The Daily Strike-5/20/09-Action is the Best Disinfectant

Good evening and welcome to the Daily Strike. I have just enough time today to give you everything you need to know about the going-ons in Washington. In the past week or so, Washington has been consumed with a scandal drummed up by partisans and cable news chatter, fear mongering about relocating prisoners into the United States, and a lot of other jibber jabber. Even today, the Senate spent the morning debating a politically-charged amendment preventing Guantanamo prisoners from coming into the United States. What's the best way for Democrats to move beyond these partially self-inflicted wounds? Get stuff done. Today, they did just that.

THE WHITE HOUSE: The President had a somewhat low key day in preparation for his major speech tomorrow on torture and detainee policy. The President, though, this afternoon signed two important bills dealing with housing regulations. The first, the "Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act," will help protect consumers against mortgage fraud. The second, the "Helping Families Save Their Homes Act," allows the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to support various loan modification programs. Neither bill is sufficient to fix the housing crisis. The bill notably lacks the "cramdown" provision, which would have allowed bankruptcy judges to modify existing loan agreements. However, the two pieces of legislation are good starts in reigning in the lending industry.

Earlier in the day, the President held his quarterly meeting with the economic advisory commission he set up, headed by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker. It's pretty unclear what exactly this group does except get a bunch of old people around a table. The President said that the group talked about various proposed steps in financial regulation and job creation. We'll see if this group comes up with any substantive recommendations.

The President also announced today that he will hold a White House Summit next month on immigration reform. He has been facing pressure on this issue from Hispanic groups, who provided key support for him in last year's election.

THE HOUSE: The President will have to schedule another signing ceremony for later this week. The House today concurred in the Senate amendments on the Credit Card Bill of Rights, which will, among other things, prohibit arbitrary rate increases on customers who are less than 60 days late on paying their bills. President Obama pushed hard for passage of this legislation, and rightfully so. It makes very substantive changes in the rules under which credit card companies operate. The House had to take two separate votes on the bill. The Senate, led by Republican Tom Coburn, included an unrelated amendment allowing people to bring guns into national parks. House leaders decided that they didn't want to hold up the credit card bill because of this provision. Therefore, they took separate votes on the bill itself, and the gun amendment. If one of the amendments had failed, the entire bill would not have been agreed to.

The good news? The credit card portion of the bill passed by a vote of 361-64. All no votes were from Republicans, except for Rep. Herseth-Sandlin of the credit-card loving state of South Dakota. The bad news? The gun portion of the bill passed by a vote of 279-147. All but 2 Republicans voted for this part of the bill, while a majority of Democrats voted against it.

The House then moved to consideration of a bill to assist veterans and the disabled in establishing small businesses. The House considered various amendments, all of which were accepted on voice vote, with the exception of one amendment offered by Rep. Kratovil (D-MD). The Kratovil amendment was approved by a unanimous vote of 427-0.

The House then voted on a Republican motion to recommit that would provide monetary assistance to small business to compensate for any "carbon emissions" tax. This was basically a political statement against cap-and-trade hidden in a Congressional motion. But Democrats had no real reason to oppose it. The motion was agreed to by a vote of 385-41. All no votes were from Democrats.

The underlying bill was approved by an overwhelming 406-15 margin, with all opposition coming from Republicans.

The House will move on tomorrow to the FAA authorization bill.

THE SENATE: The Senate is slowly ploughing through amendments to the war funding bill. This morning, Senators voted 90-6 to prohibit Guantanamo detainees from being put in the United States. The Democrats clearly lost the PR battle on this issue. It's not like anyone was planning on releasing suspected terrorists in our neighborhoods and letting them chill out in our public schools. They would be put in maximum security prisons, like every other dangerous criminal. Republicans, trying to regain their national security bona fides, somehow convinced the public that relocating prisoners in the United States would constitute having "terrorists threatening your communities." As MSNBC's Chuck Todd pointed out, are we supposed to believe that living near a prison with CONVICTED rapists or murderers safer than living next to a prison with SUSPECTED terrorists?

The only Democrats who were not overcome by political pressure on this vote were Durbin (IL), Harkin (IA), Leahy (VT), Levin (MI), Reed (RI) and Whitehouse (RI).

The Senate then took a break from the war funding bill to vote on the conference report accompanying the military procurement reform bill. The report was agreed to by a unanimous vote of 95-0. The House will vote on it tomorrow, and President Obama will sign it by the end of the week. Chalk up another legislative victory.

The Senate went back to dispose of a few amendments on the war funding bill. The first amendment, from Republican leader Mitch McConnell, would limit the release of detainees into the United States pending a report on the detention center at Guantanamo Bay. . The amendment was agreed to 92-3. The "no" votes were from Democrats Burris (IL), Durbin (IL) and Leahy (VT).

The Senate also unanimously approved a Brownback (R-KS) amendment requiring the federal government to consult state governments before relocating prisoners to their states. How much more political hay can they get out of this issue? I guess we'll soon find out, though it sure wastes a lot of time on the Senate floor.

The Senate will vote on cloture tomorrow, before dealing with the remaining amendments to the bill. I expect that cloture should be invoked relatively easily. Republicans have gotten their amendments approved, so they'll probably vote for the bill en masse. I suspect that 10 or so Democrats will vote against the bill.

That's it for a busy, "end of session"-type day. We'll be back for more tomorrow and Friday!

The Daily Strike-5/7/09-Another Budget Day

Good evening and welcome to the Daily Strike. The full 2010 budget proposal was released today. It's like Christmas for nerds! We'll give you a full rundown. Also, this weekend, we return to Lady Strike's native Syracuse for mother's day. Posting will be relatively light. Hopefully Feline Strike can make it on his own for a couple of days. Also, I'm repeating a lot of points that I made in the previous entry, so bare with me.

