for example, by exempting the first $20,000 of income from payroll taxes this year and next, recreating a WPA and Civilian Conservation Corps, creating an infrastructure bank, providing tax incentives for small businesses to hire, expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit, and so on.

But what happens next week if Congress can’t or won’t deliver the President a bill to raise the debt ceiling? Remember: This is all politics, mixed in with legal technicalities. Economics has nothing to do with it.

One possibility, therefore, is for the Treasury to keep paying the nation’s bills regardless. It would continue to issue Treasury bills, which are our nation’s IOUs. When those IOUs are cashed at the Federal Reserve Board, the Fed would do what it has always done: Honor them.

How long could this go on without the debt ceiling being lifted? That’s a legal question. Republicans in Congress could mount a legal challenge, but no court in its right mind would stop the Fed from honoring the full faith and credit of the United States.

One of the biggest right wing memes that drives me crazy is that the economy is bad because we have too much taxes still and that the President’s stimulus didn’t work because it was worthless spending.  I knew it wouldn’t do much to stimulate the economy simply because it didn’t take advantage of the government spending multiplier in key areas and wasn’t  big enough.  Also, it was the Biggest Tax Cut Ever which rarely works as efficiently as direct government spending to get consumption going again.  So why are so many idiots arguing that more of the same tax cuts are going to improve the economy and cutting all levels of government spending is considered confidence building when the government spending multiplier will just push recessionary momentum?  You got me.  It’s insanity.

So, what happens if these debt ceilings talk fail?  Well, first, every single financial asset, liability, and contract will reprice all over the world.  Most of them will reprice in a bad way that will hamper economies every where.  Every business project will be evaluated using a risk free rate that will now be higher and will not be considered risk free any more. That means many projects will now be rejected so expansions, new jobs, or anything like that will be rejected.  Remember, this is not because we can’t pay those bills, it’s because a few idiots refuse to pay them. Second, the world will continue to step away from the dollar. Third, there will be strong recessionary pressures. It’s not good, folks. As these recent GDP figures show, we’re far from out of the impact of the last financial shock.

But what if all those options failed? What would be the consequence of even a notional default? The IMF has talked of a global recession if there was a loss of confidence in US solvency although it’s not clear that a failure to roll over debt for a few days would qualify for that description.

Having seen what happened with Lehman’s default, the main worry would be a freeze in the markets. Take the finances of banks, for example. Many use Treasury bonds as the risk-free asset for capital purposes. As Capital Economics points out

“Government debt is only automatically 0% risk-weighted for banks under Basel II if it is rated AA- or higher (although regulators can make exceptions for domestic government debt issued in local currency). In principle, therefore, financial institutions would face significantly higher capital charges in the event of a US government default.In practice, it seems likely that the regulators would move quickly to waive the rules. But there might be a few hairy moments while they did. And what about money-market funds? Having been burned by the credit crunch, many have opted for the safe haven of US Treasury bills. Perhaps they could roll over those bills into some form of IOU from the government. But if investors demanded their money back at a time when Treasury bills were illiquid, money-market funds might be forced to suspend resumptions or “break the buck”. Then there is the repo market, widely used by financial institutions to raise money; Treasury securities are used as collateral for such borrowing.”

Standard & Poor’s has considered this scenario and suggests that

“Failure to pay off maturing debt or missing interest payments (approximately $62 billion of interest is payable on Aug. 15) would constitute a selective default pursuant to our criteria, and Standard & Poor’s expects it would lower the sovereign rating to ‘SD’. Even if the Fed and other central banks managed to keep the financial system functioning, we expect that markets around the world would be severely damaged. In such a hypothetical scenario, we expect that equity markets would generally plunge, borrowing costs and interbank lending rates would soar, and corporate credit markets would be closed to all but the highest quality issuers. We envisage that consumers and businesses would likely stop spending on all but essential items, and the value of the dollar would drop by 10% or more against other major currencies. With the dollar heading lower, investors would likely look for hard assets like oil and other commodities, driving prices higher.Given the fragility of the economic recovery, this is an incredible risk to contemplate. It is also worth noting that, even a freeze on government spending that stopped short of a default, would have a significant impact on demand.”

