Monthly Archives: June 2009

June 29, 2009

Who Voted For Cap and Tax, Cap and Trade, American Clean Energy and Security Act 2009

By The Move Right

Who voted for Cap and Tax?

The Heritage Foundation: The 2009 Energy Bill: Anti-Market and Anti-Consumer

House Vote On Passage: H.R. 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (aka the single largest tax increase in American history)

Those to campaign against…

Vote District Representative
Arizona
Aye AZ-4 Pastor, Edward [D]
Aye AZ-7 Grijalva, Raul [D]
Aye AZ-8 Giffords, Gabrielle [D]
Arkansas
Aye AR-2 Snyder, Victor [D]
California
Aye CA-1 Thompson, C. [D]
Aye CA-5 Matsui, Doris [D]
Aye CA-6 Woolsey, Lynn [D]
Aye CA-7 Miller, George [D]
Aye CA-8 Pelosi, Nancy [D]
Aye CA-9 Lee, Barbara [D]
Aye CA-10 Tauscher, Ellen
Aye CA-11 McNerney, Jerry [D]
Aye CA-12 Speier, Jackie [D]
Aye CA-14 Eshoo, Anna [D]
Aye CA-15 Honda, Michael [D]
Aye CA-16 Lofgren, Zoe [D]
Aye CA-17 Farr, Sam [D]
Aye CA-18 Cardoza, Dennis [D]
Aye CA-23 Capps, Lois [D]
Aye CA-27 Sherman, Brad [D]
Aye CA-28 Berman, Howard [D]
Aye CA-29 Schiff, Adam [D]
Aye CA-30 Waxman, Henry [D]
Aye CA-31 Becerra, Xavier [D]
Aye CA-33 Watson, Diane [D]
Aye CA-34 Roybal-Allard, Lucille [D]
Aye CA-35 Waters, Maxine [D]
Aye CA-36 Harman, Jane [D]
Aye CA-37 Richardson, Laura [D]
Aye CA-38 Napolitano, Grace [D]
Aye CA-39 Sanchez, Linda [D]
Aye CA-43 Baca, Joe [D]
Aye CA-45 Bono Mack, Mary [R]
Aye CA-47 Sanchez, Loretta [D]
Aye CA-51 Filner, Bob [D]
Aye CA-53 Davis, Susan [D]
Colorado
Aye CO-1 DeGette, Diana [D]
Aye CO-2 Polis, Jared [D]
Aye CO-4 Markey, Betsy [D]
Aye CO-7 Perlmutter, Ed [D]
Connecticut
Aye CT-1 Larson, John [D]
Aye CT-2 Courtney, Joe [D]
Aye CT-3 DeLauro, Rosa [D]
Aye CT-4 Himes, James [D]
Aye CT-5 Murphy, Christopher [D]
Delaware
Aye DE-0 Castle, Michael [R]
Florida
Aye FL-2 Boyd, Allen [D]
Aye FL-3 Brown, Corrine [D]
Aye FL-8 Grayson, Alan [D]
Aye FL-11 Castor, Kathy [D]
Aye FL-17 Meek, Kendrick [D]
Aye FL-19 Wexler, Robert [D]
Aye FL-20 Wasserman Schultz, Debbie [D]
Aye FL-22 Klein, Ron [D]
Aye FL-24 Kosmas, Suzanne [D]
Georgia
Aye GA-2 Bishop, Sanford [D]
Aye GA-4 Johnson, Henry [D]
Aye GA-5 Lewis, John [D]
Aye GA-13 Scott, David [D]
Hawaii
Aye HI-1 Abercrombie, Neil [D]
Aye HI-2 Hirono, Mazie [D]
Illinois
Aye IL-1 Rush, Bobby [D]
Aye IL-2 Jackson, Jesse [D]