BUDGET: The President introduced his full Fiscal Year 2010 budget today. This 1400 page document details spending in federal programs line-by-line. In his announcement, the President did not focus on what the budget will do for health care, education or the environment. He instead focused on $17 billion worth of cuts, which account for about half of one percent of the total budget. I get that highlighting the cuts is largely symbolic, and that it's supposed to show Obama's fiscal responsibility. But as I mentioned in a dialogue with The Big Picture, you should be emphasizing the strengths in the budget, not inadvertently drawing attention to its weaknesses. Furthermore, when your biggest political battle in the coming months is to convince people to spend a lot of money right now on important priorities, is it really worth it to talk about the usefulness of cutting spending?

Also, it annoys me when the Obama administration uses the same misleading logic and rhetoric as the previous administration. Both Bush and Obama criticized the "Washington elite" who don't realize that $17 billion is a lot of money. "Just go ask every family if that's a lot of money," they tell us. Well, the fact is that it ISN'T a lot of money, and we need to be honest about that. Obama then pulled a Bush-McCain move by mentioning one specific egregious spending item, money for a "cultural atache" to France. You could eliminate millions of programs like that and you wouldn't make a dent in the federal deficit.

The Big Picture wisely reminds me that this is Barack Obama. We should always have faith that he knows what he's doing. I'll just say that I wasn't happy with the way this was rolled out.

THE PRESIDENT: Earlier in the day, the President held an education meeting with an eclectic cast of characters: New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I), civil rights activist Al Sharpton, and former Speaker Newt Gingrich. After all the trash Newt has talked recently, I'm surprised Obama let him into the White House. The former Speaker praised Obama for bravely defending charter schools, which are not popular among some of his biggest constituents.

Gingrich also must have been happy that Obama opposed Congressional Democrats' effort to end the DC School Vouchers program. The pilot program, enacted a few years ago by Republicans, gives scholarships to inner city students so they can attend private schools. The Washington Post writes about this in their editorial pages almost every day. Yes, it would be bad to cut funding to these students while they're still attending these private schools. But the Washington Post misses the point. It may be GREAT for the lucky students who get these scholarships, but what does it do to improve education as a whole?

THE SENATE: Today was an uncharacteristically quick day in the United States Senate. Senators spent the morning debating a military procurement reform bill, cosponsored by Senators Levin (MI) and McCain (AZ) that would change Pentagon organization and procedures for the acquisition of major weapons system, to protect against waste, fraud and abuse. A few amendments were accepted by voice vote, and the bill passed 93-0. Pretty rare that everyone, even ideologues like Coburn (OK) and DeMint (SC) would vote unanimously for a substantive bill. The Senate also approved the nomination of Gil Kerlikowske to be Director of National Drug Control Policy by a vote of 93-1. Obama's good friend Mr. Coburn was the only Senator voting no. The upper chamber will consider the House-passed Credit Card Bill of Rights next week.

THE HOUSE: The House today approved a bill to reform consumer mortgage practices and provide accountability for such practices, and to provide certain minimum standards for consumer mortgage loans. This is the third housing bill Congress has considered in the past few weeks. Congress has already sent President Obama bill designed to cut down on mortgage fraud. Both houses have also passed different versions of the "Helping Families Save Their Homes Act." Today's bill passed by a vote of 300-114. All no votes were from Republicans, except for Reps. Bright (AL), Kirkpatrick (AZ) and Schrader (OR). (all Freshman!). Prior to final passage, the House accepted by voice vote a Republican motion to recommit which set some guidelines for grant-seekers.

The House voted on a series of amendments as well. Here's a brief rundown.

1. The first amendment was the best by far. Anticipating that Republicans would try and use this bill to attack ACORN, Democrat Barney Frank preempted them by proposing to prohibit funding to any organization under federal indictment. The amendment passed 245-176. And all opposition was from Republicans, except for Reps. Bright (AL), Giffords (AZ), Minnick (ID) and Mitchell (AZ).

2. The next amendment from Rep. Hensarling (R-TX) sought to " to strike the assignee and securitizer liability provisions from the bill." It failed 171-252.

3. Third was an amendment from Republican Study Committee Chairman and partisan extraordinaire Tom Price who sought "to delay the enactment of titles I, II, and III of the bill until the Federal Reserve certifies that they will not reduce the availability or increase the price of credit for qualified mortgages. " It failed 167-259.

4. Finally, the House voted down an amendment by Rep. McHenry (R-NC) which would have striked portions of the bill relating to high-cost mortgages. The amendment failed 171-255.

The House also adopted several amendments by voice vote.

That's it for us today, I'll make sure to write quick entries this weekend, include our "Comment of the Week" and our new feature "Wouldn't Go As Far As THAT!" Have a great weekend!

The Daily Strike-5/6/09-Showdowns

Good evening and welcome to the Daily Strike on another busy Wednesday. President Obama held two key meetings today at the White House, and the Senate made progress on two important bills. Let's get you caught up.

THE WHITE HOUSE: The President today held two "trilateral" meetings today, one figurative and one literal. The first meeting was with the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, Senators Baucus (D-MT) and Grassley (IA). This committee has so far taken the lead in developing a plan for comprehensive health insurance, which I would guess was the focus of the meeting. Baucus has been walking a tightrope recently, by saying that a bill does not necessarily need to contain a public option, while not closing the door on one. Grassley has said that a public option is a deal-breaker. Grassley will have little say in the matter if Democrats choose to use the reconciliation option. The public option has taken a hit in the past couple of weeks, with Senators Ben Nelson (D-NE) and Arlen Specter (?-PA) coming out against it. I really hate to say this, but I'm not sure if the Democrats could even muster 50 votes for a public option, with the power of the insurance lobby and the need for some self-interested Senators to appear "centrist." The best chance for a public plan might be a compromise being crafted by Senator Schumer (D-NY), which would create a public plan with provisions that would prevent it from crowding out private insurance companies. I just can't understand why anyone would oppose a public option. The only drawback, apparently, is that it will put some private companies out of business if they don't lower prices or improve quality. GOOD! The job of the United States Congress is not to protect the insurance industry, it's to protect the American people.

