
This winter, progressives and elected Democrats in states across the country found themselves blindsided by a coordinated wave of conservative legislation. The policies themselves were tailor-made to both advance right-leaning policy objectives, and undermine the electoral hopes of the Democratic Party: union-busting, voter ID laws, tort reforms.
Despite high unemployment, and a public clamoring for jobs, these political measures popped up in just about every state where the GOP took control of part or all of government after the 2010 midterm romp -- the ideas themselves were drafted and circulated by a network of conservative groups, and advanced by a crop of politicians that has been nurtured by the movement for years.
Looking forward, progressives want a piece of that action.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Leading progressives in the Democratic party are pressing President Obama to get more involved in the fight over public worker rights playing out in Wisconsin and other states across the country.
Obama has publicly sided with state and local government employees against laws meant to crush their right to collectively bargain. But his political shop has run hot and cold on the question of involving him more publicly in the protests.
The co-chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus yesterday both called on him to speak out more loudly -- or even join the protesters in Wisconsin.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Republicans may be enjoying their ascendancy and critics may be suggesting the President Obama is tilting to the right along with them, but former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean says the "the State of the Progressive Movement is strong."
In a long letter sent to members of Democracy For America -- the progressive group that operates out of Dean's 2004 presidential headquarters in Vermont -- Dean opines on the state of the left after a year that saw many setbacks for progressives, from the death of the public option to the Republicans' November electoral sweep.
"The next few years aren't going to be easy either," Dean writes. "It's going to be a fight to stop right-wing Republicans from rolling back progress and forcing gridlock in Congress."
Despite the progressive critics of Obama, Dean makes it clear that he's fully behind Obama -- and that Obama's cause is a progressive one.
"We'll need to work harder than ever to accomplish real change and reelect President Obama in 2012," Dean writes. "But we've never been afraid of hard work."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Despite the tax cut deal they hate, progressive forces will be on the fighting lines for President Obama in 2012. That's the word from Democracy For America, the progressive advocacy PAC forged from the remnants of Howard Dean's 2004 bid for the Democratic presidential nomination.
In a wide-ranging interview Friday, DFA communications director Levana Layendecker discussed the ways Obama has hurt progressives over the past couple weeks. But she said that despite it all, the left will still stand by the man they backed in 2008 when he runs again in 2012.
The comments echoed those from Dean himself, who was briefly mentioned as a possible primary opponent for Obama by liberals angered by the tax cut deal's two-year extension of the Bush cuts on the highest incomes. Dean has said he won't run against Obama in a primary and that he doesn't expect anyone else will, either.
But if they don't primary him, will progressives just stay home, leaving Obama without an important part of his activist base? Layendecker says no. They may be mad at him now, sure. But the liberals are coming home to Obama.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Senate candidate Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA) is the latest to join the progressive petition opposing any cuts to Social Security.
"Joe joined the statement at SocialSecurityProtectors.com and opposes any effort that would not maintain present benefits," his spokesman says. "We know that two-thirds of retirees rely on Social Security for most of their retirement income and the system can be protected without risking seniors' retirement savings in the stock market. As one example of how to address solvency without harming current benefits, a return to the tax rates of the Clinton era (when we created 23 million jobs) for the top two percent of earners - the wealthiest of Americans who received the majority of the tax cuts of the Bush era (when we created zero net jobs) - would cover Social Security's shortfall over the next 75 years."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)There's no doubt about it, things aren't looking good for November for the Democratic party. It's way too early to know if they will lose the House, but there is broad agreement that 100 days from now, there will be losses and Democratic numbers in Congress will dwindle.
On the ground in Las Vegas for the last several days, TPM took the temperature of Netroots Nation activists, the candidates courting them for dollars and door-knocking and the official party operatives who need progressives engaged if they want to prevent a total wipeout this fall. Most campaign types sounded hopeful notes that it won't be as bad in the end as it looks now, and there seems to be broad agreement that, if the races are put into the context of the idea that Democrats move forward and the Republicans want to take you back to the Bush era, they might just stave off the worst of the losses.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Las Vegas -- President Obama greeted progressive activists and liberal bloggers this morning via video message, telling the group during the final full day of Netroots Nation that he gets their frustration that "change hasn't come fast enough."
"I hope you take a moment to consider all we've accomplished so far," Obama said. Then the pre-recorded video showed a segment from MSNBC's Rachel Maddow rattling off the administration's achievements.