Aye IL-3 Lipinski, Daniel [D]
Aye IL-4 Gutierrez, Luis [D]
Aye IL-5 Quigley, Mike [D]
Aye IL-7 Davis, Danny [D]
Aye IL-8 Bean, Melissa [D]
Aye IL-9 Schakowsky, Janice [D]
Aye IL-10 Kirk, Mark [R]
Aye IL-11 Halvorson, Deborah [D]
Aye IL-17 Hare, Phil [D]
Indiana
Aye IN-7 Carson, André [D]
Aye IN-9 Hill, Baron [D]
Iowa
Aye IA-1 Braley, Bruce [D]
Aye IA-2 Loebsack, David [D]
Aye IA-3 Boswell, Leonard [D]
Kansas
Aye KS-3 Moore, Dennis [D]
Kentucky
Aye KY-3 Yarmuth, John [D]
Aye KY-6 Chandler, Ben [D]
Maine
Aye ME-1 Pingree, Chellie [D]
Aye ME-2 Michaud, Michael [D]
Maryland
Aye MD-1 Kratovil, Frank [D]
Aye MD-2 Ruppersberger, C.A. [D]
Aye MD-3 Sarbanes, John [D]
Aye MD-4 Edwards, Donna [D]
Aye MD-5 Hoyer, Steny [D]
Aye MD-7 Cummings, Elijah [D]
Aye MD-8 Van Hollen, Christopher [D]
Massachusetts
Aye MA-1 Olver, John [D]
Aye MA-2 Neal, Richard [D]
Aye MA-3 McGovern, James [D]
Aye MA-4 Frank, Barney [D]
Aye MA-5 Tsongas, Niki [D]
Aye MA-6 Tierney, John [D]
Aye MA-7 Markey, Edward [D]
Aye MA-8 Capuano, Michael [D]
Aye MA-9 Lynch, Stephen [D]
Aye MA-10 Delahunt, William [D]
Michigan
Aye MI-1 Stupak, Bart [D]
Aye MI-5 Kildee, Dale [D]
Aye MI-7 Schauer, Mark [D]
Aye MI-9 Peters, Gary [D]
Aye MI-12 Levin, Sander [D]
Aye MI-13 Kilpatrick, Carolyn [D]
Aye MI-14 Conyers, John [D]
Aye MI-15 Dingell, John [D]
Minnesota
Aye MN-1 Walz, Timothy [D]
Aye MN-4 McCollum, Betty [D]
Aye MN-5 Ellison, Keith [D]
Aye MN-7 Peterson, Collin [D]
Aye MN-8 Oberstar, James [D]
Mississippi
Aye MS-2 Thompson, Bennie [D]
Missouri
Aye MO-1 Clay, William [D]
Aye MO-3 Carnahan, Russ [D]
Aye MO-4 Skelton, Ike [D]
Aye MO-5 Cleaver, Emanuel [D]
Nevada
Aye NV-1 Berkley, Shelley [D]
Aye NV-3 Titus, Dina [D]
New Hampshire
Aye NH-1 Shea-Porter, Carol [D]
Aye NH-2 Hodes, Paul [D]
New Jersey
Aye NJ-1 Andrews, Robert [D]
Aye NJ-2 LoBiondo, Frank [R]
Aye NJ-3 Adler, John [D]
Aye NJ-4 Smith, Christopher [R]
Aye NJ-6 Pallone, Frank [D]
Aye NJ-7 Lance, Leonard [R]
Aye NJ-8 Pascrell, William [D]
Aye NJ-9 Rothman, Steven [D]
Aye NJ-10 Payne, Donald [D]
Aye NJ-12 Holt, Rush [D]
Aye NJ-13 Sires, Albio [D]
New Mexico
Aye NM-1 Heinrich, Martin [D]
Aye NM-2 Teague, Harry [D]
Aye NM-3 Lujan, Ben [D]
New York
Aye NY-1 Bishop, Timothy [D]
Aye NY-2 Israel, Steve [D]
Aye NY-4 McCarthy, Carolyn [D]
Aye NY-5 Ackerman, Gary [D]
Aye NY-6 Meeks, Gregory [D]
Aye NY-7 Crowley, Joseph [D]