The Republican strategy to prevent Americans from getting health care seemed to be revealed in a memo by pollster/spinmeister Frank Luntz. Republicans are being instructed to emphasize that they are FOR reform, just not for the Democrats' plan because it puts government bureaucrats in charge of your health care. How about Frank Luntz just pays for unnecessary emergency room visits caused by a lack of health insurance?

The President's second meeting today was with Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai and Pakistan's President Asif Ali Zardari. In remarks after the meeting, Obama said that he was glad these two leaders understood the precariousness of the situation in that part of the world. Obama pledged that the U.S. would use foreign aid to create "growth and opportunity."

I have two major concerns with this meeting. First of all, Obama said that the United States will make a lasting commitment to both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Doesn't that sound a little too Vietnam-like? We need to emphasize an exit strategy instead of unconditional American support. Secondly, these two leaders are not the right people to lead these countries right now. Karzai, a former darling of the United States, has been plagued by corruption and incompetence, and Zardari has not been able to stop the Taliban from advancing into Pakistan. It may be a little early for the Washington Post to be running features on Afghanistan called "Obama's War," but the Af/Pak situation is certainly something to worry about.

We'll have a lot more from the administration tomorrow night, after the expected roll out of their full Fiscal Year 2010 budget proposal. (The thing they released earlier this year, and the Congressional Budget Resolution, were just blueprints).

THE SENATE: The Senate today passed the cramdown-less "Helping Families Save Their Homes" Act , which will direct the Department of Housing and Urban Development to implement a program to encourage loan modification. The cramdown provision was defeated last week, so the most of the controversy surrounding the bill subsided. The final vote was 91-5, with Republicans Bunning (KY), Coburn (OK), DeMint (SC), Gregg (NH) and Inhofe. Prior to vote on final passage, the Senate voted on three additional amendments.

1. The first amendment, offered by Senator Kerry (D-MA) seeks to "protect the interests of bona fide tenants in the case of any foreclosure on any dwelling or residential real property, and for other purposes." What's a bona fide tenant? A legal tenant as opposed to a "squatter?" Anyways, the amendment was agreed to by a vote of 57-39. All Democrats voted for the amendment, as did one Republican, Senator Snowe (ME). Once again, Specter votes with his party! He's getting the hang of it!

2. The second amendment, offered by Senator Coburn (R-OK), would have established a pilot program that would expedite the disposal of Federal "real" property. I looked into what "real" property was, and apparently it means something along the lines of "excess" or "under- performing" land. Because the amendment would violate Senate budget rules, it required 60 votes to pass. The amendment failed by a vote of 50-46. All no votes were from Democrats, except for Christoper Bond (R-MO). Every other Republicans voted yes, as did Democrats Bayh (IN), Carper (DE), Conrad (ND), Dorgan (ND), Klobuchar (MN), Lincoln (AR), McCaskill (MO), Nelson (NE), Pryor (AR), Warner (VA) and Webb (VA). Again, Specter on our side!

3. Finally, the Senate voted on an amendment offered by Senator Grassley (R-IA) that gives the U.S. comptrollers authority to do audits on the Federal Reserve. I don't know how this has to do with housing, per se. Either way, it was approved by a vote of 95-1, with only Senator Alexander (R-TN), voting in the negative.

The Senate has moved on to consideration on a bill reforming military procurement policies. The bill has the ardent support of Obama's Presidential opponent, John McCain. The Senate will vote on a few amendments to that bill tomorrow, prior to an evening vote on final passage. We'll have more details on that bill tomorrow.

The House had another reasonably quiet day. They did agree to the Senate-passed anti-mortgage fraud bill by a vote of 367-59, with Democrat Alan Grayson (FL) voting present. (?). All no votes were from Republicans. The bill will now go to President Obama for his signature.

That's it for us today, see you tomorrow night! Leave us some comments and let us know what we missed!

The Daily Strike-5/5/09-Cinco de Mayo

Good evening and welcome to the Daily Strike. The President celebrated Cinco de Mayo last night because had some important business to tend to today. Let's get to it.

THE WHITE HOUSE: Today, once again, was a very busy day on the west side of Pennsylvania Avenue. The President, after receiving his morning briefings, met with key House lawmakers to discuss a climate change bill. The chairman of the House Energy and Commerce committee, Henry Waxman joined Select Committee on Climate Change Chairman Edward Markey, and other Democrats in hashing out a legislative strategy with President Obama. The President reiterated that a Cap-and-Trade energy bill is one of his main legislative priorities for this year. The chances of such a bill passing have seemed more and more unlikely recently. For one, a bad economy makes it harder to undertake a massive reordering of the private sector towards cleaner energy (although it would be phased in slowly). Also, Democrats from manufacturing states have expressed opposition because laws restricting carbon outputs might hurt their states' businesses. Republicans are almost unanimous in opposition, saying the cap-and-trade proposals amount to a "national energy tax." They also complain, oddly, that cap-and-trade picks winners and losers in the economy. GOOD! Don't we want to encourage companies to produce clean, renewable energy, and discourage them from making fossil fuels? Obama apparently urged lawmakers to try and seek compromise so they can get something done. My guess is that the only clean energy bill coming this year will be one significantly watered down, which is too bad for our planet and our long-term prosperity.

The President then went to lunch with the Vice President at an independently-owned burger joint in Arlington. Biden ordered a swiss cheeseburger with jalapenos, and the President stuck with your standard cheddar cheeseburger. How do I know this? The press pool has a little too much time on their hands. Maybe one of these days he'll go to lunch at the food court where I eat. Yeah, I'm pretty swept up.