Obama promised, "we're not done." He said that the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell is in the works and touted his own plan to draw down 90,000 troops from Iraq.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (5)Las Vegas -- MSNBC's Ed Schultz tonight slammed President Obama's White House for its handling of the Shirley Sherrod debacle, suggesting that Obama and his team are afraid of Fox News and don't use progressive media enough.
Speaking to a roaring opening night crowd at Netroots Nation at the Rio casino here, Schultz cursed through a spirited critique of Obama. Schultz pointed to the camera and said he was glad the speech was being recorded and wanted the White House to hear his message. Schultz also leveled insults at conservative Democratic Sens. Blanche Lincoln (AR), Ben Nelson (NE) and Mary Landrieu (LA), along with Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), who the netroots helped boot from the party in 2006. Schultz said he didn't care if Democratic Senators boycott his show because he doesn't need them for ratings. He also said that MSNBC "did a hell of a job fighting for health care."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)For years, pundits and politicians on the left have been calling themselves "progressives" to avoid the apparent stigma of the word "liberal." But a USA Today/Gallup poll released today indicates that a majority of Americans still aren't sure what "progressive" really means.
According to the poll, 54% percent of adults are unsure if the word "progressive" describes their political views. Fifty-seven percent of self-identified liberals, 65% of moderates, and 45% of conservatives just don't know if the word aptly characterizes their political outlook.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said in an interview that Tuesday's elections look like a "pretty big sweep" for progressives. "They are having a big night," he said.
"My belief is that progressive Dems are a lot more appealing to mainstream voters than tea party advocates," Dean told me in an interview just after Rep. Joe Sestak was declared the winner over Sen. Arlen Specter in the Pennsylvania Democratic Senate primary.
"This is a big night for people who really want Washington to be a change agent," Dean said, adding the results show a "backlash" against both parties in official Washington. Dean, also former governor of Vermont and a 2004 presidential candidate, said he views Jack Conway as the progressive choice in Kentucky and said Lt. Gov. Bill Halter's forcing of a runoff in Arkansas proves that candidates on the left can prevail.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Senate Democrats attempted to reassure riled up progressive pundits today that conservaDems might indeed pay a price next January when the caucus decides who will - and won't - keep their leadership positions.
TPMDC and other news outlets are in attendance at the Progressive Media Summit on Capitol Hill, hosted by the Senate Democrats. Some here, including John Aravosis and MSNBC's Ed Schultz, are treating it as a forum to tell the Senators what they are doing wrong.
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) told the group he understands frustration that some Democrats "don't have the backbone we wish they had." After the Democrats were asked why the leadership doesn't strip Sen. Blanche Lincoln of her Agriculture Committee chairmanship, Brown chimed in and said that might be coming next year.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)A finding from a new Research 2000 poll suggests Democrats and Independents are deeply disappointed with President Obama's unwillingness to truly engage in the fight for a public option.
Commissioned by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, and Democracy for America, the question, to 800 likely voters was: "President Obama has said he favors a public health insurance option. Senator Joe Lieberman is widely credited with forcing Senate Democrats to take the public option off the table in order to win his vote. Do you think President Obama should have done more to pressure Lieberman to allow the public option to move forward?"
Overall, 63 percent said yes, 29 percent said no, and 8 percent had no opinion.
But among Democrats, and Independents, the numbers are far more striking.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)Here's a snapshot of the electorate, at the moment when a small handful of Democrats have teamed up to tank the public option. A new Research 2000 poll, commissioned by Democracy for America and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee finds that the overwhelming majority of likely voters believe Democrats who vote against the public option should face primaries from their left.
When asked: "If a Democratic member of Congress votes against a public health insurance option, would you want a more progressive candidate to run against them in a Democratic primary?" 84 percent of respondents said "yes," 11 percent said "no," and 5 percent said they weren't sure.
Those are fairly striking numbers, particularly given last night's news that Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) is standing in the way of public option alternatives. Lieberman, along with Sens. Ben Nelson (D-NE), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), and Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) joined forces several weeks ago, insisting they'd filibuster a health care reform bill if it included a public option. That threat laid the groundwork for a new compromise, but Lieberman's saying even that's a no-go.
The overall survey, which will be released later today, polled 802 from December 11 through the 13th--it's margin of error is 3.5%. For the above question, which went to Democrats only question, 256 were polled, yielding a 6.1% margin of error.