I still can’t believe that a few people are willing to tank the economy for failed economic hypotheses. It’s as if everything we’ve learned over the past 70 years has been completely thrown to the wind and we’re being run by the myth of Reagan’s ghost.  I say myth because what they’re going on didn’t even happen on his watch. He was responsible for the biggest single tax increase in history and was responsible for a lot of the debt they’re whining about today. Speaking of Reagan, one of his economists–Bruce Bartlett–has an excellent analytical piece up on how the Debt Crisis is being Fueled by Obama’s weak negotiations.  It’s worth a read.

Unfortunately, Obama is really too young to have the kind of experience that previous presidents like Reagan brought to the White House in terms of understanding intransigent enemies and how to deal with them. Consequently, Obama has really been caught flat-footed by the Tea Party era Republican Party. He believed it would respond positively if he offered it half a loaf on just about every issue.

For example, some 40 percent of the 2009 stimulus legislation consisted of tax cuts even though his economic advisers knew that they would have almost no stimulative effect. But Obama viewed them as an important concession to Republicans. Yet despite total rejection of his stimulus package by the GOP, Obama kept the tax cuts rather than reprogramming the money into more effective programs such as state aid or public works.

Nevertheless, Obama offered Republicans another half-loaf  by putting forward a health reform plan almost identical to those that they and conservative groups such as the Heritage Foundation had proposedin the 1990s. Obama’s offer was summarily rejected and Republicans suddenly decided that the individual mandate, which previously had been at the core of their own health reform plans, was unconstitutional.

Now we are in the midst of a debt crisis that stems largely from Obama’s inability to accept the intransigence of his political opponents. Last December, he caved in to Republicans by supporting extension of the Bush tax cuts even though there is no evidence that they have done anything other than increase the deficit. There were those who told Obama that he ought to include an increase in the debt limit, but he rejected that idea, believing that Republicans would behave like responsible adults and raise the debt limit just as they did routinely when their party held the White House.

I join Bartlett, former President Clinton, and others in begging the President to invoke the 14th amendment.  Then, he should find some economics advisers who know what they are doing and listen to them for a change.


Friday Reads

Good Morning!

I’m really glad it’s Friday and I’m wondering what the markets will be doing.  There’s more extremist nonsense coming out of the Congress in the debt ceiling and deficit debate. Let’s take a brief look at the headlines.

First, it appears that Pell Grants are under attack. 

House conservatives who have stalled legislation to raise the national debt limit are angry that it includes $17 billion in supplemental spending for Pell Grants, which some compare to welfare.

Legislation crafted by House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) to raise the debt limit by $900 billion would directly appropriate $9 billion for Pell Grants in 2012 and another $8 billion in 2013.

There’s speculation that some of the teabots may have their districts cannibalized by an angry Speaker of the House in redistricting measures.

Jim Jordan’s open defiance of Speaker John Boehner’s efforts to solve the debt-ceiling crisis could cost the Urbana Republican his safe House seat in next year’s election.

Two Republican sources deeply involved in configuring new Ohio congressional districts confirmed to The Dispatch  today  that Jordan’s disloyalty to Boehner has put him in jeopardy of being zeroed out of a district.

“Jim Jordan’s boneheadedness has kind of informed everybody’s thinking,” said one of the sources, both of whom spoke only on condition of anonymity. “The easiest option for everybody has presented itself.”

Jordan’s rural 11-county district, which has a 60 percent Republican voter index, “is easy to cannibalize because it stretches so far,” the other source said.

Michele in Wonderland thinks the impasse on the debt ceiling is not an emergency.  Can some one please tell this woman to report to someplace where she can buy a clue or a brain or some sanity?

Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann again brushed off warnings from leaders in both parties that the country would face disastrous economic consequences if the government fails to raise the debt ceiling by next Tuesday.

