Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
72 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
income taxes, all the while it is reported cutting social security is in the president's budget. 
"I reeeeeeally don't think you want to go here."
... go there. What does that wall of "blue links" mean?
FYI: America's problems predate 2009, and President Obama is working to improve the country.
President Obama actually unprivatized student loans in his first term: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022557183
His health care reform did the unthinkable: raised taxes on the rich.
It also did more for inequality than any other legislation in decades.
There is a debate about the impact of the recent tax deal, but simple arithmetic shows the reality.
Pre Bush tax cuts: lowest tax bracket 15 percent and top tax bracket 39.6 percent.
Bush tax cuts: lowest tax bracket 10 percent and top tax bracket 35 percent.
President Obama's tax deal, lowest rate 10 percent, top rate 39.6 percent.
Do the math and it will show that the gap between someone earning $50,000 and someone earning $500,000 closed to more than what it was in the 1990s. Add the health care law tax and the gap closes even more.
<...>
Perhaps the best prism through which to see the Democrats’ gains is inequality. In the 2008 campaign, Mr. Obama said that his top priority as president would be to “create bottom-up economic growth” and reduce inequality...In the 2009 stimulus, he insisted on making tax credits “fully refundable,” so that even people who did not make enough to pay much federal tax would benefit. The 2010 health care law overhaul was probably the biggest attack on inequality since it began rising in the 1970s, increasing taxes on businesses and the rich to pay for health insurance largely for the middle class.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/03/us/politics/for-obama-fiscal-deal-is-a-victory-that-also-holds-risks.html
Perhaps the best prism through which to see the Democrats’ gains is inequality. In the 2008 campaign, Mr. Obama said that his top priority as president would be to “create bottom-up economic growth” and reduce inequality...In the 2009 stimulus, he insisted on making tax credits “fully refundable,” so that even people who did not make enough to pay much federal tax would benefit. The 2010 health care law overhaul was probably the biggest attack on inequality since it began rising in the 1970s, increasing taxes on businesses and the rich to pay for health insurance largely for the middle class.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/03/us/politics/for-obama-fiscal-deal-is-a-victory-that-also-holds-risks.html
Obama and Redistribution
Some notes for myself: how much impact have Obama’s policies actually had on current and prospective inequality?
The main policies to consider are PPACA (the health reform) and ATRA (the fiscal cliff deal with its associated tax rise).
I’m not a fan of the Tax Foundation’s work, but their analysis of the distributional effects of Obamacare looks about right: significant benefits to the bottom half of the income distribution, paid for largely by taxes on the top few percent (the Medicare surcharge and the extra tax on investment income). The Tax Policy Center — whose work I do trust — has the Act reducing the after-tax income of the top 1 percent by 1.8 percent, the top 0.1 percent by 2.5 percent.
Meanwhile, ATRA raises taxes relative to a continuation of the Bush high-end tax cuts: after-tax income down 4.5 percent for the 1-percenters, 6.2 percent for the top 0.1 percent.
Putting this together, we have a roughly 6 percent hit to the 1 percent, around 9 to the superelite. That’s only a partial rollback of these groups’ huge gains since 1980, but it’s not trivial.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/20/obama-and-redistribution/
Some notes for myself: how much impact have Obama’s policies actually had on current and prospective inequality?
The main policies to consider are PPACA (the health reform) and ATRA (the fiscal cliff deal with its associated tax rise).
I’m not a fan of the Tax Foundation’s work, but their analysis of the distributional effects of Obamacare looks about right: significant benefits to the bottom half of the income distribution, paid for largely by taxes on the top few percent (the Medicare surcharge and the extra tax on investment income). The Tax Policy Center — whose work I do trust — has the Act reducing the after-tax income of the top 1 percent by 1.8 percent, the top 0.1 percent by 2.5 percent.
Meanwhile, ATRA raises taxes relative to a continuation of the Bush high-end tax cuts: after-tax income down 4.5 percent for the 1-percenters, 6.2 percent for the top 0.1 percent.
Putting this together, we have a roughly 6 percent hit to the 1 percent, around 9 to the superelite. That’s only a partial rollback of these groups’ huge gains since 1980, but it’s not trivial.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/20/obama-and-redistribution/
Do the math.
There is a reason Republicans want to repeal this law.
Who Benefits from the ACA Medicaid Expansion?
