November 3-5, 2017
Nov 03 05:46 Is Vin Weber in trouble? Nov 03 07:35 Jobs report predictions Nov 03 14:18 Setting terms for tax reform debate Nov 04 16:41 Refugee resettlement report Nov 05 09:14 Is VA trending in Gillespie's direction? Nov 05 10:14 Beating something with nothing Nov 05 15:26 Pipeline intentional omissions Nov 05 19:06 DFL's missing economic message
Prior Months: Jan Feb ~ May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Is Vin Weber in trouble?
When the indictments of Paul Manafort and Rick Gates were unsealed, people started asking questions about the Podesta Group and Mercury LLC. The Podesta Group is owned by Tony and John Podesta. Mercury LLC is run by former Minnesota Congressman Vin Weber. This AP article raises a number of questions about these men's lobbying activities, saying "At the center of the widening probe are Tony Podesta, a longtime Democratic operative, and Vin Weber, a former GOP congressman and leader of his own high-powered lobbying firm, Mercury LLC. The two men were hired as part of a multimillion-dollar lobbying effort directed by Manafort and longtime associate Rick Gates."
Later in the article, it continues, saying "Representatives for Weber's firm and Podesta said they are cooperating with the special counsel's investigation. Podesta, whose brother was the chairman of Hillary Clinton's campaign, has resigned from his firm." This can't be good news for Weber or Tony Podesta, especially if the AP article is right in saying "With the emphasis on the Ukrainian lobbying efforts, Mueller's criminal probe is moving beyond investigating ties between the Trump campaign and Russia and is aggressively pursuing people who worked as foreign agents without registering with the Justice Department. More witnesses are expected before the grand jury in coming weeks."
This article indicates that K Street isn't taking a business-as-usual attitude these days:
Washington lobbyists who represent foreign powers have taken comfort for decades in the fact that the Justice Department rarely goes after them for potentially breaking the law. That all changed on Monday. The news of Tony Podesta's resignation from his namesake firm and indictment of Paul Manafort and Rick Gates sent K Street scrambling, as lobbyists rushed to make sure they're in compliance with the rules. The developments also renewed calls for Congress to pass legislation beefing up the Justice Department's enforcement of the law, which lawmakers in both parties have derided for lacking teeth.
If Director Mueller's focus has shifted to "pursuing people who worked as foreign agents without registering with the Justice Department", then Weber's firm might be in trouble. I can't picture Mueller opening an investigation into Weber's firm if he hadn't gotten a tip that something was, at minimum, suspicious. This video suggests that something else has caught Mueller's attention:
[Video no longer available]
According to Manafort's indictment, he and Gates "engaged in weekly and at times daily calls and emails with (company 1 and company 2) to provide them directions as to specific lobbying steps that should be taken and to receive reports back as to the results of such lobbying." The two firms were the Podesta Group and Mercury.
Being connected with guys who've been indicted doesn't mean you're automatically guilty. It doesn't mean you're squeaky clean, either.
Posted Friday, November 3, 2017 5:46 AM
No comments.
Jobs report predictions
If President Trump is looking for good news, this article should help put a smile on his face. Let's dig into what the experts are predicting for this morning's jobs report.
The article starts by saying "Economists expect job growth of 310,000 in October, a rebound after the impact of hurricanes Harvey and Irma resulted in a 33,000 decline in September." If 310,000 jobs are created in October, President Trump's critics will be crushed. President Trump will have notched another victory that will improve his job approval rating, too. Most importantly, 310,000 new jobs would be welcome news to people after 8 years of lackluster economic growth.
President Trump still has to wait for the official report to be published but getting anywhere close to that would be a victory. Seth Carpenter, the chief U.S. economist at UBS, said "Our forecast is for 325,000. It's going to be a big number. You're going to get a kind of soft average for those two months."
