Thursday, February 28, 2013

T-1 to Austerity

Now we count down by the hour to the automatic across the board federal spending cuts and the negative impact on the economy.  Small businesses will be particularly hurt when money starts leaving Main Street.

But don’t expect any sympathy from the U.S. Chamber for the plight of small business (even though it says that it represents small business also).  The U.S. Chamber has come out against any effort in the Senate for a balanced approach between raising revenue and cutting spending—something the public is firmly behind. 
Why?

Because they are protecting their big dues paying members--the multinational corporations who pay little in federal income tax. 
So damn the torpedoes and full steam ahead toward austerity and the harm to small businesses.  But at least we’ll protect all the big boys from paying their fair share of taxes.

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

T-2 to Austerity

The Washington Post
February 26, 2013

Sequestering common sense

By

The media is going sequester 24-7. Anyone who hasn’t been paying attention to the across-the-board spending cuts about to hit this Friday is about to have little choice. The brouhaha about the austerity bomb is drowning out any attention to what is actually going on in the economy — which is supposedly the point of the whole debate.

The stark reality is the economy is still in trouble and Americans are still hurting. The economy contracted last quarter, even before Americans got hit with the end of the payroll tax holiday, which will take $1,000 out of the typical family’s annual paycheck. The Congressional Budget Office projects that growth will inch along at about 1.5 percent this year. That translates into continued mass unemployment — with more than 20 million people in need of full-time work — and falling wages. The richest 1 percent captured an unimaginable 121 percent of all income growth in 2009 and 2010, coming out of the Great Recession. They pocketed all of the growth in income, while 99 percent of Americans actually lost ground. That trend is likely to get worse rather than better.

Federal Reserve Governor Janet L. Yellen described the tragic human costs of widespread, long-term unemployment in an important speech this month. Families lose their homes; divorce and depression rise; children are scarred; skills are lost. A young generation is leaving school to sit on the couch.

Yet most of Washington — from the newly reelected Democratic president to the self-described insurgent Tea Party Republicans — is ignoring this reality to focus on cutting deficits.

The Republican Congress seems intent on letting the “sequester” take place — the idiotic across the board cuts that were explicitly designed to be anathema to both parties. Senate Democrats call not for repealing these cuts, but for “paying for” delaying them for a few more months.

Why this fixation? Deficits aren’t careering out of control. In fact, as the Congressional Budget Office reports, in relation to the economy, the deficit has fallen faster over the past three years than at any time since the demobilization after World War II. Calls for cutting Medicare benefits ignore the reality that the slowing rise in Medicare costs has already cut about $500 billion from its projected costs over 10 years compared to estimates made two years ago.

In fact, the too-rapid and premature decline in deficits in a weak economy is hindering any recovery, as Yellen noted.

Sadly, none of the supposed free-market ideologues in Congress are listening to the markets. With interest rates near zero, investors are sending the United States a flashing green light: Go borrow money to rebuild our decrepit and deteriorating infrastructure, investments that would put people back to work and make the country far more competitive.

So why this obsession with deficits and debt? There are many factors, but central to it is a widespread elite consensus that this crisis provides a unique opportunity to “fix” — exact benefit cuts from — Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, despite the opposition of broad majorities across the political spectrum.

No one has done more to propagate and consolidate this consensus than the Wall Street billionaire Pete Peterson, who has been railing about the threat posed by the “paid vacation” provided by Social Security and Medicare for over three decades. As a special feature in this week’s Nation (which I edit) and a valuable report by the Center for Media and Democracy demonstrate, Peterson has devoted nearly half a billion dollars to this quest since 2008.

Only last week, Fix the Debt, one of the many groups funded by Peterson, trotted out its co-founders, Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, to lay out yet another plan. Echoing Peterson’s views, they called for cuts in Medicare and Social Security, tax reform that would lower top rates but close loopholes (including middle-class tax breaks such as that for employer-based health care), and curbs on all other government spending.

This elite consensus ignores how we got into the fix we are in. The deficit was under 2 percent of gross domestic product in 2007 and the debt under 40 percent of GDP when Wall Street’s wilding blew up the housing bubble and drove the economy into the Great Recession. Wall Street got bailed out, but the deficit soared to 11 percent of GDP and Americans lost nearly 40 percent of their wealth. You’d think anyone so fixated on avoiding another Pearl Harbor moment would focus on making certain Wall Street was properly shackled, and the too-big-to-fail banks broken up.

But the elite bipartisan consensus is focused on sending the bill for Wall Street’s mess to an already battered middle class, by weakening the basic pillars of a family’s economic security — Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. And they are a lot closer than anyone thinks. The sequester is just the first of a series of austerity bombs that the Republican Congress will use to extort cuts in these benefits.

It’s time to stop such extortionists from holding our country’s economic future hostage.