“I do not believe for one moment that we will lose the full faith and credit of the United States,” Bachmann said Thursday during a question-and-answer session at the National Press Club in Washington.

Bachmann, a House member from Minnesota, has been a staunch opponent of the debt ceiling hike for months, saying the move poses no threat to the markets or to the American public and would only give President Barack Obama license to increase government spending.

Other insane Bachmann stories today including her defense of using Federal Loans for her own housing while lambasting the very agencies that helped her afford her house.  Evidently, it’s not welfare when she does it.

GOP presidential contender Michele Bachmann (R) has been in hot water in recent weeks for personally taking advantage of hundreds of thousands of dollars in government aid while denouncing the very programs she benefited from. Most recently, the Washington Post discovered that Bachmann and her husband signed for a $417,000 home loan backed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac just weeks before she called for the two mortgage giants to be entirely dismantled.

Bachmann has been a consistently fierce critic of mortgage lending programs and has advocated abolishing the government sponsored mortgage enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Yet she took out the maximum possible loan from those programs to finance her family’s move to a lavish 5,200-square-foot home on a golf course.

Bachmann also wants to declare her family business’ “pray away the gay” discredited therapy practice put off limits.

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) visited the National Press Club in Washington on Thursday for a speech and question-and-answer session. The GOP presidential contender’s remarks focused mostly on her opposition to raising the debt ceiling under any circumstances. She did field one question on an issue we’ve covered: reports that the Christian counseling clinic she co-owns with her husband tries to cure gay people of homosexuality. Bachmann has repeatedly dodged questions on the issue, and even gone so far as to cut off interviews with Iowa reporters who broach the subject; when I caught up with her outside the MoJo DC office recently, she was a no comment (literally, she didn’t say anything).

On Thursday, Bachmann was asked if she believes homosexuality is a lifestyle decision that can be cured. So, with her husband sitting to her left at the Press Club, how’d Bachmann respond? By dodging the issue entirely and declaring her spouse, her children, her foster children, and her business off limits:

The next interesting trial on TV should be that of Polygamist Cult Leader Warren Jeffs who is being tried for sex assault on a 12 year old girl.  Jeffs wants to act as his own lawyer.

Prosecutors said they have an audio tape of polygamist leader Warren Jeffs sexually assaulting a 12-year-old child, The Salt Lake Tribune reported on its websiteThursday.

The revelation came during opening statements on Jeffs’ trial on child sexual assault charges.

The prosecutor also said DNA evidence would prove that Jeffs fathered a child with a 15-year-old girl, the Tribune reported.

Earlier Thursday, Jeffs threw the trial into disarray when he fired his defense lawyers and demanded the right to represent himself, which the judge then granted.

“It’s not as easy as it looks on TV, Mr. Jeffs,” State District Judge Barbara Walther told him. “You’re on your own.”

Jeffs refused to answer when Walther asked him whether he wanted to make an opening statement, the Tribune said.

Jeffs, the leader of a breakaway Mormon sect, is charged with child sexual assault and aggravated child sexual assault in connection with his “spiritual marriages” to a 12-year-old girl and a 14-year-old girl at the Yearning for Zion Ranch in remote west Texas.

There is also DNA evidence.

Here’s a great article from Alternet on how Wall Street broke the economy.   It’s an interview with Gretchen Morgensen on her new book.  Here’s a great conversation on how predatory lenders fed bad loans into Fannie and Freddie.

TM: After the S&L crisis, we were going to fix Fannie and Freddie, but things only got worse. When you ask the fox how to clean the henhouse…

GM: You make a good point about who’s to blame. Blame falls on both sides of the aisle in Congress. It’s not an either-or, Democratic or Republican issue, not a liberal or conservative issue — there’s enough blame to go around. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were primary movers in the push for home ownership. And there’s nothing wrong with that, owning your own home is a deep-seated wish in the American psyche. The problem was in the execution. You don’t lure people in who are unsophisticated, who don’t understand what they’re doing. You certainly don’t offer them the kinds of poisonous loans that were targeted to minority borrowers; low-income borrowers; first-time home buyers.