Thus far, we've had 2 straight quarters of 3% economic growth. The jobs reports have been decent, not spectacular. If these predictions are right, though, then that's just another sign that this economy is primed to take a big step forward. If that happens, the Trump bandwagon will get a lot fuller. It'll certainly give him the type of momentum that's needed to push through tax reform.
Check back later to find out what the report actually said.
UPDATE: Another positive report is in the books:
- Payrolls rose 261k (est. 313k) after 18k advance; revisions added 90k to Aug.-Sept. figures, including turning Sept. drop into a gain
- Unemployment rate, derived from a separate Labor Department survey of households, fell to 4.1% (est. 4.2%) from 4.2%
Those aren't fantastic jobs numbers but the unemployment rate is pretty eye-catching.
Posted Friday, November 3, 2017 7:47 AM
No comments.
Setting terms for tax reform debate
This USA Today Our View editorial is biased and unworthy of serious consideration. That said, it's instructive of what Republicans will have to fight.
For instance, the editorial says "The measure's cut in the corporate income tax rate from 35% to 20%, for example, could boost the economy. And its limit on the interest deduction for new mortgages has angered the powerful homebuilding and Realtor lobbies, which suggests that its drafters might be doing something right. But by the standards of President Reagan's landmark 1986 tax reform, this plan is a major disappointment. It lacks fiscal discipline, is needlessly indulgent of the wealthy, and is purposely punitive to universities, college students and people who live in high-tax states. Taken as a whole, this plan is partisan, even petty."
Let's examine that. It isn't that cutting "the corporate income tax rate from 35% to 20%" might boost the economy. Cutting that tax rate will boost the economy. The DJIA is chomping at the bit waiting for that tax rate cut. If it becomes reality, expect companies to invest that extra capital into hiring extra R & D personnel. Expect small businesses to buy new equipment, which, in turn, will strengthen the manufacturing sector and durable goods orders.
With consumer confidence shooting through the roof , it likely wouldn't take much to get the economy roaring. It's disappointing, though predictable, for the editorial to say that the tax plan "is needlessly indulgent of the wealthy." President Reagan was fond of saying that it's impossible to be pro-jobs and anti-employer. The first Reagan tax cuts were on capital gains with the intent on getting Detroit back on its feet. It worked magnificently. Then there's this:
Preliminary estimates are that it would increase deficits by $1.5 trillion over 10 years. To put that in perspective, an only slightly different cast of GOP lawmakers screamed bloody murder in 2009 over an Obama economic stimulus plan half that size. Republicans were deficit hawks then. Now, not so much.
I wrote about the stimulus back in the day. It just threw money at people. Republicans predicted that it wouldn't spur the economy. The Republicans' predictions were right. Further, Republicans argued that the Obama stimulus was nothing but pork. They were right. It's foolish to argue that the Republicans' Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is nothing but pork and special favors. Predictably, though, that's what the Democrats are doing.
Finally, saying that "an only slightly different cast of GOP lawmakers screamed bloody murder in 2009 over an Obama economic stimulus" is mathematically insulting. There were 178 Republicans in the House in 2009. There are 239 Republicans in the House as of Oct. 21. That's a difference of 61 Republicans in the House. I wouldn't call that a "slightly different cast of GOP lawmakers."
Then there's this BS:
The biggest flaw in the GOP plan is that, for all the rhetoric about helping the middle class, it is tilted toward the wealthy. Benefits for the rich include:
Termination of the tax on inherited wealth, a priority of wealthy GOP donors but not many other Americans. Immediately upon passage, estates of up to $22 million could be passed on to heirs tax-free. After six years, estates of any size could be passed on tax-free. Over a decade, this change alone would drain $172 billion from the Treasury.
The wealth that's been accumulated in these estates has been taxed already. It's been taxed at a high rate, too. There's nothing moral about the government taxing estates twice.
Further, this doesn't benefit the wealthy. People like the Gates family, the Clinton family or the Dayton family create foundations to shelter their wealth. Family farmers would benefit from this. Small business owners would benefit, too.