A key element of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is the expansion of Medicaid to nearly all individuals with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) ($15,415 for an individual; $26,344 for a family of three in 2012) in 2014. Medicaid currently provides health coverage for over 60 million individuals, including 1 in 4 children, but low parent eligibility levels and restrictions in eligibility for other adults mean that many low income individuals remain uninsured. The ACA expands coverage by setting a national Medicaid eligibility floor for nearly all groups. By 2016, Medicaid, along with the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), will cover an additional 17 million individuals, mostly low-income adults, leading to a significant reduction in the number of uninsured people.
Medicaid does not cover many low-income adults today. To qualify for Medicaid prior to health reform, individuals had to meet financial eligibility criteria and belong to one of the following specific groups: children, parents, pregnant women, people with severe disability, and seniors. Non-disabled adults without dependent children were generally excluded from Medicaid unless the state obtained a waiver to cover them. The federal government sets minimum eligibility levels for each category, which are up to 133% FPL for pregnant women and children but are much lower for parents (under 50% FPL in most states). States have the option to expand coverage to higher incomes, but Medicaid eligibility levels for adults remain very limited (Figure 1). Seventeen states limit Medicaid coverage to parents earning less than 50 percent of poverty ($9,545 for a family of 3), and only eight states provide full Medicaid coverage to other low-income adults. State-by state Medicaid eligibility levels for parents and other adults are available here.
The ACA expands Medicaid to a national floor of 138% of poverty ($15,415 for an individual; $26,344 for a family of three). The threshold is 133% FPL, but 5% of an individual’s income is disregarded, effectively raising the limit to 138% FPL. The expansion of coverage will make many low-income adults newly eligible for Medicaid and reduce the current variation in eligibility levels across states. To preserve the current base of coverage, states must also maintain minimum eligibility levels in place as of March 2010, when the law was signed. This requirement remains in effect until 2014 for adults and 2019 for children. Under the ACA, states also have the option to expand coverage early to low-income adults prior to 2014. To date, eight states (CA, CT, CO, DC, MN, MO, NJ and WA) have taken up this option to extend Medicaid to adults. Nearly all of these states previously provided solely state- or county-funded coverage to some low-income adults. By moving these adults to Medicaid and obtaining federal financing, these states were able to maintain and, in some cases, expand coverage. Together these early expansions covered over half a million adults as of April 2012.
Eligibility requirements for the elderly and persons with disabilities do not change under reform although some individuals with disabilities may become newly eligible under the adult expansion. Lawfully residing immigrants will be eligible for the Medicaid expansion, although many will continue to be subject to a five-year waiting period before they may enroll in coverage. States have the option to eliminate this five-year waiting period for children and pregnant women but not for other adults. Undocumented immigrants will remain ineligible for Medicaid.
- more -
http://www.kff.org/medicaid/quicktake_aca_medicaid.cfm
A key element of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is the expansion of Medicaid to nearly all individuals with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) ($15,415 for an individual; $26,344 for a family of three in 2012) in 2014. Medicaid currently provides health coverage for over 60 million individuals, including 1 in 4 children, but low parent eligibility levels and restrictions in eligibility for other adults mean that many low income individuals remain uninsured. The ACA expands coverage by setting a national Medicaid eligibility floor for nearly all groups. By 2016, Medicaid, along with the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), will cover an additional 17 million individuals, mostly low-income adults, leading to a significant reduction in the number of uninsured people.
Medicaid does not cover many low-income adults today. To qualify for Medicaid prior to health reform, individuals had to meet financial eligibility criteria and belong to one of the following specific groups: children, parents, pregnant women, people with severe disability, and seniors. Non-disabled adults without dependent children were generally excluded from Medicaid unless the state obtained a waiver to cover them. The federal government sets minimum eligibility levels for each category, which are up to 133% FPL for pregnant women and children but are much lower for parents (under 50% FPL in most states). States have the option to expand coverage to higher incomes, but Medicaid eligibility levels for adults remain very limited (Figure 1). Seventeen states limit Medicaid coverage to parents earning less than 50 percent of poverty ($9,545 for a family of 3), and only eight states provide full Medicaid coverage to other low-income adults. State-by state Medicaid eligibility levels for parents and other adults are available here.
The ACA expands Medicaid to a national floor of 138% of poverty ($15,415 for an individual; $26,344 for a family of three). The threshold is 133% FPL, but 5% of an individual’s income is disregarded, effectively raising the limit to 138% FPL. The expansion of coverage will make many low-income adults newly eligible for Medicaid and reduce the current variation in eligibility levels across states. To preserve the current base of coverage, states must also maintain minimum eligibility levels in place as of March 2010, when the law was signed. This requirement remains in effect until 2014 for adults and 2019 for children. Under the ACA, states also have the option to expand coverage early to low-income adults prior to 2014. To date, eight states (CA, CT, CO, DC, MN, MO, NJ and WA) have taken up this option to extend Medicaid to adults. Nearly all of these states previously provided solely state- or county-funded coverage to some low-income adults. By moving these adults to Medicaid and obtaining federal financing, these states were able to maintain and, in some cases, expand coverage. Together these early expansions covered over half a million adults as of April 2012.