TM: Targeted by Fannie and Freddie or targeted by predatory mortgage lenders?

GM: This is where Fannie and Freddie step aside and the mortgage lenders step into the breach. Countrywide was Fannie Mae’s biggest provider of loans. A lot of the losses that taxpayers are footing at this moment came very late in the game, in 2005, 2006, mortgages that were really ugly and really poisonous. Fannie Mae led the way, pushing for home ownership, degrading underwriting standards, pushing for more relaxed lending standards. Then the predatory lenders take the ball and run with it because there’s so much money to be made.

TM: And because of Fannie Mae’s initiative, so little risk.

GM: So little risk. Fannie Mae was either guaranteeing the loans that Countrywide and other lenders were making or taking them into their own portfolios. The taxpayer was essentially taking on the risk. There is an unholy alliance between Fannie Mae, a government sponsored enterprise, and predatory lenders and Wall Street. Wall Street saw Fannie Mae creating pools of loans that they would sell to others to sell to investors. Wall Street took that ball and ran with it, issuing trillions of dollars in mortgage-backed securities bursting with predatory loans.

I’m glad to see her clarify the misunderstanding of the role of Fannie and Freddie in the mortgage meltdown.  It wasn’t their affordable housing role that created the bigger mess.  It was their lack of due diligence in investigating loans packaged by known predatory lenders and their managers who were dealing themselves quota bonuses.  Congress didn’t watch what they were doing either.  They just assumed they were following their mandate.

I’m happy to see that a Judge will allow a defamation suit against propagandameister Breitbart to proceed.  The suit was filed by Shirley Sherrod and dealt with the horrible edit job his site did to make her look like some kind of racist.  You may recall she used to work in the Department of Agriculture.

Last year, Breitbart published a video of Sherrod describing to an NAACP conference how she overcame her own racist attitudes. However, a video from that speech was deceptively edited to make it appear that she was describing how she used the power of the government against a white farmer.

She was fired from her post at the agriculture department within hours of the clip hitting Breitbart’s website, and for at least a day the world believed Sherrod was a racist who abused her power to harm a white farmer.

Once it became clear that was not the case, the government offered her the job back, but she declined. Even after a formal apology from the White House and an offer to talk to the president, Sherrod still refused.

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack took it a step further and offered her a position dealing with civil rights and discrimination issues at the USDA, but Sherrod declined and vowed to sue Breitbart over his deceptive prank.

The suit also targets Breitbart colleague Larry O’Connor and one other unnamed defendant.

Lawyers for the defense argued that the suit was invalid because it was triggered by a matter of “pure opinion,” not statements of fact.

So, that should give you something to think on this morning.  What’s on your reading and blogging list today?  Please!  Share with us!

 

 

 

 


Captains of Contrived Chaos

Professor Chaos and General Disarray

It’s started.  All you have to do is watch the stock market and you’ll  see it.  The unbelievably contrived debt ceiling nonsense is taking hold.  The republican business big guns are out and they don’t seem to be able to stop a group of very determined crazy, freshmen congressmen that don’t have a clue about government or economics.

Here’s some headlines you may want to check out.

First, it’s obvious Boehner, the Chamber of Commerce, and even Wall Street minions don’t have control over the teabots.

Boehner: ‘A Lot’ Of Republicans Want To Force Default, Create ‘Enough Chaos’ To Pass Balanced Budget Amendment

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) said today that some members of his own caucus who are refusing to agree to a compromise debt ceiling deal are hoping to unleash “chaos” and thus force the White House and Senate Democrats to make bigger concessions than they’re already offering. As many as 40 House Republicans, especially Tea Party members and freshmen, have demanded nothing short of changing the Constitution to include a balanced budget amendment before they would vote to raise debt ceiling, even though that has zero chance before the U.S. faces potential default on Aug. 2.

A balanced budget amendment is one of the most insane laws a government can pass.  It lets them spend all they want when revenues come in and create depressions during recessions.  Pretty much what they’ve been doing the last 10 years.  Even John McCain says its crazy.