Aye NY-8 Nadler, Jerrold [D]
Aye NY-9 Weiner, Anthony [D]
Aye NY-10 Towns, Edolphus [D]
Aye NY-11 Clarke, Yvette [D]
Aye NY-12 Velazquez, Nydia [D]
Aye NY-13 McMahon, Michael [D]
Aye NY-14 Maloney, Carolyn [D]
Aye NY-15 Rangel, Charles [D]
Aye NY-16 Serrano, José [D]
Aye NY-17 Engel, Eliot [D]
Aye NY-18 Lowey, Nita [D]
Aye NY-19 Hall, John [D]
Aye NY-20 Murphy, Scott [D]
Aye NY-21 Tonko, Paul [D]
Aye NY-22 Hinchey, Maurice [D]
Aye NY-23 McHugh, John [R]
Aye NY-25 Maffei, Daniel [D]
Aye NY-27 Higgins, Brian [D]
Aye NY-28 Slaughter, Louise [D]
North Carolina
Aye NC-1 Butterfield, George [D]
Aye NC-2 Etheridge, Bob [D]
Aye NC-4 Price, David [D]
Aye NC-11 Shuler, Heath [D]
Aye NC-12 Watt, Melvin [D]
Aye NC-13 Miller, R. [D]
Ohio
Aye OH-1 Driehaus, Steve [D]
Aye OH-9 Kaptur, Marcy [D]
Aye OH-11 Fudge, Marcia [D]
Aye OH-13 Sutton, Betty [D]
Aye OH-15 Kilroy, Mary Jo [D]
Aye OH-16 Boccieri, John [D]
Aye OH-17 Ryan, Timothy [D]
Aye OH-18 Space, Zachary [D]
Oregon
Aye OR-1 Wu, David [D]
Aye OR-3 Blumenauer, Earl [D]
Aye OR-5 Schrader, Kurt [D]
Pennsylvania
Aye PA-1 Brady, Robert [D]
Aye PA-2 Fattah, Chaka [D]
Aye PA-7 Sestak, Joe [D]
Aye PA-8 Murphy, Patrick [D]
Aye PA-11 Kanjorski, Paul [D]
Aye PA-12 Murtha, John [D]
Aye PA-13 Schwartz, Allyson [D]
Aye PA-14 Doyle, Michael [D]
Rhode Island
Aye RI-1 Kennedy, Patrick [D]
Aye RI-2 Langevin, James [D]
South Carolina
Aye SC-5 Spratt, John [D]
Aye SC-6 Clyburn, James [D]
Tennessee
Aye TN-5 Cooper, Jim [D]
Aye TN-6 Gordon, Barton [D]
Aye TN-9 Cohen, Steve [D]
Texas
Aye TX-9 Green, Al [D]
Aye TX-15 Hinojosa, Rubén [D]
Aye TX-16 Reyes, Silvestre [D]
Aye TX-18 Jackson-Lee, Sheila [D]
Aye TX-20 Gonzalez, Charles [D]
Aye TX-25 Doggett, Lloyd [D]
Aye TX-28 Cuellar, Henry [D]
Aye TX-29 Green, Raymond [D]
Aye TX-30 Johnson, Eddie [D]
Vermont
Aye VT-0 Welch, Peter [D]
Virginia
Aye VA-3 Scott, Robert [D]
Aye VA-5 Perriello, Thomas [D]
Aye VA-8 Moran, James [D]
Aye VA-9 Boucher, Frederick [D]
Aye VA-11 Connolly, Gerald [D]
Washington
Aye WA-1 Inslee, Jay [D]
Aye WA-2 Larsen, Rick [D]
Aye WA-3 Baird, Brian [D]
Aye WA-6 Dicks, Norman [D]
Aye WA-7 McDermott, James [D]
Aye WA-8 Reichert, Dave [R]
Aye WA-9 Smith, Adam [D]
Wisconsin
Aye WI-2 Baldwin, Tammy [D]
Aye WI-3 Kind, Ronald [D]
Aye WI-4 Moore, Gwen [D]
Aye WI-7 Obey, David [D]
Aye WI-8 Kagen, Steve [D]