The President met this afternoon with Israeli President Shimon Peres. Peres is the head of state, and not the head of government, meaning he is more of the ceremonial head of the state of Israel. Still, Peres is the former Prime Minister, and still carries a lot of clout. Peres said that Israel is still committed to a two-state solution, the cornerstone of any peace effort with the Palestinians. Peres said that he and Obama agreed on the importance of the unique friendship between Israel and the United States, and that the two countries' partnership is as strong as ever. The most interesting news from the event was Peres' apparent acceptance of Obama's intentions to talk directly with leaders in Iran. Peres says that if the President wants to try engagement, Israel will be "loyal partners." Something tells me that current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu probably doesn't agree with that.

The President sits down with the Presidents of Afghanistan and Pakistan tomorrow. We will bring you full coverage. These meetings become crucial as the security situation in Pakistan gets ever more perilous.

THE SENATE: The Senate spent today working on the "Helping Families Save Their Homes" Act, which would direct the Department of Housing and Urban Development to encourage loan modifications for delinquent homeowners. The bill, unlike the House version, does not contain the "cramdown" provision, which would allow bankruptcy judges to renegotiate the terms of mortgages. The Senate took roll call votes in relation to 4 amendments today.A vote on final passage is scheduled for tomorrow afternoon, after about 10 more votes on amendments. Following consideration of this bill, the Senate will move on to a bipartisan Defense Department procurement reform bill co-sponsored by Senators Levin (D-MI) and McCain (R-AZ).

Let's go through today's amendments quickly:

1. The first amendment today was offered by Senator Corker (R-TN). It addressed "safe harbor for certain services." I'm no housing expert, so if you want to figure out what this is, be my guest. The amendment was defeated by a vote of 31-63. All yes votes were from Republicans. The GOP crossovers were Chambliss (GA) (really?) Collins (ME), Isakson (GA), Martinez (GA), Snowe (ME) and Voinovich (OH).

2. The next amendment was a really politically tough one proposed by Senator Thune (R-SD). It would have deauthorized the Secretary of the Treasury from using TARP funds that have been paid back to the federal government. In other words, once we get bailout money back, we can't spend it again. This is one of those amendments that gives party leaders cold sweats. TARP is politically very unpopular, but this amendment would be bad policy. Why would we give up potential TARP money if we could use it to capitalize struggling banks? I'm pretty sure Thune's intention is to score a political point or two by making President Obama come back to Congress and beg for more bailout money, instead of just using money he already would have. Luckily, the Democrats did a good job whipping the amendment, and it failed by a narrow 47-48 vote. The Demos who couldn't resist the political pressure (aka they voted aye) were Cantwell (WA), Dorgan (ND), Feingold (WI), Feinstein (CA), Lincoln (AR), Nelson (NE), Pryor (AR) and Tester (MT). The only Republican voting no was Lugar (IN). And Specter, whatever he is, voted no. He's starting to act more like a Democrat!

3. The third vote was in relation to a second degree amendment offered by Senator Ensign (R-NV) to an amendment offered by Senator Boxer (D-CA). The Boxer amendment would provide for a written warning to be given out to homeowners of financial scams. The Ensign amendment, as I understand it, simply set some oversight guidelines for this program. The amendment passed unanimously, by a vote of 96-0.

4. The last vote of the day came on an amendment offered by Senator DeMint (R-SC), which would prohibit the government from owning any stock in companies that received TARP money. This was basically an anti-nationalization amendment, from what I can gather. Anyway, it failed on a vote of 36-59. The only Republicans not voting yes were Bennett (UT) and Corker (TN). All Democrats voted no (yay Specter!).

The other major Congressional action today was a meeting of the Senate Finance Committee discussing health care reform. This was supposed to be a collegial meeting, with testimony from various stakeholders. Then, of course, a bunch of pro-single payer activists came in and started screaming and protesting, disrupting the hearing. Do they not realize that what they're doing is COMPLETELY counter-productive? We need America to think that OPPONENTS of health reform are the crazy ones!

Nothing much going on the House today, but they'll take up another housing bill tomorrow. We will let you know all about it. Have a good night! Leave some comments!

The Daily Strike-5/4/09-Tax Havens

Good evening and welcome to the Daily Strike. Make sure you're all caught up on the upcoming week in politics by reading our previous entry!

THE WHITE HOUSE: The big event at the White House today was a join announcement with the President and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner on tax reform. The plan calls for the IRS to hire 800 new investigators to investigate offshore tax loopholes. The plan would also reform deferral rules, thus raising taxes on multinational corporations by about $240 billion. I talked earlier about how that's not really a lot of money, but on second thought, if it eliminates incentives for companies to ship jobs overseas, it could help facilitate long-term economic growth. The way it is now, our tax code provides a competitive advantage to companies who ship jobs overseas. Even worse, companies avoid paying their fair share of taxes by claiming that they are "headquartered" in places like the Cayman Islands. Obama pointed out today that one address in the Cayman Islands houses about 18,000 businesses. I'm pleased with the tone this new policy will set, but I still have my concerns. As journalist David Sirota wisely points out, the Panama Free Trade Act, being pushed by U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk, runs completely counter to this new policy. According to Public Citizen a new report "details how Panama explicitly created an industrial policy designed to create a 'comparative advantage' in tax-evasion and money-laundering services for entities such as the bailed-out American International Group (AIG) and Mexican and Colombian narcotraffickers." Not cool.

Obama also took time out of his day to call Senators Hatch (R-UT) and Specter (D-PA) to solicit advice on his Supreme Court nomination. Apparently, Hatch said that Republicans would be happy to cooperate if Obama nominated a consensus Justice, and not a radical. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said that Obama hopes to be a good way through the nomination process by the August Congressional recess. I hope they get it done sooner than that, because an August recess is a perfect time for Republicans to mount a smear campaign.