McCain To ‘Foolish’ Republicans Demanding A Balanced Budget Amendment: ‘It’s Bizarro’

In exchange for not sending the nation into economic ruin, a swath of Republicans are demanding to pass a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) to the Constitution. By forcing government to actively slash spending in the face of falling revenues, such an amendment “would greatly damage an already-weak recovery,” “mandate perverse actions in the face of recessions,” and is considered one of the worse ideas in Washington. Nonetheless, as House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) said today, the fringe contingent of the GOP is aiming to create “enough chaos” to force the Senate and the White House to accept a BBA. Freshman Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), sponsor of the Senate’s BBA bill, actually wants America’s “house to come down” unless he gets his way. But today on the Senate floor, a more seasoned senator schooled the freshman contingent on economic reality. Though an avid supporter of the BBA, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) stood amazed that some members actually believed a BBA could pass in the Senate. Such a belief, he said, is “worse than foolish. That is deceiving.” Taking heed of numerous economists’ warning about the Aug. 2 deadline, McCain said that Republicans who are holding out on raising the debt ceiling for an impossible amendment is “unfair” and “bizarro”

Here’s a list of the Republicans and which side they’re on: CIVIL WAR: GOP Coalition Splinters Into Open Conflict Over Debt Ceiling.   Boehner’s signed on The Chamber of Commerce, crotchety old Fred Thompson, Nasty young Cantor, Nutcase Allen West, and the presidential candidates that aren’t Michelle Bachmann.  She’s out in front of creating the end times, as usual.

Margaret Carlson–yeah, i know–is even calling Boehner the Gang of One.

The resistance came from the right. At least 60 House Republicans have declared that they won’t vote for a debt-limit increase — for any reason. Although outside experts were brought in to explain the potential consequences of default, including a “death spiral” in the bond market initiated by a loss of confidence, many of the Tea Party intransigents didn’t bother to attend the lecture. In any case, they preferred a potential catastrophe to a deal that would provide political benefits to the president — even if most of the policy benefits accrued to Republicans.

When Obama called for increasing the revenue component from $800 billion to $1.2 trillion, Boehner had his excuse. He pulled out of negotiations, leaving Obama to complain in an impromptu news conference that he had been left, once again, “at the altar.”

It’s hard to know how much of Obama’s lament was genuine and how much of it was designed to give Boehner bragging rights about how he had bested the president. In any case, it wasn’t enough. Boehner merely gave his colleagues dramatic cuts in spending; what they really want is for Obama to fail, painfully and visibly. For that, higher interest rates, a devalued dollar, cratering stock markets and another recession appear to be a price worth paying. They don’t want to govern; they want to stick it to the man.

It’s obvious today that the markets realize that the confidence fairy ran off with the high priests of voodoo economics.  Things are starting to crumble.  That’s the live link to all the red.  Here’s a mid day recap.  Notice that credit default swaps (argghhhh) are on the rise!

Stocks fell for a third day and Treasuries and commodities slid as a stalemate over the debt ceiling pushed the U.S. closer to default and durable-goods orders unexpectedly dropped. The dollar rallied.

The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index lost 1.7 percent to 1,309.87 at 2:31 p.m. in New York. The cost of insuring against a U.S. default climbed to the highest level since February 2010 and 10-year Treasury note yields climbed four basis points to 2.99 percent. Coffee and oil lost more than 1.5 percent and gold erased earlier gains to drag the S&P GSCI Index down 0.9 percent. The Dollar Index rose 0.8 percent.

The dispute over plans to cut the U.S. federal deficit has stolen investor attention away from an earnings season that has produced higher-than-estimated results at about 81 percent of S&P 500 companies that reported so far. Shares of industrial companies helped lead declines today after a Commerce Department report showed durable goods orders fell 2.1 percent.

“It’s a tug of war between the headline risk of the debt ceiling issue and earnings,” Matthew DiFilippo, who helps manage $1 billion as director of research at Stewart Capital Advisors LLC in Indiana, Pennsylvania, said in telephone interview. “The volatility may create buying opportunities because corporate earnings are coming in strong, and the market does appear to be cheap compared to the underlying earnings power.”