Eligibility requirements for the elderly and persons with disabilities do not change under reform although some individuals with disabilities may become newly eligible under the adult expansion. Lawfully residing immigrants will be eligible for the Medicaid expansion, although many will continue to be subject to a five-year waiting period before they may enroll in coverage. States have the option to eliminate this five-year waiting period for children and pregnant women but not for other adults. Undocumented immigrants will remain ineligible for Medicaid.
- more -
http://www.kff.org/medicaid/quicktake_aca_medicaid.cfm
Editorial
Report Card on Health Care Reform
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Republican leaders in Congress regularly denounce the 2010 Affordable Care Act and vow to block money to carry it out or even to repeal it. Those political attacks ignore the considerable benefits delivered to millions of people since the law’s enactment three years ago Saturday. The main elements of the law do not kick in until Jan. 1, 2014, when many millions of uninsured people will gain coverage. Yet it has already thrown a lifeline to people at high risk of losing insurance or being uninsured, including young adults and people with chronic health problems, and it has made a start toward reforming the costly, dysfunctional American health care system.
EXPANDING COVERAGE Starting in 2010, all insurers and employers that offer dependent coverage were required to offer coverage to dependent children up to age 26. An estimated 6.6 million people ages 19 through 25 have been able to stay on or join their parents’ plans as result, with more than 3 million previously uninsured young adults getting health insurance. The law requires private health insurers to provide free preventive care, without co-pays or deductibles. Some 71 million Americans have received at least one free preventive service, like a mammogram or a flu shot, and an additional 34 million older Americans got free preventive services in 2012 under Medicare.
<...>
The law appropriated $11 billion over five years to build and operate community health centers, a major factor in increasing the annual number of patients served to 21 million, a rise of 3 million from previous levels. Some $5 billion has been put into a reinsurance program that has encouraged employers to retain coverage for retirees and their families; 19 million people benefited with reduced premiums or cost-sharing.
<...>
BETTER QUALITY OF CARE One of the most promising aspects of the health reform act is its focus on improving quality. The percentage of Medicare patients requiring readmission to the hospital within 30 days of discharge dropped from an average of 19 percent over the past five years to 17.8 percent in the last half of 2012, an improvement due in large part to penalties imposed by Medicare for poor performance and financial incentives paid by Medicare to providers to encourage better coordination of care after a patient leaves the hospital.
- more -
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/24/opinion/sunday/report-card-on-health-care-reform.html
Report Card on Health Care Reform
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Republican leaders in Congress regularly denounce the 2010 Affordable Care Act and vow to block money to carry it out or even to repeal it. Those political attacks ignore the considerable benefits delivered to millions of people since the law’s enactment three years ago Saturday. The main elements of the law do not kick in until Jan. 1, 2014, when many millions of uninsured people will gain coverage. Yet it has already thrown a lifeline to people at high risk of losing insurance or being uninsured, including young adults and people with chronic health problems, and it has made a start toward reforming the costly, dysfunctional American health care system.
EXPANDING COVERAGE Starting in 2010, all insurers and employers that offer dependent coverage were required to offer coverage to dependent children up to age 26. An estimated 6.6 million people ages 19 through 25 have been able to stay on or join their parents’ plans as result, with more than 3 million previously uninsured young adults getting health insurance. The law requires private health insurers to provide free preventive care, without co-pays or deductibles. Some 71 million Americans have received at least one free preventive service, like a mammogram or a flu shot, and an additional 34 million older Americans got free preventive services in 2012 under Medicare.
<...>
The law appropriated $11 billion over five years to build and operate community health centers, a major factor in increasing the annual number of patients served to 21 million, a rise of 3 million from previous levels. Some $5 billion has been put into a reinsurance program that has encouraged employers to retain coverage for retirees and their families; 19 million people benefited with reduced premiums or cost-sharing.
<...>
BETTER QUALITY OF CARE One of the most promising aspects of the health reform act is its focus on improving quality. The percentage of Medicare patients requiring readmission to the hospital within 30 days of discharge dropped from an average of 19 percent over the past five years to 17.8 percent in the last half of 2012, an improvement due in large part to penalties imposed by Medicare for poor performance and financial incentives paid by Medicare to providers to encourage better coordination of care after a patient leaves the hospital.