ON THE HILL: Meanwhile, Obama's court nominee will face a new ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Republicans have apparently chosen Jeff Sessions (R-AL) to replace Specter as the top Republican on the committee. Sessions was lower in seniority on the committee than either Hatch or Charles Grassley (OH), but Hatch has already served as chair of the committee, and Grassley is the current ranking member of the Finance Committee. The irony of Sessions' ascent is that his own nomination for a federal court seat was defeated by the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1986 because of his "insensitive views" on race. As U.S. Attorney in Alabama in 1984, Sessions spent hours interrogating voters in predominantly black districts for voter fraud, finding 14 allegedly tampered ballots out of 1.7 million cast. Sessions tried to prosecute three civil rights workers, including a former aide to Martin Luther King Jr. The workers were acquitted after four hours of jury deliberation. What a great new face for the Republican party!!

The full Senate held two votes today on amendments by Senator Clown on the "Helping Families Save Their Homes" act, a bill implement loan modification programs. The first amendment wasn't TOO clownish, though it was certainly not germane to the matter at hand. The amendment would have removed any impediments to the repayment of TARP funds. The amendment was defeated 39-53 by a majority who obviously doesn't trust anything David Vitter does. Democrats Bayh (IN), Kohl (WI), Nelson (NE) and Webb (VA) joined 35 Republicans in voting yes. Republicans Corker (TN), Gregg (NH) and Lugar (IN) voted with the Democrats. Finally, Specter joined his new party on an important vote!

The next amendment was TRULY clownish. It would have stipulated that the primary function of the Federal Housing Administration was to stay financially solvent. In other words, the goal of the FHA is not to help people stay in their homes and protect their nest-egg with low-cost loans, but to "save money." You have got to be kidding me. Why don't we just let all the people who rely on FHA loans suffer because we want to make a cheap political point about fiscal responsibility? Luckily, the amendment was soundly defeated 36-56. This time, no Democrats crossed the aisle. The only Republican voting now was Voinovich (OH). Again, Specter voted on the good side. He's 2 for 4 since his party switch.

On the House side today, they voted on a couple of bills under suspension of the rules. House Democrats also unveiled their version of a spending bill for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill gives President Obama pretty much everything he asked for, except money to close down Guantanamo Bay. Appropriations Committee David Obey expressed major concern about the administration's Afghanistan policy, but said that he was willing to give the new President one year to prove that he can make real progress. The bill will include benchmarks that will measure the success of the mission. I hope that President Obama agrees to these conditions.

That's it for us today. Please leave us some comments! See you tomorrow night!!

The Weekly Strike-5/4-5/10

Good Monday morning and welcome to the Weekly Strike, where we preview the upcoming week in politics. Another busy one, so let's get to it.

THE WHITE HOUSE: President Obama undoubtedly will try to settle things down a little bit after a hectic week. In the span of 7 days, the President had to deal with the outbreak of the H1N1 virus, he helped orchestrate a key party switch in the Senate, he gave a prime time press conference on his first 100 days, and addressed a pending Supreme Court vacancy. His schedule this week, so far, seems a little more laid back.

Today the President delivers remarks on tax reform at the White House. He will outline a plan to close offshore tax loopholes that he expects will save the taxpayers $240 billion over ten years. He will reportedly propose that this money be used to cut taxes for businesses. Again, the President here is trying to seem fiscally responsible. I have to admit I'm a bit skeptical. Every President EVER has talked about saving money by cutting down on "waste, fraud and abuse." I would rather see Obama put his political capital on the line to make harder choices, like cutting payments to private student loan companies and Medicare advantage. Oh yeah, $240 billion over ten years is really not a lot of money. That's a third of the size of the stimulus package, which will only be spent over two years. The President concludes his day holding a celebration for Cinco de Mayo at the White House.

Tomorrow, the President will meet with Israeli President (more like a figurehead) Shimon Peres. Tomorrow, he holds a key meeting with the Presidents of Afghanistan and Pakistan. With the Taliban on the march into Pakistan, there is ample reason for the President to be concerned that the situation could spiral out of control, especially considering that Pakistan has nuclear weapons.

Perhaps the biggest event on this week's schedule is Thursday's expected release of those "stress tests," which should tell us which banks have enough stability to enjoy continued government support. If those stress tests come back negative, expect a stock market blood bath. As Chuck Todd pointed out, any bad result on these tests will embolden left-wing critics of the President, who say that he hasn't gone far enough.

THE SENATE: Congress this weeks continues a parade of financial regulation legislation. The Senate today will resume consideration of the "Helping Families Save Their Homes Act." Originally intended to be the Senate version of a House-passed housing, it is now significantly watered-down after the removal of the controversial "cramdown" provision. The Senate will vote on two amendments tonight, both from Senator Clown of Louisiana. I expect them to complete the bill by mid-week, which would trigger a contentious House-Senate conference. The Senate will then presumably move to consideration of the House-passed Credit Card Bill of Rights. The bill adds new regulations to protect the consumer against additional interest rates, and will require credit card companies to notify customers 45 days in advance of any rate increases. Learn more on this comprehensive bill here. The bill passed overwhelmingly in the House, and I expect it to do equally as well in the Senate. If it passes later in the week without changes, President Obama can sign it as soon as early next week. If the Senate amends the bill, the House will either have to accept the changes or demand a conference.

THE HOUSE: The House also focuses on regulatory reform this week. After dealing with suspension bills today and tomorrow, the House moves to consideration of a separate housing bill cracking down on predatory mortgage lending. Among other provisions, the bill will prohibit steering incentives in connection with origination of mortgage loans and will direct federal banking agencies to to prohibit condition terms or practices that are "abusive, unfair, deceptive, predatory, inconsistent with reasonable underwriting standards, or not in the interest of the borrower."

The House will also voted on a bill the Senate passed overwhelmingly last week that protects against mortgage fraud. They will use expedited suspension procedures for this bill, assuming that it can muster the necessary 2/3rds support. If they do approve this measure, it will go straight to the President's desk. For those of you keeping score at home, that's three separate housing bills being considered this week.

That's it for now, thanks to those who have left comments recently! Keep them coming!

The Daily Strike-4/30/09-Pressers and Gaffes

Good evening and welcome to the Daily Strike on another packed day in Washington. I apologize for not offering my analysis of the press conference yesterday, but don't worry, because here I go!