Those to thank…

Vote District Representative
Alabama
No AL-1 Bonner, Jo [R]
No AL-2 Bright, Bobby [D]
No AL-3 Rogers, Michael [R]
No AL-4 Aderholt, Robert [R]
No AL-5 Griffith, Parker [D]
No AL-6 Bachus, Spencer [R]
No AL-7 Davis, Artur [D]
Alaska
No AK-0 Young, Donald [R]
Arizona
No AZ-1 Kirkpatrick, Ann [D]
No AZ-2 Franks, Trent [R]
No AZ-3 Shadegg, John [R]
No AZ-5 Mitchell, Harry [D]
Arkansas
No AR-1 Berry, Robert [D]
No AR-3 Boozman, John [R]
No AR-4 Ross, Mike [D]
California
No CA-2 Herger, Walter [R]
No CA-3 Lungren, Daniel [R]
No CA-4 McClintock, Tom [R]
No CA-13 Stark, Fortney [D]
No CA-19 Radanovich, George [R]
No CA-20 Costa, Jim [D]
No CA-21 Nunes, Devin [R]
No CA-22 McCarthy, Kevin [R]
No CA-24 Gallegly, Elton [R]
No CA-25 McKeon, Howard [R]
No CA-26 Dreier, David [R]
No CA-40 Royce, Edward [R]
No CA-41 Lewis, Jerry [R]
No CA-42 Miller, Gary [R]
No CA-44 Calvert, Ken [R]
No CA-46 Rohrabacher, Dana [R]
No CA-48 Campbell, John [R]
No CA-49 Issa, Darrell [R]
No CA-50 Bilbray, Brian [R]
No CA-52 Hunter, Duncan [R]
Colorado
No CO-3 Salazar, John [D]
No CO-5 Lamborn, Doug [R]
No CO-6 Coffman, Mike [R]
Florida
No FL-1 Miller, Jeff [R]
No FL-4 Crenshaw, Ander [R]
No FL-5 Brown-Waite, Virginia [R]
No FL-6 Stearns, Clifford [R]
No FL-7 Mica, John [R]
No FL-9 Bilirakis, Gus [R]
No FL-10 Young, C. W. [R]
No FL-12 Putnam, Adam [R]
No FL-13 Buchanan, Vern [R]
No FL-14 Mack, Connie [R]
No FL-15 Posey, Bill [R]
No FL-16 Rooney, Thomas [R]
No FL-18 Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana [R]
No FL-21 Diaz-Balart, Lincoln [R]
No FL-25 Diaz-Balart, Mario [R]
Georgia
No GA-1 Kingston, Jack [R]
No GA-3 Westmoreland, Lynn [R]
No GA-6 Price, Tom [R]
No GA-7 Linder, John [R]
No GA-8 Marshall, James [D]
No GA-9 Deal, Nathan [R]
No GA-10 Broun, Paul [R]
No GA-11 Gingrey, John [R]
No GA-12 Barrow, John [D]
Idaho
No ID-1 Minnick, Walter [D]
No ID-2 Simpson, Michael [R]
Illinois
No IL-6 Roskam, Peter [R]
No IL-12 Costello, Jerry [D]
No IL-13 Biggert, Judy [R]
No IL-14 Foster, Bill [D]
No IL-15 Johnson, Timothy [R]
No IL-16 Manzullo, Donald [R]
No IL-18 Schock, Aaron [R]
No IL-19 Shimkus, John [R]
Indiana
No IN-1 Visclosky, Peter [D]
No IN-2 Donnelly, Joe [D]
No IN-3 Souder, Mark [R]
No IN-4 Buyer, Stephen [R]
No IN-5 Burton, Dan [R]
No IN-6 Pence, Mike [R]
No IN-8 Ellsworth, Brad [D]
Iowa
No IA-4 Latham, Thomas [R]
No IA-5 King, Steve [R]
Kansas
No KS-1 Moran, Jerry [R]
No KS-2 Jenkins, Lynn [R]
No KS-4 Tiahrt, Todd [R]
Kentucky
No KY-1 Whitfield, Edward [R]
No KY-2 Guthrie, Brett [R]
No KY-4 Davis, Geoff [R]
No KY-5 Rogers, Harold [R]
Louisiana
No LA-1 Scalise, Steve [R]
No LA-2 Cao, Anh [R]
No LA-3 Melancon, Charles [D]
No LA-4 Fleming, John [R]
No LA-5 Alexander, Rodney [R]
No LA-6 Cassidy, Bill [R]
No LA-7 Boustany, Charles [R]
Maryland
No MD-6 Bartlett, Roscoe [R]
Michigan
No MI-2 Hoekstra, Peter [R]
No MI-3 Ehlers, Vernon [R]
No MI-4 Camp, David [R]
No MI-6 Upton, Frederick [R]
No MI-8 Rogers, Michael [R]
No MI-10 Miller, Candice [R]
No MI-11 McCotter, Thaddeus [R]
Minnesota
No MN-2 Kline, John [R]
No MN-3 Paulsen, Erik [R]
No MN-6 Bachmann, Michele [R]