 Wall Street really doesn’t care how we pay are bills.  They only care that we do it.  There are plenty of revenue sources out there.  Most of these guys don’t subscribe to voodoo economics at all.  Republicans and most likely the President think that they’re all supply side-oriented.  Most economists and financiers don’t buy that at all and a lot of them have been calling for increased taxes.  They just want a plan that reduces risk,

What Wall Street, and the ratings agencies are worried about is not whether we can pay–we can–but whether we will.  A lot of Republicans seem to think that we can secure our AAA rating by showing the agencies–and the markets–that we’ve made serious cuts.  But if you achieve this end by holding the debt ceiling hostage, what you’re really demonstrating is not a tough-minded commitment to entitlement reform, but a political system so broken that it has trouble taking even simple, obvious steps to keep the fiscal engine running.  Our AAA is not at risk because our current fiscal path is unsustainable, but because ratings agencies know what many GOP freshman and party activists apparently do not: that doing the unpopular things required to get the budget in balance is going to require both parties to hold hands and jump together.  Otherwise, whoever forces through their unpopular plan (huge tax increases/massive spending cuts) is going to get trounced at the next elections by an opposition party promising to undo whatever it is the party in charge has just done.

We are not broke. We can pay our bills. We can meet our obligations.  It’s just a bunch of nutcases in Washington DC aren’t going on reality.  They’re off playing Professor Chaos and General Disarray with our economy because they hate the Washington Insider Kewl Kids.


Monday Reads

Good Morning!

I’ve still been following some of the same stories that we talked about this weekend.  The Federal Deficit standoff continues with each side going to its time out corner to write its own plan.  More and more information about the home grown Norwegian terrorist comes up showing that he was basically an extremist Christian “Crusader” who felt that killing innocent people was necessary to stop the forward march of “multicultural Marxists”. There’s rumors that the Norwegian police may be looking for British associates of the terrorist who Fox News now refers to as a mad man and NAZI.  This is despite a lot of evidence that he and others like him try to paint themselves as”Zionists” and pro Israel. They’ve even offered up help. This is something that Israeli leaders have condemned as not being pro Israel.

In numerous online postings, including a manifesto published on the day of the attacks, Breivik promoted the Vienna School or Crusader Nationalism philosophy, a mishmash of anti-modern principles that also calls for “the deportation of all Muslims from Europe” as well as from “the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.”

According to the manifesto, titled “2083: A European Declaration of Independence” and published under the pseudonym Andrew Berwick, the Vienna School supports “pro-Zionism/Israeli nationalism.”

The Norwegian terrorist attack has put focus on right wing extremist groups in Europe and should lead us to closely examine similar movements in this country.  Fiercely nationalistic and anti-immigrant, these organizations have been networking over the internet.

The success of populist parties appealing to a sense of lost national identity has brought criticism of minorities, immigrants and in particular Muslims out of the beer halls and Internet chat rooms and into mainstream politics. While the parties themselves generally do not condone violence, some experts say a climate of hatred in the political discourse has encouraged violent individuals.

“I’m not surprised when things like the bombing in Norway happen, because you will always find people who feel more radical means are necessary,” said Joerg Forbrig, an analyst at the German Marshall Fund in Berlin who has studied far-right issues in Europe. “It literally is something that can happen in a number of places and there are broader problems behind it.”

The most astounding recent news is that the Norwegian many may be linked to a UK group.

Detectives investigating Norway’s bomb attack and mass shooting are thought to be probing the suspect’s possible links to the British far right.

Police have been examining the background of Anders Breivik, who reportedly claimed he was recruited by two English right-wing extremists at a meeting in the UK in 2002 attended by seven other people.

Trisha Tritch at NYT has a great piece up on  How the Deficit Got This Big. It’s exactly what we’ve been saying here forever.