Katrina vanden Heuvel is the editor and publisher of The Nation.

Read at

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

T-3 to Austerity

With the automatic budget cuts across the board to federal agencies coming three days from now, bills to address the issue are apparently the only real action taking place in Washington.

According to The Hill:
The Republican plan would maintain the level of spending reductions but give President Obama more flexibility to minimize their impact on military preparedness and other vital government services, such as air traffic control and airport security screening.

The Democratic package, meanwhile, would freeze the sequester through the end of the calendar year and offset the $110 billion cost with an even mix of spending cuts and tax increases.


Despite all the dire warnings of economic consequences for allowing the sequester cuts to take place as prescribed by law, neither bill will get the 60 votes needed to pass.  The Senate Dems would have the votes to pass their bill (favored by most Americans) if we actually allowed a majority to pass legislation (another good reason for Senate filibuster reform).

In the House, also according to The Hill, Republicans are addressing the cuts to the Pentagon:
Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.) is introducing a bill that would target the $500 billion in cuts — rather than letting them hit across-the-board— while legislation from Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.) would do away with the defense side of sequestration altogether.


B
ut there is at least one South Carolina GOP House member who will not vote to spare the military or any federal agency.

Representative Jeff Duncan says that all agencies should be able to absorb the cuts.  Mr. Duncan is a strong advocate for cutting federal spending and he’s putting his vote where his mouth is.  While you might not agree with him, he is willing to suffer any public backlash from the sequester cuts. 

Whether Mr. Duncan's voters will agree with his position that the nation needs a good shot of austerity remains to be seen after the cuts are made and the economy is hurt.  But he stands on his principles.  And that’s a lot better than many of his colleagues talking out of both sides of their mouths for the need for spending cuts as long as they don’t affect their pet projects.

Monday, February 25, 2013

T-4 to Austerity

Obamacare haters are on the verge of finally having some success in stopping the implementation of the healthcare reform.  If the sequester’s automatic budget cuts go into effect this Friday, federal spending on three of the components of teh Affordable Care Act will be impacted.

Less money will be available for establishing the health insurance marketplaces (exchanges).  State entities trying to establish CO-OP health insurance plans will see less money.  And small business tax credits for offering health insurance will be cut.
But, of course, to achieve this slim success against Obamacare, the opponents have to be willing to put the brakes on the whole economy.  

Thursday, February 21, 2013

Not expanding Medicaid will cost SC small businesses


The State
February 21, 2013

By FRANK KNAPP JR. — Guest Columnist
Columbia, SC — The debate is underway over whether to expand the federal-state health insurance program, Medicaid, to more uninsured low-income South Carolinians.

Opponents of expansion, made possible by the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, are led by Gov. Nikki Haley’s director of Health and Human Services, Tony Keck, who runs the state’s Medicaid program. Mr. Keck’s public position is that the issue is not about cost but about making more of our citizens healthy. He argues that expanding Medicaid is an inefficient way of achieving that goal.
In December, I attended a forum where Mr. Keck explained that having health insurance was not a good predictor of health outcomes. Therefore the state would do better in promoting health by concentrating on education and jobs while encouraging our citizens to make better personal choices about their behavior.

But in response to a question I posed, Mr. Keck admitted that a low-income person’s health would be better if he had Medicaid than if he did not. “But at what cost?” he quickly added.

Mr. Keck’s almost reflexive response reveals that the tactic of arguing that Medicaid isn’t the best way to improve health is really an effort to misdirect the debate away from the real issue — cost.
If we remove the partisanship over Obamacare and admit that improving the level of education, size of paychecks and behavioral decisions of the state’s low-income citizens is an admirable but daunting goal that will take decades to achieve, the primary objection to expanding Medicaid to improve health today is cost.

Opponents of expansion say that the state can’t afford its eventual 10 percent share of the Medicaid expansion. Mr. Keck’s actuary projects that the cost to the state could be up to $1 billion by 2020.
Proponents of expansion point to a study that projects that economic activity in the state will increase by $3.3 billion and 44,000 jobs will be created from expanding Medicaid. This increase in economic impact would result in the state actually taking in more revenue than it would spend on the expansion through 2020, contradicting Mr. Keck’s analysis. After 2020 the state’s budget would experience a small net loss due to expansion.

Unfortunately, this cost debate has largely overlooked an important factor associated with not expanding Medicaid — the cost to our small businesses.
Many low-income employees work for our state’s small businesses, and expanding Medicaid will result in reduced costs to these employers.