- more -
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/24/opinion/sunday/report-card-on-health-care-reform.html
Here's a summary of the NYT report:
That includes:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/25/1196892/-An-Affordable-Care-Act-report-card-three-years-in
- Some 6.6 million people ages 19 through 25 who have been able to stay on their parents' insurance plans and more than than 3 million young adults getting health insurance.
- 17 million getting some kind of free preventive service, like flu shots, and 34 million Medicare recipients getting free preventive services in 2012;
- 17 million children with pre-existing conditions being protected against being uninsured;
- More than 107,000 adults with pre-existing conditions finally having insurance under the federally run insurance program;
- 21 million received care from expanded community health centers, 3 million more than previously served;
- $1.1 billion in rebates, an average of $151 per family paid by insurers that failed to meet the benchmark of 80 to 85 percent of premium revenues on medical claims or quality improvements;
- Since 2010, more than 6.3 million older or disabled people have saved more than $6.3 billion on prescription drugs;
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/25/1196892/-An-Affordable-Care-Act-report-card-three-years-in
Medicare Fraud: HHS announces record-breaking $4.2 Billion recovered in FY 2012
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022354924
The President's policies also prove that savings do not have to come at the expense of appropriate spending and benefits. The health care law not only expanded benefits for seniors, it's reversing the damage done by Bush, and it strengthened Medicare.
Long before this Supreme Court decision, through the Affordable Care Act, seniors began to see positive changes in their prescription drug costs, access to preventive health care, and more. Thanks to the Supreme Court’s decision the following provisions will continue to be provided to seniors:
Medicare Improvements
The ACA contains several important improvements to the Medicare program, many of which are already helping seniors today.
1) Closing the donut hole
2) Improving senior’s access to preventive medical services
- more -
http://www.ncpssm.org/Portals/0/pdf/aca-analysis.pdf
Medicare Improvements
The ACA contains several important improvements to the Medicare program, many of which are already helping seniors today.
1) Closing the donut hole
a. Medicare Part D covers the cost of medications up to a certain point. Between that point, and a catastrophic coverage threshold, the older adult must pay out of pocket for medication (this gap in coverage is often called the Part D “donut hole”). One in four beneficiaries fall in this gap, and end up paying an average of $3,610 out of pocket on drug expenses.
b. The ACA requires drug manufacturers to reduce prices for Medicare enrollees in the donut hole. Beginning in 2011, brand‐name drug manufacturers must provide a 50% discount on brand‐name and biologic drugs for Part D enrollees in the donut hole. By 2013, Medicare will begin to provide an additional discount on brand‐name and biologic drugs for enrollees in the donut hole. By 2020, Part D enrollees will be responsible for only 25% of donut hole drug costs.
c. This is a benefit seniors are getting now, and will continue to get as a result of this decision.
2) Improving senior’s access to preventive medical services
a. Prior to the ACA, Medicare beneficiaries were required to pay a deductible and 20% copay for many preventive health services.
b. The ACA eliminated cost‐sharing for many preventive services and introduced an annual wellness visit for beneficiaries.
c. The ACA also eliminated cost‐sharing for screening services, like mammograms, Pap smears, bone mass measurements, depression screening, diabetes screening, HIV screening and obesity screenings.
d. This is a benefit seniors are getting now, and will continue to get as a result of this decision.
- more -
http://www.ncpssm.org/Portals/0/pdf/aca-analysis.pdf
MEDICARE’S FINANCIAL CONDITION
Medicare’s financial condition is measured in several ways, including the solvency of the Part A Trust Fund, the annual growth in spending, and growth in spending on a per capita basis. Average annual growth in total Medicare spending is projected to be 6.6% between 2010 and 2019, but 3.5% on a per capita basis (assuming no reduction in physician fees).
The Part A Trust Fund is projected to be depleted in 2024— eight years longer than in the absence of the health reform law—at which point Medicare would not have sufficient funds to pay full benefits, even though revenue flows into the Trust Fund each year. Part A Trust Fund solvency is affected by growth in the economy, which directly affects revenue from payroll tax contributions, and by demographic trends: an increasing number of beneficiaries, especially between 2010 and 2030 when the baby boom generation reaches Medicare eligibility age, and a declining ratio of workers per beneficiary making payroll contributions (Figure 4).
http://www.kff.org/medicare/upload/7305-06.pdf
Medicare’s financial condition is measured in several ways, including the solvency of the Part A Trust Fund, the annual growth in spending, and growth in spending on a per capita basis. Average annual growth in total Medicare spending is projected to be 6.6% between 2010 and 2019, but 3.5% on a per capita basis (assuming no reduction in physician fees).