Whether he's in Connecticut or Washington, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) won't be able to hide from his controversial position on the public option. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee will run the below ad in Lieberman's home state and the District of Columbia, starting tomorrow.
"Joe Lieberman promised Connecticut voters in 2006 that he would support core Democratic issues like health care reform," said PCCC co-founder Adam Green in a statement. "This tongue-in-cheek ad holds Lieberman accountable for putting his own ego ahead of the overwhelming will of Connecticut voters who demand a public health insurance option."
The initial buy is $40,000, to be supported by additional online fundraising.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)Responding to news first reported by TPMDC, that the White House is pushing back on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's inclination to include an optional government insurance program in the Senate's health care bill, one of the left's most hardline progressive groups is taking aim directly at President Obama.
In an unprecedented move, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee will air a new TV ad, and is gathering signatures on an emergency petition, warning the administration not to support a health care compromise, favored by Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), that could kill the public option.
The spot will air at least 100 times in Maine, augmented by an online fundraising drive. The group's recent ad targeting Snowe helped them raise over $100,000.
The petition reads, "Every day, insurance companies deny care and let people die. Getting one Republican senator's vote is not worth delaying reform -- too many real lives are at stake. We need you to fight and state clearly that anything less than a strong public option is not change we can believe in."
Over the course of the health care debate, liberal groups have targeted key senators standing in the way of reform. But though many on the left have long felt that the White House hasn't done enough to ensure the creation of a public option, PCCC is the first organization to make Obama the focus of a pressure ad. You can read their email to supporters below the fold.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)Here's another nugget exemplifying the intense pressure Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is facing from both elected Democrats and grassroots liberals to make sure health care legislation includes a public option.
"There are 52 solid Democrats for the public option," said Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA). "Only about five Democrats oppose it. Should the 52 give in to the five? Or should the five go along with the vast majority of the Democratic caucus?"
Last Thursday, at a heated Democratic caucus lunch, several Democrats rose to give impassioned arguments in favor of the public option. And, with the exception of Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND), who gave a counterargument for private co-ops, the handful of public option opponents in the Senate were silent.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (3)The Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which has been ramping up its campaign for a public option in the last several weeks, will run the below ad in Nevada this week, urging Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to fight for the public option as he takes the lead in designing a health care bill to bring to the Senate floor.
PCCC is raising funds this week in the hope of running the ad 200 times in Las Vegas on cable and broadcast networks. It will begin airing on Wednesday. You can read a letter from PCCC to its supporters below the fold.
Reid's staff has scoffed at similar efforts in recent weeks, saying that while Reid is working to build consensus for a public option, he will not likely respond to strong-arm tactics.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)Remember a couple weeks ago when I reported that progressive groups were organizing a campaign--including television ads--to pressure Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to include the public option in the Senate health care bill, and to enforce party unanimity against GOP filibusters?
Well, check out a new letter, available below the fold, from the Progressive Change Campaign Committee to its supporters.
Bold progressive Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL) helped us deliver nearly 90,000 petition signatures to Sen. Harry Reid on Wednesday....PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)We demanded that Reid stand up to conservative Democrats who are threatening to help Republicans block an up-or-down vote on the public option. CNN, ABC, Huffington Post, Washington Post, and others covered the event....
This weekend, we'll be filming a TV ad in Nevada featuring one of Reid's constituents who desperately needs the public option. It will be powerful. More on that next week...
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid isn't exactly accustomed to kind words from progressives these days. With a health care reform fight that feels endless, and an intractable bloc of conservative Democrats refusing to play nice on the public option, Reid has become a common whipping boy for activists who think he hasn't done enough to strong arm his 60 voting members into giving health care reform an up or down vote.
So it comes as some surprise that two prominent progressive figures, approached by TPMDC, said that much has changed since the summer--and particularly in the last couple weeks--and that Reid is working the inside game for the public option.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)As you may have heard, progressive groups are petitioning Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to throw down the gauntlet and get conservative Democrats on board against Republican filibusters. The idea: "Any Democratic senators who support a Republican attempt to block a vote on health care reform should be stripped of their leadership titles. Americans deserve a clean up-or-down vote on health care."
A letter from the Progressive Change Campaign Committee to supporters announces, "We'll deliver the petition signatures to Harry Reid next week after a big news conference in front of the Senate."
So what does leadership think of this? Not too much, apparently. "These kinds of gestures are counter-productive and won't have any impact on Capitol Hill," says a leadership aide. "These kinds of efforts will fall flat."