Posted Friday, November 3, 2017 2:18 PM
No comments.
Refugee resettlement report
Based on the number of refugees admitted into the country, there's no mistaking the fact that there's a new administration in charge. These statistics don't tap-dance around the differences between the Obama administration and the Trump administration.
For instance, "In October 2017, the first month of FY 2018, only 275 refugees from ... Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen were admitted to the United States under the Refugee Admissions Program. In contrast, in October 2016, the first month of FY 2017, a total of 4,581 refugees from these seven countries were admitted into the United States under the Refugee Admissions Program (1,352 from Somalia, 1,323 from Iraq, 1,297 from Syria, 414 from Iran, and none from either Libya or Yemen.)"
That's what I like seeing! If people want to call me Islamophobic, that's fine. It isn't true but I won't shrivel if I'm called that. I won't worry if Gov. Dayton says I need to find another state, either:
[Video no longer available]
These refugees cost communities tons of money. It costs schools lots of extra money to get refugees up to speed in speaking English. It costs workers tons of money in lower wages, too. Then there's this:
Refugee Council USA, the "trade organization" of the refugee resettlement industry, issued a statement last week that it "is appalled by the Administration's proposed changes to refugee processing. These changes enact another ban on refugee admissions and are driven by ideology rather than necessity."
TRANSLATION: Our clients need the cheap labor provided by these refugees. Trump is spoiling that for our clients.
If you think I'm being sarcastic about what RCUSA is complaining about, I'm not. I wrote about the refugee resettlement racket in this post . It's another of DC's cottage industries.
Posted Saturday, November 4, 2017 4:41 PM
Comment 1 by John Palmer at 04-Nov-17 05:09 PM
An example of the desperation of the refugee resettlement industry is reported by Breitbart News, that the Refugee Council USA spent $100,000 this year to hire the Podesta Group to lobby Congress and provide pro-Amnesty Republican legislators with 'talking points' that can provide them 'cover' when talking about refugee resettlement issues with the media and other Republicans.
Talking points won't cover revenue lost in a business paid per person resettled.
Is VA trending in Gillespie's direction?
This article is good news for GOP gubernatorial candidate Ed Gillespie, saying "The new poll of likely Virginia voters by Republican firm Optimus/Firehouse Strategies over Wednesday and Thursday shows Gillespie leading his Democratic opponent Ralph Northam by 40.4 percent to 37.4 percent." The thing that's most encouraging, though, is that the Latino Victory Fund ad enraged independents and fired up Republicans.
As a result, turnout should be high for the GOP candidate. Meanwhile, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Ralph Northam is having difficulty turning out the Obama coalition. Those 2 things should help deliver a victory for a victory to Governor-Elect-in-Waiting Gillespie.
Turnout for Northam might be hurt because he's played into Republicans' hands on sanctuary cities. The article says "Northam has also received criticism among party members and progressive voter groups for his break with party rhetoric on so-called sanctuary cities, which do not comply with federal immigration laws, saying he would sign legislation banning them 'if that bill comes to my desk.'" First, that's taking a defensive position, which isn't good anytime but especially troubling the last week of a campaign.
Then there's this :
Following headliner Stephen K. Bannon, executive chairman of Breitbart News, populist-nationalist 2018 U.S. Senate candidate Corey Stewart addressed the Remembrance Project National Conference in Washington, DC, Saturday. The event, at the capital's famous Willard Hotel, featured a 'who's who' of leaders in the fight against illegal immigration, including headliner Bannon, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, and Colorado gubernatorial candidate Tom Tancredo, in Remembrance Project's largest annual event to honor Americans killed by illegal alien crime and the "angel families" they left behind.
Finally, there's this observation:
"MS-13 is not just a Northern Virginia problem. It's not just in Northern Virginia and tidewater," Stewart told Breitbart News on Saturday. "It is spreading down the [Interstate] 81 corridor and is becoming a statewide issue : It's an issue that will drive not only conservatives but independent voters who are concerned about it."