PRESS CONFERENCE: I think Obama's press conference yesterday was solid. I especially liked his tone. The President was serious, resolved and confident as he addressed the numerous challenges he has to face. There were some definite weak spots. For one, I agree with Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow that he seemed to imply that torture has worked in some circumstances. His point was that even if it does work, we can't do it because it's against our values. I don't think that's a smart argument to make. Nor do I believe, based on numerous interviews with former interrogators, that torture helped protect the country.

The most disappointing effort last night came from the media. The questions were largely about "sexy" issues like torture, Arlen Specter, and state secrets. There were some questions on more pressing topics, like the collapse of the auto industry, the situation in Pakistan and unemployment in the African American community. There were not, however, any questions about economic recovery, jobs, health care, education or energy. Not only are each of these the cornerstones of the President's agenda, but they are far and away the concerns of the American public. For his part, Obama could have geared his answers more towards these themes, so that people knew exactly what progress he intended to make in his next 100 days.

LOOSE LIPS BIDEN: I had to mention the absurdity of Joe Biden this morning saying that he wouldn't want his family on a plane or the subway in light of the swine flu. The administration was forced to quickly "clarify" the statement (read: retract it without saying Biden was wrong). The last thing you want to do during an epidemic is get people to start panicking unnecessarily. The Vice President had done a good job recently keeping his mouth shut, but I guess all good things come to an end.

CHRYSLER: The President announced today that he supported Chrysler's decision to enter a structured bankruptcy. The car company will still be making a deal with European automaker Fiat, which will allow Chrysler to stay in business temporarily. The Associated Press says that "according to the bankruptcy filing, a new company will be formed that will buy the assets of Chrysler - its plants, brands, land, equipment, as well as its contracts with the union, dealers and suppliers, from the bankruptcy court. " Part of the reason Chrysler went into bankruptcy, the President noted, is that creditors working in hedge funds and investment firms weren't willing to accept a deal negotiated with lenders. Apparently, these creditors were counting on getting a better deal if the government decided to step in with another bailout. Obama was right to chastise these speculators. I'm happy to see Obama strike a balance between calling out ridiculous business practices, while coming up with solutions that will (at least in the short term) keep companies afloat.

THE SENATE: The Senate today took up a broad housing bill designed to prevent foreclosures and enhance mortgage credit availability. This is a the twin of the bill passed earlier this week that ramps up enforcement against mortgage fraud. The House passed a similar bill last month with a controversial provision called "cramdown" which allows bankruptcy judges to renegotiate the terms of mortgages. This provision was offered today as an amendment from Senator Durbin. Durbin argued that cramdown was the most important vehicle for limiting the number of foreclosures, because it is the only way to renegotiate mortgages for people who have been screwed over by dishonest lenders (these weren't his exact words). He also argued that too may Senators were cronies of the banking and lending industries. Apparently, he's right. His amendment failed by a vote of 45-51, 15 votes shy of the 60 votes needed to advance the amendment. 12 Democrats voted against the amendment: Baucus (MT), Bennet (CO), Byrd (WV), Carper (DE), Dorgan (ND), Johnson (SD), Landrieu (LA), Lincoln (AR), Nelson (NE), Pryor (AR), Specter (PA) and Tester (MT). You'd think that Specter might actually vote with his new party once in awhile. What a shameful display by these "moderate" Democrats, who caved to pressure from corrupt lenders.

The other Senate vote today was the confirmation of Strickland to be the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife. Somehow his nomination was controversial (they really care about THIS position that much?), so 60 votes were required to advance his nomination. Strickland was confirmed by a vote of 89-2. Your defectors were Republicans Bunning (KY) and Wicker (MS).

THE HOUSE: The House of Representatives spent all day today considering the Credit Card Bill of Rights. Among other provisions, the bill prohibits creditors from increasing interest rates on existing balances without meeting certain strict criteria. It also requires creditors to notify consumers 45 days in advance of a change in credit card rates. The bill also prohibits companies from giving credit cards to people under 18 years old unless they have been emancipated from their parents or they are using their parents' or guardian's account. (Thank GOD I've passed that age!). Despite some vocal Republican opposition, the bill passed by a large 357-70 vote. All no votes were from Republicans except for Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, a Democrat from South Dakota. Does it have anything to do with the fact that my credit card bills come form an office in South Dakota? Just asking.

In the course of the debate, 15 amendments were agreed to or rejected by voice vote. I'll spare you the details, but you can find descriptions of them here (if you scroll down a bit). Two amendments required recorded votes. The first was offered by Rep. Slaughter (D-NY), which would "set underwriting standards for students' credit cards, including limiting credit lines to the greater of 20 percent of a student's annual income or $500, without a co-signer and requiring creditors to obtain a proof of income, income history, and credit history from college students before approving credit applications. " In other words, it will now be harder for your little brother or sister to go on a reckless shopping spree. The amendment was agreed to 276-154. The vote was not quite along party lines. 46 Republicans voted for it, while 25 Democrats voted against it.

The second amendment voted upon came from Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), the sponsor of the bill. The amendment would require credit card holders to opt-into receiving over-the-limit spending protection in order for the credit card company to charge an over-the-limit fee. The amendment passed 284-149. 43 Republicans voted with yes with the Democratic majority, while 16 Democrats voted in opposition.

The House was also forced to vote on a motion to recommit, offered by Rep. Roskam (R-IL) that would have required a number of conditions to be met before the bill was triggered into law (aka, a trigger mechanism.) I'm not exactly sure what the conditions were, but it failed anyway by a vote of 164-263. 5 Democrats voted for it, while 16 Republicans voted against it.

Today, I also heard a discussion in both the House and Senate on the agenda for the remaining 3 weeks of the legislative session. Both chambers will take up a supplemental spending bill funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The House will work next week on a version of the Senate-passed mortgage fraud bill. The Senate will consider the credit card bill next week, followed by a bill addressing military procurement reform. More details to come when they are available.