Additionally, the aide added, even if Democrats were responsive to the pressure, it's improperly placed. "There's a fundamental miscalculation here, in that ultimately this is not a decision for Senator Reid to make. This is a decision that's going to be made by the caucus as a whole."
I doubt whether that will assuage progressives, but generally speaking the notion that party defectors should be stripped of their seniority and other perks is often embraced by grassroots activists on both the left and the right. But in recent years it hasn't typically resulted in any action on the Hill.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)A post at the website Open Left by Mike Lux tells a troubling story for progressives.
"Some senior White House staffers are now beginning to try to sell this trigger to progressive groups as the compromise version of a public option, saying the White House doesn't want to have a floor fight in the Senate, and that they can always fix it in conference committee," Lux writes.
That way they can pick up Snowe, satisfy that desperate urge for being officially bipartisan (even though Snowe can't bring a single other Republican with her), and not have to worry about procedural hassles in the Senate.
Lux is a former staffer for President Bill Clinton, and worked for the Obama transition team--not necessarily the first person you'd imagine warning of "an ugly fight within the Democratic Party, further erosion of Obama's standing with his base, the specter of more primary fights."
Off the record interviews and emails with reform leaders resulted in no denials, and two confirmations that Lux's account is correct.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Impossible to say at this early date. But if it happens, Keith Olbermann will look awfully prescient.
The comment comes in the last minute of the clip. Think of it less as prognostication and more as a barometer of progressive frustration with the President.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)Late last night, Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ)--a co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus--issued a press release saying he had "grave concerns" that the White House is telling pro-reform groups that they will "cease supporting" the public option.
Though I can not confirm Grijalva's specific claim entirely, after a number of off-the-record conversations with congressional and advocacy sources, it's clear that many progressives are preparing themselves to be disappointed next week.
Low-level White House officials have reached out to certain reform groups that have staked their ground on the need for a public option, I'm told, and warned them not to spend any more money advocating for the policy--that it's just not worth it. That suggestion hasn't been heeded--at least for now. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee, and Democracy for America raised over $100,000 to continue running this ad in Iowa after Congress returns from recess.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)
It's been just over a week since Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) switched parties, and already progressive activists are taking the temperature in Pennsylvania to see if the climate's right to retire him. The liberal Progressive Change Campaign Committee, in partnership with some of the Netroots' most visible blogs, is conducting a week-long straw poll to determine both the level of progressive grassroots support for challenging Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) in the 2010 primary, and whether the challenger should be Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA).
The development resembles in some ways the early days Ned Lamont's successful campaign--backed by the progressive grassroots--to defeat Sen. Joe Lieberman in the 2006 Connecticut primary. Lieberman, of course, turned around and beat Lamont in the general election by running as an Independent, but election laws in Pennsylvania would prevent Specter from doing the same thing.
For his part, Sestak seems to be positioning himself to become Netroots darling. In the last week he has grown more and more critical of both the party establishment for thoughtlessly backing Specter, and of Specter himself, who he says is an unreliable representative for Pennsylvania Democrats.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)As TPMDC has previously noted, Senate Republicans don't see the need to offer an alternative budget of their own this week -- even as they blast the priorities President Obama has outlined.
But the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) is taking that leap, presenting an alternative budget that includes cuts to outdated weapons projects and defense procurement initiatives as well as a new 0.25% tax on all stock trades that would offset the staggering cost of the financial bailout.
The details of the progressives' budget are available after the jump -- and worth cheering, given the recent news that the CPC is struggling to get a literal foot in the door at the White House.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)My colleague Eric noted this story in the Morning Roundup, but it's worth noting that the Congressional Progressive Caucus still doesn't appear to be waking up to its potential to influence the Obama administration's agenda.
As Roll Call notes, the president has given White House face time to all manner of Democratic klatsches, from the business-friendly Blue Dogs and New Democrats to the Congressional Hispanic and Black Caucuses. But the Progressives' request for a meeting with Obama -- which TPMDC noted a long while back, right here as well as here -- has fallen on deaf ears.
Anyone who thinks progressives don't need to assert themselves, that they can best help Obama advance his priorities by being supportive and avoiding the appearance of nitpicking or spotlight-chasing, should read the call-to-arms that TNR's John Judis delivered to the left last month.