The winner of the big elections is the candidate that finds the issue that evokes the most visceral reaction. I think MS-13 is this year's visceral issue. We'll see Tuesday night whether I'm right.
Posted Sunday, November 5, 2017 9:15 AM
No comments.
Beating something with nothing
If I had to give this article a title, I'd give the title 'You can't beat something with nothing'. Another title I'd consider is 'Republicans win while Democrats whine'. Katie Packer Beeson's article is spot on.
It starts by saying "The Democrats seem to enjoy gloating about the hot mess that is the Republican Party these days. Former GOP presidents warning the president about the people he surrounds himself with; sitting Republican U.S. senators calling the president unstable and unqualified; and a former GOP speaker of the house saying "there is no Republican Party. The president isn't a Republican." And Democrats' friends in the mainstream media have kindly created an echo chamber that makes them think that they are always right and the Republicans are a bunch of sexist, racist, whack jobs. So why aren't they winning?"
It continued, saying "So when they lost the election, there was a reckoning. The leadership of the Democratic Party was drummed up and new, forward-looking leaders took the reins and offered an alternative to what they saw as the disaster of Donald Trump. Wait, no. That isn't what happened. Instead, they re-elected Nancy Pelosi as speaker of the house. They elected Chuck Schumer as Senate majority [editor's note: Schumer is minority leader] leader and completely sold out to the New York and California wings of the Democratic Party."
Then there's this:
Instead of talking about middle-class tax cuts, they talked about transgender bathroom access. Instead of talking about fixing Obamacare, which was crushing many in the middle class with high premiums and complicated doctor selections, they walked right into the trap of the alt-right and began tearing down Civil War statues.
Democrats still haven't figured out how to talk to blue collar America. They're experts at talking to college professors and progressive activists but they're worthless at talking with factory workers, small businesses and tradesmen. It's like those people are from another planet. (Perhaps, it's the Democrats that are from a different planet?)
Look how paralyzed Hillary looks when confronted by a coal miner:
[Video no longer available]
Hillary looked positively petrified. She looked like she would've rather been anywhere else in the world than at that roundtable.
What [Democrats] don't seem to understand is that you can point out your opponent's weaknesses all day long, but if you don't provide an alternative, then people will stick with the status quo. I've spoken to dozens of Republican women in recent months who have grown disillusioned with the Republican Party, and when I ask why they don't defect, the answer is always the same: "It's no better over there."
Until Democrats learn what animates blue collar workers, they should expect to lose lots of races, at least enough to keep them in the minority for a decade or more.
Posted Sunday, November 5, 2017 10:14 AM
No comments.
Pipeline intentional omissions
The thing I hate about LTEs like this one is what they omit. The writer of this LTE talks about 3 pipelines that he lives by, saying "I live by three 'pipelines.' The first most folks know as U.S. Highway 10. It carries a ton of traffic, especially on weekends, enabling thousands bent on enjoying what Northern Minnesota has to offer. It has a huge economic impact. According to the U of MN Extension Service, the combined travel and tourism annual revenues from June of 2007 to May of 2008 in Aitkin, Cass, Crow Wing, and Hubbard counties alone amounted to $713,699,246 and the state realized $326,376,889 in state revenues." Having lived my entire life within a mile of Highway 10, I can't dispute that lots of tourists use Highway 10. Having said that, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that Highway 10 also is used by tons of truckers bringing tons of products to the Twin Cities and beyond.
FYI- I-94 is used more for transporting products to market. One of the products delivered on I-94 and Highway 10 is crude oil. Those highways deliver product to the refineries Flint Hills Resources in Rosemount, MN. It's idiotic to think that stopping the pipeline will cause oil companies to take those wells out of production. That isn't happening, which means that oil will be transported by a less safe way.