The Part A Trust Fund is projected to be depleted in 2024— eight years longer than in the absence of the health reform law—at which point Medicare would not have sufficient funds to pay full benefits, even though revenue flows into the Trust Fund each year. Part A Trust Fund solvency is affected by growth in the economy, which directly affects revenue from payroll tax contributions, and by demographic trends: an increasing number of beneficiaries, especially between 2010 and 2030 when the baby boom generation reaches Medicare eligibility age, and a declining ratio of workers per beneficiary making payroll contributions (Figure 4).
http://www.kff.org/medicare/upload/7305-06.pdf
The law gets better as it nears full implementation in 2014.
New Federal Rule Requires Insurers to Offer Mental Health Coverage
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022407451
Here’s one way Obamacare changed today
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251288922
Rules finalized for the good stuff in Obamacare
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022415967
Kathleen Sebelius: Holding Insurance Companies Accountable for High Premium Increases
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022417762
The health care law is still the biggest expansion of the safety net since Medicare
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022159929
The President has also enacted serious Wall Street reforms: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022456858
The Wall Street reform law would have a significant impact if implementation is sped up.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022441546
There is also big movement in civil rights, which is an economic issue.
Obama administration asks Supreme Court to strike down Defense of Marriage Act
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022416121
Another big, bold stroke for gay rights
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022442960
<...>
Evan Wolfson, who leads the pro-marriage-equality group Freedom To Marry, told TPM that the brief makes as expansive a legal case as plausible for putting gay and straight couples on equal footing. “The arguments laid out powerfully and clearly refute all the purported justifications for withholding the freedom to marry for gay couples,” Wolfson said.
- more -
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/03/obama-gays-have-a-constitutional-right-to-marry.php
Evan Wolfson, who leads the pro-marriage-equality group Freedom To Marry, told TPM that the brief makes as expansive a legal case as plausible for putting gay and straight couples on equal footing. “The arguments laid out powerfully and clearly refute all the purported justifications for withholding the freedom to marry for gay couples,” Wolfson said.
- more -
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/03/obama-gays-have-a-constitutional-right-to-marry.php
LGBT People Will Receive First-Ever Domestic Violence Protections Under VAWA
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022443504
The President is leading the way in other areas.
President Obama Shows No CISPA-like Invasion of Privacy Needed to Defend Critical Infrastructure
By Michelle Richardson
Last night the President signed an executive order (EO) aimed at ramping up the cybersecurity of critical infrastructure. Overwhelmingly, the EO focuses on privacy-neutral coordination between the government and the owners and operators of critical infrastructure (CI)—such as the banking, communication, power, and transportation sectors—which have long been regulated because of their fundamental role in the smooth operation of society. Now that these important entities are all connected to the internet, the administration insists that their cybersecurity be on par with their physical security.
There are two important information sharing advancements in the EO, and this time they are good for privacy. They do not include the many problems of legislation like the Cyber Intelligence and Sharing Protection Act (CISPA) because an executive order by definition cannot take away the privacy protections granted by current statutes. In other words, the EO cannot exempt companies from privacy statutes, or let the government collect new information. It can only act within its existing power to change policies and practices.
Two cheers for cybersecurity programs that can do something besides spy on Americans.
The first information sharing advancement greases the wheels of information from the government to the private sector. Section 4 lights a fire under agencies and directs them to share more information with companies—information they already have and can legally collect under current law. Information flowing in this direction is nowhere as near as problematic as the opposite direction. To the extent that corporate and congressional advocates claim that CISPA is needed for this purpose, the administration beat them to the punch. The EO directs the attorney general, the director of national intelligence and the secretary of homeland security to set up a system to get threat information to critical infrastructure owners and operators. They have four months to pull it together.
The second information sharing provision is a net positive for civil liberties. Section 5 directs the Department of Homeland Security, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) and the Office of Management and Budget to evaluate current interagency information sharing. There is plenty of cyber information floating around the executive branch and across different agencies. There doesn't appear to be any publicly available regulation of how that information is protected for privacy purposes, and it may very well be that it is protected by a mish-mash of originating statutes that treat different types of information with varying protections. By holding the agencies accountable to the Fair Information Practice Principles (FIPPs)—transparency, choice, minimization and more—we may see a government-wide cybersecurity privacy regime evolve. To get it done right, PCLOB will need to be funded and staffed up, and advocacy will be needed to keep the agencies true to the FIPPs, but the President has now declared them the bellwether for cybersecurity information.