With President Obama and Republican leaders calling for cutting the budget by trillions over the next 10 years, it is worth asking how we got here — from healthy surpluses at the end of the Clinton era, and the promise of future surpluses, to nine straight years of deficits, including the $1.3 trillion shortfall in 2010. The answer is largely the Bush-era tax cuts, war spending in Iraq and Afghanistan, and recessions.

Despite what antigovernment conservatives say, non-defense discretionary spending on areas like foreign aid, education and food safety was not a driving factor in creating the deficits. In fact, such spending, accounting for only 15 percent of the budget, has been basically flat as a share of the economy for decades. Cutting it simply will not fill the deficit hole.

So, let’s try to move away from the big stories. The Institute of Medicine of the National Academies argues that preventative services for women–including access to birth control–is essential to women’s health. The ACLU explains the importance of these findings.

This is a huge step forward for women’s health, as the IOM’s recommendation is a significant move toward ensuring that contraception is provided without co-pays or other out-of-pocket expenses in new insurance plans under the health reform law.

Last summer, the federal government commissioned the IOM, an independent medical authority, to review and recommend women’s preventive health services that should be included in the Department’s final guidelines on preventive services that are expected later this summer. In a true showing of support for women’s health, the IOM recommended that the list of services should include “the full range of Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptive methods.”

The IOM’s recommendation, if adopted, will ensure that millions of women have access to the safe and effective contraception they need, which is a critical component of basic health care for women. Without contraception, women have more unintended pregnancies and are less likely to get the prenatal care they require to carry a healthy pregnancy to term.  Out-of-pocket expenses for birth control, which can range between $15 and $50 per month, burden a woman’s ability to access and use contraception consistently, especially if she is already managing a tight budget. Eliminating extra out-of-pocket costs would remove a major barrier to contraception access, allowing women to make their own personal decisions about whether or when to have children, regardless of the size of their pocketbooks.

National Geographic has a fascinating read up on five hypothesis about the origins and purposes of Machu Picchu.  I watched the TV program and was surprised to find that one of the biggest ones is that it was actually a royal resort. This is one place that I’ve always wanted to visit.

Verano’s interpretation of the Machu Picchu skeletons is consistent with one of the most popular theories about the site: that it was the royal retreat of the 15th-century Inca Emperor Pachacuti.

According to this idea, Machu Picchu was a place for Pachacuti and his royal court, or panaca, to relax, hunt, and entertain guests.

“The members of Pachacuti’s panaca may have lived there during the year for a few days, weeks, or months,” said Guillermo Cock, a Lima-based archaeologist who has also received funding from the National Geographic Society’s Committee for Research and Exploration. (The Society owns National Geographic News.)

The “royal estate” theory, first proposed in the 1980s, is largely based on a 16th-century Spanish document that referred to a royal estate called Picchu, which was built in the same general area as Machu Picchu.

Yesterday, nearly 800 same sex couples tied the knot in New York.  Now, we just need to get DOMA off the books so these couples can enjoy the same federal rights as all married couples.

“Marriage equality is alive and well,” New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, the body’s first openly gay leader, said in a press briefing outside the clerk’s office, eliciting cheers from spectators. “All of the great stories and love that are pouring out today — they show what all of us who have fought a lifetime for this knew and know, that moving rights forward makes us a better society.”

The victory for gay-rights advocates, which was championed by Governor Andrew Cuomo and made headlines worldwide, more than doubled, to 35 million, the number of Americans free to marry either gender.

City officials were prepared to marry today all 823 couples — gay and straight — who entered a lottery last week. They expected to beat the previous record for most weddings in one day, set by 621 couples on Valentine’s Day in 2003. About 60 judges were on hand to grant judicial waivers eliminating the state’s 24-hour waiting period.

Okay, so those are my offerings for this Monday morning.  What’s on your reading and blogging list?


Invoke the 14th Amendment. PERIOD.

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. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

The first intelligent article suggesting we do that came from The Nation‘s Katrina vanden Heuvel after Timothy Geithner suggested he had folks exploring the option.  I’ve ended several blog posts this month with the call to invoke the 14th and send the insane teabot posse back home with the message that they may want to read up on U.S. The Constitution before they start waving that Gadsden flag in our faces.