Which brings me to the third "pipeline" that I live by, the Mississippi River. The Enbridge pipeline will cross it twice. Can you imagine what impact a spill would have on the 1.8 million people who rely on it for clean drinking water?
This zealot thinks that technology doesn't exist. Either that or he thinks that oil companies can't wait to pollute. Either way, this zealot apparently isn't in touch with reality.
If the environmentalists stop this pipeline, the DFL will be hurt politically for a generation. They will have stabbed the DFL's blue collar base in the back for the umpteenth time. The DFL will have looked the other way for the umpteenth time, too. Then the DFL will try to win back their votes by expressing solidarity for working families', many of whom won't be employed thanks to the DFL's pandering to the environmentalists.
Here's hoping the environmentalists will enjoy working with GOP majorities in the Minnesota House and Senate and a reform-minded GOP governor.
Posted Sunday, November 5, 2017 3:26 PM
No comments.
DFL's missing economic message
A trip to the Walz-Flanagan campaign website exposes the DFL's lack of an economic message. Their campaign website doesn't have an issues page, which is telling. On its homepage, it has a tiny portion of the page dedicated to explain why they're running. That portion of the page says "running for Governor and Lieutenant Governor to make our vision of One Minnesota a reality. We are united in this vision: A Minnesota where every child has the opportunity to succeed and hope for the future, a Minnesota where the people whose lives are most impacted by public policy choices have a seat at the table, a Minnesota with fair wages, fully funded public schools, and affordable healthcare as a right, not a privilege and a Minnesota where we protect our environment, invest in renewable energy and jobs, and maintain our roads, bridges, and transit across the state. We want to bring this vision to the governor's office and support the Minnesota we know and love."
In other words, they're running for Gov. Dayton's third term. They're running without explaining what economic goals they'll fight for.
A quick view of Paul Thissen's website doesn't lay out a vision for Minnesota's economy, either. It talks about how the Supreme Court should protect labor unions. It talks briefly how we should implement single-payer health care statewide. Thissen talks about legalizing marijuana, too. There isn't anything in that pile of words that sounds like he has a clue about capitalism. Then again, his legislative record hasn't shown him to have a clue about creating high-paying middle class jobs so we shouldn't be surprised.
Erin Murphy's campaign website has a ' Why I'm Running ' page but it doesn't have an issues page, much less an explanation of what economic policies she'd implement.
Of the 4 DFL gubernatorial candidates' websites that I visited, only Rebecca Otto talked about the economy. Even then, she only spoke about raising the minimum wage :
Across her statewide listening tour Rebecca met hard-working people who are under-compensated, making it hard to make ends meet. This is hurting our families, our communities, and our way of life. Rebecca Otto supports increasing the minimum wage and indexing it to inflation. She will also be releasing an economic plan that will help increase wages across the state.
There's nothing on any of these candidates' websites that talks about infrastructure, especially pipelines. Why is that? Is it because the DFL's special interest masters won't let them support legitimate projects that create middle class wages? Is it because the DFL doesn't think that fossil fuels will play an important part in our economy?
Finally, it's apparent that the DFL doesn't understand capitalism whatsoever. This morning on At Issue with Tom Hauser, Katharine Tinucci said that cutting the corporate tax rate won't create jobs because "the rich" won't invest the money. What an idiot. What wealthy people want most is more money. The best way to get wealthier is by investing that money.
Isn't it apparent that the DFL doesn't understand human nature?
Posted Sunday, November 5, 2017 7:06 PM
Comment 1 by JerryE9 at 06-Nov-17 08:48 AM
Wouldn't it be easier if they just said, "I will give you everything you want and somebody else will pay for it"? These folks are from liberal la-la land, and believe that good DFL legislators can repeal the laws of economics, physics and chemistry, and human nature.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 06-Nov-17 09:36 AM
You could put it that way but it wouldn't have the same impact as saying that the DFL doesn't understand economics.