First, there is a significant cost to a small business when workers are not on the job because they are sick or have to care for family members who are ill. Even employees who don’t miss work when they are sick are less effective. Workers with health insurance for themselves and their families miss less work due to illness and are more productive. Clearly expanding Medicaid to cover low-income workers will economically benefit their small-business employers.
Second, small businesses that want to offer health insurance to employees will find it more affordable under a Medicaid expansion. Small employers with Medicaid-eligible workers will have fewer employees to cover on a private group health plan and thus have less in premiums to pay. In addition, with expansion the cost of the employee’s private insurance will drop due to a reduction in the hidden tax on every health insurance policy, which pays for the uncompensated care for the uninsured. Based on projections by Milliman, the actuarial firm used by Mr. Keck for his cost projections, the reduced premiums could be up to $1,000 per year for family coverage.

The third benefit of a Medicaid expansion involves the requirement of the Affordable Care Act that businesses with 50 or more employees either offer health insurance or pay a penalty. Workers on Medicaid are not counted toward the total number of employees, so the Medicaid expansion would mean that even many small businesses with 50 or more employees could avoid paying a penalty for not offering health insurance.
While our state officials continue to debate the cost of expanding Medicaid, that debate must include the cost to small businesses for not doing so.

Mr. Knapp is the president and CEO of the S.C. Small Business Chamber of Commerce; contact him at Sbchamber@scsbc.org.

Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2013/02/21/2641481/knapp-not-expanding-medicaid-will.html#storylink=cpy


 

Wednesday, February 20, 2013

Support the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Remember the Great Recession???

One of the reforms Congress passed to try to stop a future repeast of the financial meltdown that hurt small businesses and individuals was the establishment of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).

Below is a letter from my friend Katherine McFate asking for your support for the CFPB.  I encourage you to join the effort for a strong government agency that has already taken strong measures to protect us from the greed of Wall Street.
------------------------------------------------------------------
 
February 20, 2013

In the wake of the meltdown of the financial markets brought on by risky and predatory lending practices, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) was created to rein in credit card companies and other financial institutions that prey on vulnerable consumers. In the 24 months since it was created, we've applauded its substantive work and the outstanding way that it operates, inviting public input and exemplifying transparency. Unfortunately, its important work is now threatened. The Senate vote to confirm Richard Cordray as the head of the agency has been blocked for two years. (He's been there working under an interim appointment.) It's time for the Senate to take a vote.

Please tell your senators to vote on Richard Cordray's nomination so that the CFPB can continue protecting all of us from the exploitative practices of big banks, mortgage lending institutions, and credit card companies.

Thanks to the CFPB, approximately half a billion dollars have been returned to consumers cheated by credit card companies.

Thanks to the CFPB, new mortgage rules will protect families and level the playing field between small financial institutions like community banks and credit unions and larger banks.

Thanks to the CFPB, students will get more accurate information about the real costs of their student loans.

It required public pressure from Americans like you to establish the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Now it's time for us to demand a vote on Richard Cordray's nomination.

Please make sure that the CFPB can continue to defend citizens from unfair lending practices and other abuses. Write your senators today to demand an immediate, up-or-down vote.

Thanks being an engaged citizen!

Warm regards,

Katherine McFate
President and CEO
Center for Effective Government

Thursday, February 14, 2013

Tell Congress to protect our small retailers

In 2011 the state sold out our small businesses and permitted Amazon not to collect sales tax from in-state purchases in exchange for the company building a distribution facility in Lexington County.  This allowed Amazon to continue to have an unfair competitive advantage over our small retailers.  That sales tax exemption runs out in 2016. 

But it’s not only Amazon that is not collecting state sales tax from South Carolinians making purchase online.  There are other companies doing the same and hiding behind federal law that says they don’t have to collect state sales tax if they don’t have a “presence” in the state.  They just keep on taking sales away from our small businesses because their prices are lower from not charging sales tax.

Please read the letter below and help send Congress a message to enable states to shut down this unlevel playing field that our small retailers face every day. 

Oh, and happy Valentine’s Day.
----------------------------------------------------

Dear South Carolina,

Great news!  The Marketplace Fairness Act is set to be reintroduced today, February 14, in both the House and the Senate.  What a great Valentine’s Day present for hardworking small businesses.  We need to make sure Members of Congress, both new and old, know e-fairness is still an urgent priority for America’s small businesses and communities.

Please take a moment to send your Members of Congress an email urging them to ensure the Marketplace Fairness Act passes in 2013.

Inaction by Congress means online-only retailers will continue to receive a government-sanctioned tax advantage.  Our businesses, employees, and communities will pay the price.  While some states are starting to collect sales taxes from Amazon and other online retailers, only federal legislation will fully level the playing field.  

Send a message to Congress today: No more picking winners and losers.  Tell Congress to make 2013 the year all retailers are treated equally.

We’ve worked toward passage of federal e-fairness for a long time.  This is our chance to finally level the playing field for Main Street. 

We sincerely appreciate your hard work and continued support.  Please take a few minutes to reach out to your Members of Congress today.

Best,

The Alliance for Main Street Fairness