Mississippi
No MS-1 Childers, Travis [D]
No MS-3 Harper, Gregg [R]
No MS-4 Taylor, Gene [D]
Missouri
No MO-2 Akin, W. [R]
No MO-6 Graves, Samuel [R]
No MO-7 Blunt, Roy [R]
No MO-8 Emerson, Jo Ann [R]
No MO-9 Luetkemeyer, Blaine [R]
Montana
No MT-0 Rehberg, Dennis [R]
Nebraska
No NE-1 Fortenberry, Jeffrey [R]
No NE-2 Terry, Lee [R]
No NE-3 Smith, Adrian [R]
Nevada
No NV-2 Heller, Dean [R]
New Jersey
No NJ-5 Garrett, Scott [R]
No NJ-11 Frelinghuysen, Rodney [R]
New York
No NY-3 King, Peter [R]
No NY-24 Arcuri, Michael [D]
No NY-26 Lee, Christopher [R]
No NY-29 Massa, Eric [D]
North Carolina
No NC-3 Jones, Walter [R]
No NC-5 Foxx, Virginia [R]
No NC-6 Coble, Howard [R]
No NC-7 McIntyre, Mike [D]
No NC-8 Kissell, Larry [D]
No NC-9 Myrick, Sue [R]
No NC-10 Mchenry, Patrick [R]
North Dakota
No ND-0 Pomeroy, Earl [D]
Ohio
No OH-2 Schmidt, Jean [R]
No OH-3 Turner, Michael [R]
No OH-4 Jordan, Jim [R]
No OH-5 Latta, Robert [R]
No OH-6 Wilson, Charles [D]
No OH-7 Austria, Steve [R]
No OH-8 Boehner, John [R]
No OH-10 Kucinich, Dennis [D] (*Explained)
No OH-12 Tiberi, Patrick [R]
No OH-14 LaTourette, Steven [R]
Oklahoma
No OK-2 Boren, Dan [D]
No OK-3 Lucas, Frank [R]
No OK-4 Cole, Tom [R]
No OK-5 Fallin, Mary [R]
Oregon
No OR-2 Walden, Greg [R]
No OR-4 DeFazio, Peter [D]
Pennsylvania
No PA-3 Dahlkemper, Kathleen [D]
No PA-4 Altmire, Jason [D]
No PA-5 Thompson, Glenn [R]
No PA-6 Gerlach, Jim [R]
No PA-9 Shuster, William [R]
No PA-10 Carney, Christopher [D]
No PA-15 Dent, Charles [R]
No PA-16 Pitts, Joseph [R]
No PA-17 Holden, Tim [D]
No PA-18 Murphy, Tim [R]
No PA-19 Platts, Todd [R]
South Carolina
No SC-1 Brown, Henry [R]
No SC-2 Wilson, Addison [R]
No SC-3 Barrett, James [R]
No SC-4 Inglis, Bob [R]
South Dakota
No SD-0 Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie [D]
Tennessee
No TN-1 Roe, Phil [R]
No TN-2 Duncan, John [R]
No TN-3 Wamp, Zach [R]
No TN-4 Davis, Lincoln [D]
No TN-7 Blackburn, Marsha [R]
No TN-8 Tanner, John [D]
Texas
No TX-1 Gohmert, Louis [R]
No TX-2 Poe, Ted [R]
No TX-3 Johnson, Samuel [R]
No TX-4 Hall, Ralph [R]
No TX-5 Hensarling, Jeb [R]
No TX-6 Barton, Joe [R]
No TX-7 Culberson, John [R]
No TX-8 Brady, Kevin [R]
No TX-10 McCaul, Michael [R]
No TX-11 Conaway, K. [R]
No TX-12 Granger, Kay [R]
No TX-13 Thornberry, William [R]
No TX-14 Paul, Ronald [R]
No TX-17 Edwards, Thomas [D]
No TX-19 Neugebauer, Randy [R]
No TX-21 Smith, Lamar [R]
No TX-22 Olson, Pete [R]
No TX-23 Rodriguez, Ciro [D]
No TX-24 Marchant, Kenny [R]
No TX-26 Burgess, Michael [R]
No TX-27 Ortiz, Solomon [D]
No TX-31 Carter, John [R]
No TX-32 Sessions, Peter [R]
Utah
No UT-1 Bishop, Rob [R]
No UT-2 Matheson, Jim [D]
No UT-3 Chaffetz, Jason [R]
Virginia
No VA-1 Wittman, Rob [R]
No VA-2 Nye, Glenn [D]
No VA-4 Forbes, James [R]
No VA-6 Goodlatte, Robert [R]
No VA-7 Cantor, Eric [R]
No VA-10 Wolf, Frank [R]
Washington
No WA-4 Hastings, Doc [R]
No WA-5 McMorris Rodgers, Cathy [R]
West Virginia
No WV-1 Mollohan, Alan [D]
No WV-2 Capito, Shelley [R]
No WV-3 Rahall, Nick [D]
Wisconsin
No WI-1 Ryan, Paul [R]
No WI-5 Sensenbrenner, F. [R]
No WI-6 Petri, Thomas [R]
Wyoming
No WY-0 Lummis, Cynthia [R]