That's it for tonight. You have one more day to offer comments if you want them in tomorrow's Daily Strike! Also, look out for a new feature this weekend.

The Weekly Strike-3/2-3/7

Good Monday morning and welcome to the Weekly Strike where we run down the upcoming week in politics.

WHITE HOUSE: President Obama's week is healthcare themed. Today he introduces Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius as the next Secretary of Health and Human Services. Her nomination is expected to be relatively smooth, barring any unforeseen distractions. She has had to govern as a Democrat on one of the most conservative states, so she has built a good relationship with a number of Republicans, including the state's two Republican Senators, Sam Brownback and Pat Roberts.

On Thursday, Obama holds a "Health Care Summit" at the White House. No word yet on the invitees, but I expect it to be stakeholders from across the political spectrum. Now is a good time to hold a summit on health care and show that you care what other people think, because later this year, you're gonna need as much goodwill as possible to get comprehensive health care reform enacted in Congress.

The other notable event on the President's schedule this week is a meeting tomorrow with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. This is the first meeting of the two since Obama won the Presidency. Brown will also speak to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday. My guess is that Brown, who will be in a tight election next year against the Conservative party of David Cameron, would love to be seen with President Obama, given his popularity on the British Isles.

The President travels to Columbus this Friday. Don't know why, but I would guess it's about the economy.

CONGRESS: Another busy week in Congress as the House and Senate convene today. The House will hold a postponed vote on a Housing bill tomorrow. The bill would allow bankruptcy judges to renegotiate the terms of mortgages. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was forced to postpone consideration of the bill after some of the more conservative members in her caucus thought the package went too far. I expect it to pass, with some modifications, ona largely party-line vote. The bill currently has one Republican co-sponsor, Mike Turner of Ohio.

The House then moves to consider the DC Voting Rights bill. The Senate passed its version last week. The House bill will not include some of the Senate add-ons, like the elimination of the "Fairness Doctrine" or the abolishment of the DC Gun Control laws. With a large Democratic majority, I expect the bill to pass relatively easily. The interesting thing to watch for will be the Republican motion to recommit. This parliamentary procedure is the right of the minority to try and change the bill before final passage. If the motion to recommit passes, the minority's changes are adopted immediately. My guess is that the Republicans use the motion to recommit to force members to cast a vote on gun control. In other words, the motion would require that DC gun safety laws would be abolished. Many Democrats would be tempted to vote for this, because a lot of them want to maintain their 100% rating from the NRA. Will there be enough of them voting with the Republicans to get this provision included in the bill? That remains to be seen. It also remains to be seen whether the Rules Committee will try some sort of parliamentary maneuver to keep the Republicans from being able to offer such a motion.

The Senate this week will consider an omnibus spending package that funds the federal government through September. Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has said that despite the bill's large number of earmarks, the President will sign the legislation. Senators will have the chance to offer amendments, and we'll keep you posted on which ones are adopted. Assuming the Senate amends the bill, the House will take either take up the amended version, or the two chambers will reconcile the bills. The budget must be approved by this Friday, when the continuing resolution that funds government operations expires. Of course, they may have to temporarily extend that resolution if they can't come to an agreement on a final bill this week.

That's it for this week in Politics. See you tonight for the Daily Strike!

The Daily Strike-2/18/09-Homes, Homes Again

Good afternoon. I'm writing an early Daily Strike today because Lady Strike and I are attending a hockey game this evening.

HOUSING PLAN: The big news of the day was the President's speech in Arizona unveiling the "Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan." The multi-pronged proposal will cost upwards of $75 billion. The plan is intended to help up to 7 to 9 million families restructure or refinance their mortgages to avoid foreclosure.

So what will the plan specifically do? The basic plan is that the government will provide incentive for lenders to lower mortgage rates. For example, if a lender agrees to lower a borrower's payment so that it makes up no more than 38 percent of his or her income, the government would pay to lower the payments to 31 percent of income. (I got that example from the Washington Post). This part of the plan will presumably be introduced in Congress in the coming weeks.

The other key component of the plan assists those who have made scheduled payments on their loans, but whose houses have lost value. Currently, loans covered by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac do not can not be refinanced if the borrower owes more than 80 percent of the home's current value. Under this plan, Fannie and Freddie (which of course, have been taken over by the government)can refinance mortgages if they do not exceed 105 percent of the home value. So, in layman's terms, you can get new terms on your mortgage even if you owe more than the value of your house. Because the government owns these two entities, the administration can pursue this action without additional authorization from Congress. (the program launches March 4th).

Two other key elements of the plan: First, there will be an incentive for lenders that modify troubled loans. The government will pay lenders up to $1000 if each time they restructure a troubled loan. Second, homeowners will also be eligible for incentives if they stay current with loan payments. The government will give up to $1000 per year to decrease the balance of the mortgage.

A couple of thoughts on both the problem and the proposed solution: The housing crisis, obviously, has a ripple effect that poisons the whole economy. When people can't pay their mortgages and their homes are foreclosed, they have lost their assets, and can't contribute any money into the economy. The Department of Housing and Urban Development estimates that 6 million homes will face foreclosure in the next three years. As Obama pointed out, home foreclosures significantly reduce the property values of surrounding houses. So to sum up, the problem is very urgent.

It also became more politically urgent due to the poor performance last week by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner in laying out a plan to save the financial and banking systems. The way I see it, Obama is taking a three-way approach to the economic crisis: the stimulus, the financial plan, and the housing plan. Now that the stimulus is done, his goal is to restore confidence through banking and housing reforms. At first glance, his plan seems to be specific and reasonable enough to help out in the short term.

The next question is whether the plan is politically viable. I'm pretty convinced that these changes can make it through the Democratic Congress. I expect there to be significant Republican opposition (maybe even unanimous again), because ideologically, conservatives are opposed to initiatives that reward those who, they feel, have "failed" (remember the car bailout fiasco?). You'd think that they'd be more receptive to a plan like this because it has some Republican-sounding components, like incentives to reward good behavior among lenders and borrowers. Also, the Republicans were the ones during the stimulus debate who said that the housing crisis had to be solved first. But it remains to be seen if the Republican party in its current form will support anything proposed by President Obama and the Democrats.