Overall, the EO is a win for privacy and civil liberties. It's a good reminder that while some are focused like a laser on turning our internet records over to the National Security Agency, there are a lot of other things that government can do to advance cybersecurity instead. Now it's up to all of us to make sure Congress follows the President's lead.
http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security-technology-and-liberty/president-obama-shows-no-cispa-invasion-privacy-needed
By Michelle Richardson
Last night the President signed an executive order (EO) aimed at ramping up the cybersecurity of critical infrastructure. Overwhelmingly, the EO focuses on privacy-neutral coordination between the government and the owners and operators of critical infrastructure (CI)—such as the banking, communication, power, and transportation sectors—which have long been regulated because of their fundamental role in the smooth operation of society. Now that these important entities are all connected to the internet, the administration insists that their cybersecurity be on par with their physical security.
There are two important information sharing advancements in the EO, and this time they are good for privacy. They do not include the many problems of legislation like the Cyber Intelligence and Sharing Protection Act (CISPA) because an executive order by definition cannot take away the privacy protections granted by current statutes. In other words, the EO cannot exempt companies from privacy statutes, or let the government collect new information. It can only act within its existing power to change policies and practices.
Two cheers for cybersecurity programs that can do something besides spy on Americans.
The first information sharing advancement greases the wheels of information from the government to the private sector. Section 4 lights a fire under agencies and directs them to share more information with companies—information they already have and can legally collect under current law. Information flowing in this direction is nowhere as near as problematic as the opposite direction. To the extent that corporate and congressional advocates claim that CISPA is needed for this purpose, the administration beat them to the punch. The EO directs the attorney general, the director of national intelligence and the secretary of homeland security to set up a system to get threat information to critical infrastructure owners and operators. They have four months to pull it together.
The second information sharing provision is a net positive for civil liberties. Section 5 directs the Department of Homeland Security, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) and the Office of Management and Budget to evaluate current interagency information sharing. There is plenty of cyber information floating around the executive branch and across different agencies. There doesn't appear to be any publicly available regulation of how that information is protected for privacy purposes, and it may very well be that it is protected by a mish-mash of originating statutes that treat different types of information with varying protections. By holding the agencies accountable to the Fair Information Practice Principles (FIPPs)—transparency, choice, minimization and more—we may see a government-wide cybersecurity privacy regime evolve. To get it done right, PCLOB will need to be funded and staffed up, and advocacy will be needed to keep the agencies true to the FIPPs, but the President has now declared them the bellwether for cybersecurity information.
Overall, the EO is a win for privacy and civil liberties. It's a good reminder that while some are focused like a laser on turning our internet records over to the National Security Agency, there are a lot of other things that government can do to advance cybersecurity instead. Now it's up to all of us to make sure Congress follows the President's lead.
http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security-technology-and-liberty/president-obama-shows-no-cispa-invasion-privacy-needed
After Petition, White House Says Unlocking Cell Phones Should Be Legal
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022458326
Obama, winning the argument
By Eugene Robinson
In his bid to be remembered as a transformational leader, President Obama is...gradually winning the argument about what government can and should do. His State of the Union address was an announcement of that fact — and a warning to conservatives that, to remain relevant, they will have to move beyond the premise that government is always the problem and never the solution...Repairing the nation’s infrastructure is not a partisan issue; bridges rust at the same rate in Republican-held congressional districts as in Democratic ones. The benefits of universal preschool will accrue in red states as well as blue. Climate change is not deterred by the fact that a majority of the Republican caucus in the House doesn’t believe in it.
<...>
When Obama took office, the United States was in a similar funk. Ronald Reagan’s conservative ideas had been corrupted by his followers into a kind of anti-government nihilism. Reagan wanted to shrink government; today’s Republican Party wants to destroy it.
Obama assumed leadership of a country in which inequality was growing and economic mobility declining, with the result that the American dream was becoming less attainable. It was a country whose primary and secondary schools lagged far behind international norms; whose airports, roads and bridges were showing their age; and, most important, whose path to continued prosperity, in the age of globalization and information technology, was not entirely clear.
Obama’s State of the Union speech was a detailed reiteration of his position that we can and must act to secure our future — and that government can and must be one of our principal instruments.
- more -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eugene-robinson-obama-winning-the-argument/2013/02/14/31f7bf32-76e9-11e2-aa12-e6cf1d31106b_story.html
By Eugene Robinson
In his bid to be remembered as a transformational leader, President Obama is...gradually winning the argument about what government can and should do. His State of the Union address was an announcement of that fact — and a warning to conservatives that, to remain relevant, they will have to move beyond the premise that government is always the problem and never the solution...Repairing the nation’s infrastructure is not a partisan issue; bridges rust at the same rate in Republican-held congressional districts as in Democratic ones. The benefits of universal preschool will accrue in red states as well as blue. Climate change is not deterred by the fact that a majority of the Republican caucus in the House doesn’t believe in it.