Brad Delong fleshes the argument out within this context.  We have a president that’s found lawyers who have said that actions in Libya are not “hostilities”.  I will add that we’ve had several presidents who have found lawyers that have written that “enhanced interrogation techniques” aren’t torture and that it’s okay to assassinate citizens without due process.  Certainly, with a Washington DC that has more word-parsing,  pretzel-logic-precedent-finding, triangulating lawyers per square foot than any place on the planet, the White House can find one that finds Delong’s suggestions below justifiable via Section 4 stated above.

The structure of Tim Geithner’s testimony to Congress defending his additional borrowing is:

  • The Constitution forbids me from even thinking about default.
  • You ordered me to spend.
  • A previous Congress told me not to borrow, but no Congress can bind its successors, and those of you who are in this Congress here now ordered me to spend.
  • I’m just doing what you told me to do–and what the Constitution directly and explicitly tells me to do.

And then we should move on to the people’s business. This episode of kabuki theatre has done nobody any credit. If I had previously had any respect for or confidence in Republicans, this would have shredded it. And each day it continues it further shreds my respect for and confidence in the executive branch.

DeLong argues–and I agree–that this is far better than options outlined by Ezra Klein and ranked by Calculated Risk here.  In the long run, we should probably be looking at eliminating the debt ceiling.  If Congress authorizes the spending and the President signs off on it, there should be absolutely no way that they can renege on bond holders later. Moody’s suggested the same thing last week. The rest of the crap on the table just undoes one promise made to people after another.

It should be obvious by now that Boehner is not in control of his caucus in congress. The tea party has him over a tea barrel.  These are folks that appear to have no clue about anything as illustrated by their ignorant statements last spring that all they had to do was pass a budget and it was law.  They completely forget the role of the President and the Senate. They seem to have no idea or they stubbornly refuse to believe the experts that tell them that what they are doing is basically bringing the country’s economy down.

Meanwhile, there were lingering doubts about Boehner’s ability to rally support for a debt-limit increase of any size or duration. Many House Republicans continue to push their plan to sharply cut spending over the next decade and adopt a constitutional amendment requiring Congress to balance the budget. Such a plan passed the House, but failed Friday in the Senate on a party-line vote.

Freshman Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-Tex.) said Republican leaders remain concerned that even a small increase in the debt limit would fail on the House floor.

“I think their concern about bringing it to the floor is whether they can get 218 [votes] or not,” Farenthold said in an interview. “Everybody wants to only go through this pain once.”

We can’t afford to pass a debt ceiling increase attached to no firm commitments for revenue adjustments.  It’s ridiculous.  There is no way the long term budget problems will ever be solved under these conditions.  Further more, the fall out from the increased interest rates and the impact on the already nasty economy will just drive economy-related revenues down and expenditures up. We’ll exacerbate the very thing we’re trying to alleviate. This is insanity.

If the meetings today look to be more of the same, the President should just get on TV Monday morning and tell Geithner to pay the bills for the spending that the congress authorized and cite the 14th amendment. Again, if you can find a lawyer that says that enhanced interrogation techniques aren’t torture and justify claiming a citizen is an enemy combatant and can be detained indefinitely–or assassinated–without due process, rationalizing this should be easy.  Our country’s economy shouldn’t be subjected to deliberate economic sabotage because a few new congress critterz flunked their middle school American Government and History classes.

If you don’t want to take my word for it, then take former President Clinton’s suggestion. There’s also a list of lawyers there that would tell our constitutional law lecturer President that it’s constitutional.

A few days ago, former President Bill Clinton identified a constitutional escape hatch should President Obama and Congress fail to come to terms on a deficit reduction plan before the government hits its borrowing ceiling.

He pointed to an obscure provision in the 14th Amendment, saying he would unilaterally invoke it “without hesitation” to raise the debt ceiling “and force the courts to stop me.”