By allowing Republicans to define Obama's goals (his budget in particular) as the most liberal option on the table, Judis explains, progressives risk standing pat while the president gets pigeonholed as a debt-hungry lefty. Unfortunately, the Congressional Progressives have yet to speak with the unified, assertive voice that Ble Dogs and New Dems use. From Roll Call's report:
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)The Family Research Council (FRC) and Concerned Women of America (CWA): You know them well as some of the most vocal right-wing groups in the nation, the types that push against President Obama's agenda as hard as they can, from his nominees to his executive orders.
And guess where the two groups are headed today ... to the White House, to meet with Obama's director of faith-based initiatives about finding common ground on religious-related issues.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)
I realize that the very word Lieberman sends a lot of liberals into fits of apoplexy. But it's worth making an additional point to the fine post from my colleague, Eric Kleefeld. Lieberman is talking about leaving the door open to returning to the Democratic party. I think that's unlikely since he would probably be eviscerated in a primary. Still, it's a remarkable shift from a few months ago when it seemed entirely possible that Lieberman would choose to caucus with Senate Republicans.
It's worth noting what's happened to Lieberman since Obama took office. He never wavered on the stimulus. He's supporting the Employee Free Choice Act. He's been fulsome in his praise of President Obama. Think of how much harder things would be for the president if Lieberman had bolted on those issues or had chosen to caucus with Republicans.
I understand Democratic anger with Lieberman. After all, he not only opposed Barack Obama but actively campaigned for the McCain-Palin ticket and endorsed Norm Coleman in Minnesota. The sentiment to kick him out of the caucus had a lot of merit to it. And I'm not suggesting that Lieberman won't stick it to Obama and the Democrats in the future. He probably will.
That said, I think it now seems clear that Harry Reid and Barack Obama were wise not to follow the Netroots call for a Lieberman purge and to let him keep his chairmanship of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs. I assume most readers will disagree but while the anger of kicking him to the curb would have felt good at the time, wouldn't it have made life harder for President Obama? Discuss.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)Washington has been dominated for weeks by the debate over forming an independent "truth and reconciliation commission" to uncover details about human rights and civil liberties abuses committed during the Bush administration. Prominent Democrats from Sen. Patrick Leahy (VT) to Rep. John Conyers (MI) to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (CA) have indicated their support for the concept.
But one day after Barack Obama's Pentagon was lambasted by human rights groups for reporting that conditions are humane, a coalition of liberal advocacy groups is done with taking it slow. In a statement released this morning, the 20-plus groups ask Attorney General Eric Holder to directly appoint a special prosecutor to probe former Bush administration officials.
It remains to be seen whether today's statement will move minds in Congress, where the "truth commission" plan remains controversial. Still, this call is a perfect illustration of John Judis' recent message to the American left: Expand the playing field, and do not let the White House be the most left-leaning force in the capital.
The full statement is after the jump:
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (12)The New York Times reports this morning that the White House had abandoned plans to unveil a Social Security "task force" at today's fiscal summit, raising the question of whether the Obama administration is ready to conduct separate debate over the long-term health of Social Security and Medicare -- or whether the tired canard of "dangerous entitlement spending" will continue to rule the political roost.
One liberal activist who weighed in against the proposed task force told me that some within the administration are ready to attempt "one more fix" for Social Security, thinking of the 70-year-old benefits program "as an equation to be solved" and the Obama team as the mathematicians on the case.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)As soon as Tom Daschle withdrew his nomination to be HHS Secretary , a lot of liberal bloggers started throwing around the names of Howard Dean and John Kitzaber, both former Democratic governors and both physicians, to replace him. Neither, we noted at the time, was seriously in play. We seem to be right.
(Whew.)
We did mention Kathleen Sebelius and while there's no certain confirmation that the Kansas Governor will be nominated to be Barack Obama's HHS Secretary, outside groups following this closely tell me that Sebelius is undergoing final vetting and the White House wants to be extra, extra careful not to have this one blow up. After all it would be the fourth withdrawn cabinet nomination, following Tom Daschle, Bill Richardson and Judd Gregg. Sebelius was vetted for vice president but that's not enough. Everything is being updated, I hear. The announcement could come this week and certainly by Obama's address to the nation and a joint session of Congress on Feb 24 where Sebelius is likely to be in the gallery seated near Michelle Obama.