<...>
When Obama took office, the United States was in a similar funk. Ronald Reagan’s conservative ideas had been corrupted by his followers into a kind of anti-government nihilism. Reagan wanted to shrink government; today’s Republican Party wants to destroy it.
Obama assumed leadership of a country in which inequality was growing and economic mobility declining, with the result that the American dream was becoming less attainable. It was a country whose primary and secondary schools lagged far behind international norms; whose airports, roads and bridges were showing their age; and, most important, whose path to continued prosperity, in the age of globalization and information technology, was not entirely clear.
Obama’s State of the Union speech was a detailed reiteration of his position that we can and must act to secure our future — and that government can and must be one of our principal instruments.
- more -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eugene-robinson-obama-winning-the-argument/2013/02/14/31f7bf32-76e9-11e2-aa12-e6cf1d31106b_story.html
The Real Obama
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022372942
The economy is recovering and Republicans are determined to destroy it
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022505883
Paul Krugman Destroys GOP’s Talking Points On Government Jobs
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022304886
Everything is perfect again in the country, but ignoring the massive volume of changes implemented(http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022223211) by this President to move the country in the right direction is simply an attempt to destroy his character.
Last edited Tue Apr 2, 2013, 09:49 PM - Edit history (1)
What a melange of wonderful chocolate ration! Another article about the imminent appearance of the "REAL OBAMA"!
This one is dated February 2013, only FOUR YEARS into his Presidency! And look at the quote:
Is this the real Barack Obama? I hope so. I like this one.
It is always so exciting, waiting for the REAL OBAMA to appear. And it's cool that, despite that article expressing such hopes for his second term, he is still planning cuts to Social Security and Medicare; and he signed the Monsanto Protection Act; and he is going ahead with the Trans-Pacific Free Trade Agreement; and education corporatization; and he appointed a serial defender of corrupt bankers for the SEC; the architect of "Kill Lists" and supporter of torture, drone wars, and telecom immunity for the CIA; and a Monsanto VP who has lied and been involved in extremely disturbing claims regarding food safety for the FDA.
...Because if he actually transformed into the REAL OBAMA, we wouldn't have the REAL OBAMA to look forward to anymore!
And...all that other stuff in your post, like about unlocking cell phones! WOW! I was wrong! Everything is just GREAT IN AMERICA!
.......
We now return to our regularly scheduled reality: The steady, unrelenting destruction of the middle class and obscene continued enrichment of the one percent documented in my post...
in the most important areas. Quite clearly getting worse for most of us, although not for the corporations. See the links you keep ignoring, your "beliefs" notwithstanding:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2603241
What we have witnessed, and what is forthcoming, has not been a "recovery," but a restructuring on behalf of the one percent through legislation. Lower wages, increased privatization, spiraling costs, crappy jobs, reduced benefits, and a "new normal" with purposely curtailed safety nets. Meanwhile, corporate profits are exploding.
And just wait until Obama's policies on further corporatizing education; passing the massive, job sucking and wage-depressing Trans-Pacific Free Trade agreement; approving the environmentally devastating Keystone Pipeline; and imposing austerity and cuts to Social Security go through.
Wait 'til you see the headlines then.
Naw, all the corporatist policies have nothing to do with it. It's MAGIC! 
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2603241
Incomes Flat in Recovery, but Not for the 1%
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014400736
Top 1% get 121% of income gains since 2009 (100% of new income + 21% from your old income)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022384139
U.S. corporate profits stronger than ever, workers' wages fallen to lowest-ever share of GDP (CNN)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021922334
U.S. Income Inequality Now Worse Than Many Latin American Countries
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022268073
Ranks of working poor increasing
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022200197
Inequality Rages as Dwindling Wages Lock Millions in Poverty
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022198286
The Middle Class In America Is Being Wiped Out – Here Are 60 Facts That Prove It
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022144851
Child poverty rates increase unabated
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022268450
40 Percent of Americans Now Make Less than 1968 Minimum Wage
http://www.democraticunderground.com/111631016
Corporate Profits Have Grown By 171 Percent Under ‘Anti-Business’ Obama
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014372334
US poverty on track to reach 46-year high; suburbs, underemployed workers, children hit hard
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002998131
Poverty, hunger among retirees increasing
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002748342
The Economy is "Recovering" By Creating More Low-Wage Jobs... Increasingly Filled By Graduates
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022602162
"Recovery" in US is lifting profits, but not adding jobs
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014414149
Obama to use pension funds of ordinary Americans to pay for bank mortgage settlements
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002205218
What Recovery? Across America, People in Distressed Cities and Small Towns Face Economic Catastrophe
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022545596
Real wages decline; literally no one notices
http://www.democraticunderground.com/11172387
Wall Street Soars with Wealth as Wages Stagnate, Jobs Remain in a Slump
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12526154
Wages for bottom 90% declined 1.2% during 2009-2011 recovery, top 1% income grew 8.2%
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022271466
Three Minimum Wage Jobs Needed To Afford Two-Bedroom Apartment
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022578738
Wages have fallen to a record low as a share of America’s gross domestic product.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022183930
With interviews from financial analysts talking about how many of their wealthy conservative clients were frantically calling and asking what to do with their money, convinced that imminent economic doom was certain, and how the actual financial analysts had to try and calm them down!