HOLDER: Eric Holder, the newly-sworn Attorney General, gave a speech today at the Justice Department saying that there is a "nation of cowards" when it comes to addressing the problems of race. Ten bucks says you'll see that quote on every conservative website in the next couple of hours. His point was that despite the election of our first black President, and despite our racial progress, we don't talk about our unresolved racial issues enough. I happen to agree with him on this, but I do expect people to call HIM racist for even mentioning this subject.

FAIRNESS DOCTRINE: The President made one statement today that will make Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh very happy. He articulated his opposition to the Fairness Doctrine. The Doctrine, which existed until the late 80's, mandated that radio stations had to give equal time to all political points of view. Of course, the right wing dominates talk radio, so many Democrats in Congress have sought to revive the doctrine. I personally don't think we need a fairness doctrine. I'm not usually a "free-market will solve this problem" type of guy, but in this case I am. Unlike health care and other essential items that conservatives say should be left up to the free market, no one NEEDS talk radio. Therefore, I feel like it's ok to let some radio shows fail. If liberals can't make money doing a radio show, it's probably because there isn't much of a demand. After all, we control the "blogosphere" and choose to vent our views in that venue. I'd love to see some comments on this for those who disagree. But quite honestly, it really doesn't matter who has the right to yak all day on the radio show when people in this country are suffering from economic malaise.

That's it for today, see you tomorrow, when Obama ventures out of the country for the first time into Canada.

The Weekly Strike-2/16-2/22

Back to work after the holiday weekend and time for the Weekly Strike, where we preview the upcoming week in politics.

OBAMA ON THE ROAD: Today, Obama heads to Denver to tour a solar power plant, and then sign the stimulus bill into law. He will be joined by Vice President Biden, and presumably, some lawmakers. Once the stimulus bill is signed, Obama turns to the other two legs of the economic recovery stool: housing and the financial sector.

His housing plan (or mortgage relief plan) will be unveiled tomorrow in Phoenix, AZ. At the forefront of the plan is a government subsidy to lenders as an inticement to reduce borrowers' interest rates. The plan would involve, according to the New York Times, "the government and the lender each contributing matching amounts to reduce a person’s monthly payment, possibly by several hundred dollars a month." The other proposal, which may be added as a rider to the omnibus spending bill coming up for a vote in a couple of weeks, is a provision that give bankruptcy judges the power to reduce mortgages. Expect these proposals to meet heavy Repulibican resistance because of associated costs. You have to wonder how they can oppose the first proposal, since it seems relatively Republican: give the company financial incentive to renegotiate mortgages.

On Thursday, Obama visits Canada to meet with Prime Minister Stephen Harper on his first international trip. I expect them to discuss, among many subjects, the war in Afghanistan. We keep hearing from the administration that a plan would be put forward soon that will temporarily increase forces in Afghanistan to defeat the Taliban insurgency. That announcement could come this week as well.

There's also two other things I'm watching for. One, the President may reverse Bush's executive orders banning research on stem cells discovered after 2001. This would allow him to avoid a legislative battle on this issue. Also, we still need a Secretary of Health and Human Services and Commerce. I suspect that an announcement on those will be coming soon.

CONGRESS: Congress is in a district work period (vacation) this week. It will be interesting to see how voters react to votes on the stimulus. I'd be most worried if I were Joseph Cao from New Orleans, a Republican from a very Democratic district who voted against the bill, or a host of Democrats from very conservative areas, especially in the South, who supported the bill.

The Senate returns next Monday and will vote (finally!) on the nomination of Hilda Solis to be Labor Secretary. They also will take a bill to give Washington D.C. representation in Congress. The bill would add a seat to DC, and another seat (at large) to conservative Utah in order to make sure the decision doesn't change the ideoligical makeup of the House. The number of seats in the House will temporarily rise to 237, before the 2010 census, in which all seats would be reapportioned based on population. The bill passed the House last Congress, but was filibustered by a more closely-divided Senate. I expect the bill to pass this time, because the Utah Republican Senators will support it (along with a few others). Obama will probably sign the bill into law. I'm not sure whether there will be consitutional challenges to the law, because the constitution calls for representatives from "the several states," but you need to pass the law first to find out, right?

The House will take up the omnibus budget package (which has yet to be unveiled) and also might start on the housing package. More on that next week.

LONG TERM AGENDA: Fresh off his victory on the stimulus, Obama will be going full speed ahead on a more ambitious domestic policy agenda. Besides the housing bill, the President will probably address:

-the budget through the end of FY 2009, which should reflect the administration's priorities more than the current budget, which was signed into law by President Bush.

-the budget for FY 2010. This budget, I expect, will be a vast reordering of federal spending priorities. I expect money to be taken away from places like the Pentagon and private medicare advantage plans, and towards priorities like clean energy, health care and education. He also has the oppotunity in this bill to change tax policy (Clinton and Reagan changed the tax structure in their first budget bills). One advantage of using the budget to achieve policy objectives is the so-called "reconciliation" process. Signed into law in 1974, the Budget Reconciliation process calls for the Congress to first set non-binding targets for each area of the federal government in a budget resolution. After the resolution passes both houses, committees make the cuts or additions necessary to meet these targets. The important thing is that the budget is NOT subject to a filibuster, meaning it only needs 50 votes (plus Joe Biden's possible tie-breaking vote) to pass the Senate. Obama, therefore, can be very ambitious because he could get the bill passed even if he loses a few Democrats.

-health care reform

-cap and trade energy legislation

Excited yet? As Eugene Robinson noted in his column today, Obama has already done more in his first month than Bush did in his last two years. A drastic reordering of our government policies is underway.

See you tonight! We would love your comments!