1 comment   |  tags: , , | posted in Global Warming, Tax Hikes, Tax Increases

June 27, 2009

The Climate Change Cluster something or other…

By The Move Right

Fox News:

House Filibuster

Politico:

House passes climate-change bill

Yahoo! News:

Obama implores Senate to pass climate bill

C-Span Live:

REP. JAY INSLEE (D-WA), ENERGY & COMMERCE CMTE., MEMBER

The Christian Science Monitor:

House passes major climate bill on close vote tied to cost

The Washington Post:

House Climate Bill Aims to Please Environmental and Business Interests

The Wall Street Journal:

Industries are Grappling With New Bill on Climate


Leave a comment | posted in Uncategorized

June 21, 2009

Lowest Obama Ratings To Date

By The Move Right

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

Sunday, June 21, 2009

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows that 32% of the nation’s voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-four percent (34%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -2. That’s the President’s lowest rating to date and the first time the Presidential Approval Index has fallen below zero for Obama (see trends).

Sixty percent (60%) of Democrats Strongly Approve of the President’s performance but only 8% of Republicans share that view. Sixty-one percent (61%) of Republicans Strongly Disapprove.

Read More…

Source: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Leave a comment | posted in Uncategorized

June 18, 2009

Making Sense of Stimulus Spending by Factcheck.org

By The Move Right

Making Sense of Stimulus Spending

June 16, 2009
How accurate is Obama’s claim of 150,000 jobs “saved or created”?

Summary

With the economy continuing to shed hundreds of thousands of jobs per month, Republicans are stepping up attacks on President Obama. They claim that the massive “stimulus” spending isn’t working very well.

A Republican Party Web site classifies as “fiction” the president’s repeated claim that the spending already has “saved or created” a total of 150,000 jobs, and accuses him of “fuzzy math.”

The GOP has a point here. The fact is the economy has lost more jobs, and the unemployment rate is significantly higher, than the administration originally predicted would be the case if Washington did nothing. In fact, the original projections of Obama’s economic aides have turned out to be off by a very wide margin.

The administration counters by saying the economy was worse than it realized at the time it was making its projections, and that the present jobs picture would be darker yet without the stimulus spending. In the analysis that follows, we lay out the facts and figures.

Bookmark and Share

Analysis

President Obama has said that “the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has saved or created nearly 150,000 jobs.” That’s always been a soft statistic, as we explained on the FactCheck Wire in May. The President’s Council of Economic Advisers hasn’t actually counted those 150,000 jobs. It’s a rough projection based on calculations made before Obama even took office.

There’s a lot of educated guesswork in the original document, dated Jan. 9. It was produced by Christina Romer, who is now chair of Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, and Jared Bernstein, who holds the title of “chief economist” to Vice President Joe Biden. The Romer-Bernstein study assumed (among other things) a “rule of thumb” that a 1 percent increase in economic output (measured by gross domestic product or GDP) roughly equals 1 million jobs. Those are pretty round figures. As the authors stated: “Our estimates of economic relationships and rules of thumb are derived from historical experience and so will not apply exactly in any given episode.”