Bikini Graph time! Unemployment rate falls, jobs added. “All Congress has to do is stop punishing the country on purpose.”
http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/tag/bikini-graph/
Fed's Raskin bemoans low-wage nature of jobs recovery
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/51288051/ns/business-careers/t/feds-raskin-bemoans-low-wage-nature-jobs-recovery/#.UVtVRmt5mSM
© Kevin Lamarque / Reuters
updated 3/22/2013 9:18:14 AM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Too much of the recent growth in employment has been concentrated in low-wage and temporary jobs, leaving the recovery on shaky ground, a top Federal Reserve official said on Friday.
....
Pointing to a sharp post-recession rise in poverty, a subject not often the focus of speeches by Fed officials, Raskin also argued the rise of temporary employment, which she said is approaching a record, was further widening an already large gap between rich and poor Americans.
"Our country cannot achieve prosperity without addressing the powerful undertow created by flat wages and tenuous financial security for so many millions of Americans," Raskin said in prepared remarks to the National Community Reinvestment Coalition's annual conference...."Government policymakers need to focus seriously on (these) problems, not simply because of notions of fairness and justice, because the economy's ability to produce a stable quality of living for millions of people is at stake," she said.
The economy generated 236,000 jobs in February, bringing the jobless rate down to 7.7 percent from 7.9 percent. Still, total employment is still many hundreds of thousands of jobs short of its pre-recession levels, even before accounting for population growth.
updated 3/22/2013 9:18:14 AM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Too much of the recent growth in employment has been concentrated in low-wage and temporary jobs, leaving the recovery on shaky ground, a top Federal Reserve official said on Friday.
....
Pointing to a sharp post-recession rise in poverty, a subject not often the focus of speeches by Fed officials, Raskin also argued the rise of temporary employment, which she said is approaching a record, was further widening an already large gap between rich and poor Americans.
"Our country cannot achieve prosperity without addressing the powerful undertow created by flat wages and tenuous financial security for so many millions of Americans," Raskin said in prepared remarks to the National Community Reinvestment Coalition's annual conference...."Government policymakers need to focus seriously on (these) problems, not simply because of notions of fairness and justice, because the economy's ability to produce a stable quality of living for millions of people is at stake," she said.
The economy generated 236,000 jobs in February, bringing the jobless rate down to 7.7 percent from 7.9 percent. Still, total employment is still many hundreds of thousands of jobs short of its pre-recession levels, even before accounting for population growth.
Face it. We have been, and are being restructured into a different type of economy according to the designs of the corporatists who benefit from this restructuring. They are booming. They are globalizing. They are rolling in profit. They want us to get used to living at a standard closer to the rest of their global workforce. They don't consider the impoverishment and lower standard of living for millions of Americans a crisis. There is no urgency, no clarion calls to fix the massive transfer of wealth from us to them with legislation. On the contrary, they are focused on *cutting* the safety nets.
And the Trans-Pacific is the next big step...
Raskin acknowledged progress was slow, but said the policy was having a positive effect.
"Both anecdotal evidence and a wide range of economic indicators show that these attempts are working to strengthen the recovery and that the labor market is improving," she said.
"Both anecdotal evidence and a wide range of economic indicators show that these attempts are working to strengthen the recovery and that the labor market is improving," she said.
Did you mean to post this article?
"Yes, let's raise the minimum wage by a dollar and 75 cents, while pushing the Trans-Pacific.
That will fix everything."
Are you against raising the minimum wage and ensuring that some workers aren't paid below minimum wage or are you pissed that the President proposed these?
Your so-called point was ripped to shreds and you have no comeback.
from the warmongering assholes that fled like vermin.
RAH RAH! Wall Street! 
Such of importance to the working class...