There's some disappointment among liberal groups about Sebelius's nomination, not because of her positions which they like but because she had the best shot at a Democratic pickup of the Senate seat that will be vacated by Sam Brownback, the Kansas Republican, when he retires at the end of his term.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)Barack Obama's in Ottawa today. The snow's falling. People are skating on the canals. The president and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper will meet and Obama will fly home after a few hours. It's the classic first presidential visit abroad.
But there are a couple of things to watch out for in this meeting with America's largest trading partner. The first is backtracking on the North American Free Trade Agreement. During the primaries Candidate Obama vowed to rewrite the deal. Now, uh, not so much. In an interview with Canadian TV he hinted that this wasn't the time to start getting all disruptive with settled agreements. Will organized labor let this one slide? A lot will depend on the language coming out of Obama's meeting with Harper.
Here's Thea Lee, policy director at the AFL-CIO was pretty mellow in her comments about the trip:
"We hope there will be greater fiscal cooperation in response to the economic crisis ... both in terms of scale and content," she said."We would like to see the labor and environment provisions in NAFTA strengthened and enforced more effectively."
Second, Afghanistan. What kind of commitments can he get out of Canada to help with the Obama surge? Canada's been in this fight from the start and their military is not huge but can Obama get more out of them? It'll be at least a bit of a harbinger of what could happen when he goes to the Europeans hat in hand.
National Security Adviser Gen. Jim Jones is on the trip. Hillary Clinton is in Asia. Could be some intereseting Kremlinology in who actually does the readouts to the press. Jones, by the way, won't need translation gear. Raised in France for much of his youth, he speaks fluent French.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)Well, it looks like "the fairness doctrine" died a quiet death today. White House spokesman Ben LaBolt told Fox News that President Obama was not interested in restoring the Federal Communications Commission rule that basically requires broadcasters to give equal time to opposing points of view.
If enforced, the rule would obviously create havoc in talk radio land where conservatives dominate the airwaves. Not surprisingly, the right has been in a tailspin about this, predicting that Obama would somehow take away half of Rush and Sean and Laura and but liberals in their place. Talk about redistribution! But despite some congressional interest in the measure, the idea of restoring it was never really in play.
Intellectually, I think the idea is weak and the administration seems to think so, too. After all, it hearkens back to a pre-internet era when finding an opposing view was harder. But there were some lingering questions about what Obama would do. David Axelrod got asked about it on Fox News Sunday--yes, this is a News Corp obsession--and he punted, saying it was a decision best left for Julius Genachowski, Obama's not-yet-announced nominee to chair the FCC. (Genachowski is a close friend, for what it's worth.) But it looks like the decision's already been made. Seems sensible to me but the right loses something to fulminate about. I'm curious to see how much disappointment there is on the left.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)
Well, it's a new era in Washington. A little bit, at least. The administration just finished their first event for bloggers and progressive media, a conference call with, appropriately enough, Jared Bernstein, one of the more liberal leaning members of the president's economic team. He's the top economic policy adviser to Vice President Joe Biden and he spoke for about 45 minutes with the likes of MYDD.com and yours truly.
A veteran of think tanks and a trained TV pundit, Bernstein, who has written for TPM, seemed a bit cautious and not at all eager to make news. The highlights were that he praised the stimulus package while noting that it doesn't have everything the administration and others would have liked. He noted, too, that just because something was excised from the stimulus package that in now way means the administration won't come back and try it again at a later point. He wouldn't get into specifics on what they might come back to but it's in keeping with a larger point I've tried to make (but that he refrained from explicitly making): This probably isn't the last stimulus.
I asked him how much good the bill could really do while the bank bailout plan remains so sketchy. Bernstein used a medical analogy saying that the stimulus plan was designed to
"get the patient's heart beating again" while the bank stabilization plan was about getting the patient's arteries cleaned out.
Another interesting point he made was that the stimulus package could probably shave a couple of points off of the unemployment rate but with the rate heading towards double digits you might well find the rate at 7.5 percent or so by the end of 2010. It's a sobering thought. We'll be coming out of this thing when the unemployment rate is what it is now. In other words, the roller coaster still has farther to go down.
But the biggest headline was probably the meeting itself. Jesse Lee, the online director at Casa Blanca, introduced Bernstein on the call and said he hoped that the progressive media call would be "the first in a newly sustained tradition." Let's hope.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)
The L.A. Times had a nice preview on this today, but the Center for Progressive Reform has just come out with a comprehensive report casting doubt on the regulatory record of Cass Sunstein, the president's pick to head the office in charge of government regulatory efforts.