Not “Exactly”

They can say that again. As it has turned out so far, those estimates sure haven’t applied “exactly,” or even very closely.


The Obama team originally estimated, for example, that unless a stimulus plan was enacted, the unemployment rate would reach nearly 9 percent sometime in the first three months of next year, as shown by this chart, which we copied from the original Romer-Bernstein study:


But as things have turned out, even with the big spending package in place, the jobless rate shot up to 9.4 percent in May, according to the most recent figures from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Here’s how the real, monthly jobless figures look when plotted on the Obama team’s own chart, with the red dots indicating the actual rates:

The second chart was created by “Geoff” at the Web site Innocent Bystanders. We’ve checked it and can vouch for its accuracy. The Obama team did not give the precise figures that lie behind their chart, and the chart is based on quarterly figures while the BLS figures are monthly. Nevertheless, this chart gives a reasonably good picture of how far off the Obama team’s projections have turned out to be, at least so far.

Update, June 17: We contacted “Geoff” and can now report that he is Geoff Campbell, a research and development engineer living in Colorado. “I made this particular chart because the news media rarely provides decent historical perspective on today’s news, so you can’t easily tell where we were and how we got to where we are,” he said in an exchange of e-mails. Thanks, Geoff.

Not surprisingly, Republicans are pouncing on this. Republican Rep. Darrell Issa of California and five other GOP members of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform signed a June 11 letter complaining that the administration had used murky methods to support its claims. They accused the Obama team of using “creative models to produce speculative macroeconomic forecasts” and asked for detailed explanations of the “factors and theories” behind the administration’s projections.

A  Republican Party Web page calls the 150,000 figure “fiction” and accuses the president of using “fuzzy math.” House Republican Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia said during an interview on MSNBC June 11: “[W]e were told that unemployment would not exceed 8 percent if we passed the stimulus bill. … Well, now what we’re seeing, obviously, is over 9 percent.”


The White House Explanation


White House officials have a simple explanation for all this. They say President George Bush left them a worse mess than they realized when Romer and Bernstein came up with their predictions. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and Bernstein laid this out in a press briefing on June 8. When asked about the discrepancy between his projections and the actual May unemployment figures, Bernstein said:

Bernstein:Well, first of all, let’s be very clear about this point. Our forecast at that time was right in the middle of every other forecast, and in fact, if we had had a forecast that was much worse than that, we would have been an outlier. We also would have been correct, it turned out. But the point is that the contraction of the economy in the fourth quarter – you should recall back then that was – the magnitude of that contraction was far larger than was expected. And so at the time our forecast seemed reasonable. Now, looking back, it was clearly too optimistic.

What I will say, though, and I don’t want to lose sight of this, is that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, in our view, according to our analysis, will lead to an unemployment rate by the end of next year of 1.5 to 2 points lower than would otherwise be the case. And that is the direct result of the kinds of programs and projects we’re talking about today, putting literally millions of people back to work who in the absence of this program would not be getting fully employed.

So Bernstein is sticking to the prediction that unemployment will be substantially lower with the stimulus bill than without. On that point there’s good economic theory to support him. Last October, for example, Republican economist Martin Feldstein, who had been Ronald Reagan’s chief economic adviser, wrote in the Washington Post: “The only way to prevent a deepening recession will be a temporary program of increased government spending.” He argued for a package in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Later Feldstein wrote that the package Congress was considering was “a mistake” and said it should concentrate more on military spending and temporary tax credits for such things as home improvements and buying automobiles. But he added: “The problem with the current stimulus plan is not that it is too big.”

But this time Bernstein is wisely refraining from saying where the jobs figures would be without the stimulus package. Wherever the jobless rate peaks, he’s saying it would be 1.5 percent to 2 percent higher if the stimulus package had not been enacted.

Is that so? We know of no way to prove or disprove such a claim. What we can say is that in the three months after the stimulus bill was signed Feb. 18, the economy lost more than 1.5 million jobs, according to the BLS. So even if the president’s 150,000-jobs claim is correct, that’s about 10 percent of the total jobs lost.

Footnote: The Council of Economic Advisers is required to report periodically on “total job creation” produced by the stimulus spending, but that will also be a somewhat soft number. As noted in the first quarterly report issued under the stimulus act, “Total job creation includes direct, indirect, and induced jobs which are estimated using an econometric model.”

“Direct” jobs are those created in government-sponsored projects and can be counted up in a fairly straightforward fashion. “Indirect” jobs are those that suppliers may add as they make the materials used in the project. But “induced” jobs are those that economists assume show up elsewhere in the economy as workers and firms who benefit from stimulus money spend more to buy goods and services. These might include retail sales jobs. The number of those jobs can only be estimated.

– by Brooks Jackson, with Justin Bank and Andrew Karter

Correction, June 17: We originally misstated the dates of Rep. Issa’s letter and Rep. Cantor’s interview as Jan. 11.

Sources
Romer, Christina and Jared Bernstein. “The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan,” 9 Jan. 2009.

Executive Office of the President Council of Economic Advisers. “

Estimates of Job Creation from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.” Whitehouse.gov, May 2009.

“

Remarks by the President on Alternative Energy.” White House Press Office, 27 May 2009.

“

Press Briefing by the Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and the Vice President’s Chief Economis, Jared Bernstein.” White House Press Office, 8 June 2009.

“

Employment Situation News Release.” Bureau of Labor Statistics, 5 June 2009.

Feldstein, Martin. “

The Stimulus Plan We Need Now: The President-Elect Won’t Have to Wait Till January to Act.” Washington Post, 30 Oct. 2008.

Related Articles
Obama claims the stimulus legislation will do all sorts of things. But there are no guarantees.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , | posted in Uncategorized

June 15, 2009

A Letter to Senator Bennet

By The Move Right

This is a letter from a Friend of mine, just thought I’d share it with you.


Senator Michael Bennet

702 Hart Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Bennet:

That’s a lovely picture of you and your daughter on your website. Too bad your votes have put your sweet looking child and her peers trillions of dollars in debt even before they start school.

Then there is the take over of the banking industry – you voted for that too.

Take over of the automobile industry and the theft of ownership by investors and a gift to the unions. You voted to take over the auto industry too. THIS IS A CRIMINAL ACT and I hope someone someday somewhere has the testicular fortitude to put a stop to it. Will you do something to stop it?

Will you PLEASE do something to stop the socialization of America, or are you going to continue to vote favor of it?

Now the threatened take over of the health industry. Do you really think the government can run a hospital? I’m thinking you will be voting for this as well.

Is there anyone in Washington DC who will stand up to the socialization of the United States by the Democratic Party. Will you? Or will you just stand in the back of the room and vote the way Harry Reid tells you to vote without any regard to what Coloradans want?

Will you PLEASE be the first Democrat in the US Senate to stand up for the entrepreneur, for the wage payer, for the businesses that earn a profit, employ people, and pay taxes? Will you please be the first Senator from Colorado to stand up for Colorado instead of the unions and the liberal special interests?

Our country is heading for ruin and unless YOU do something YOU will be one of the reasons we become a third-world country with a third-world president and a lackey, piss-ignorant, no balls congress.

Please HELP AMERICA. That’s why Coloradans trusted you with the job.

Stand up for America.

Stand up for Colorado.

Stand up for capitalism.

Stand up for freedom.

Don’t just stand by and let our country go down in ruins.


Your constituents,

Deleted


1 comment   |  tags: | posted in Uncategorized

June 15, 2009

“Conservatives” Are Single-Largest Ideological Group: Gallup Poll

By The Move Right

“Conservatives” Are Single-Largest Ideological Group

Percentage of “liberals” higher this decade than in early ’90s

by Lydia Saad
PRINCETON, NJ — Thus far in 2009, 40% of Americans interviewed in national Gallup Poll surveys describe their political views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and 21% as liberal. This represents a slight increase for conservatism in the U.S. since 2008, returning it to a level last seen in 2004. The 21% calling themselves liberal is in line with findings throughout this decade, but is up from the 1990s.

See Rest of Article from Gallup

Leave a comment | posted in Uncategorized

June 8, 2009

U.S. National Debt Clock

By The Move Right

Although I can’t embed the clock, I can at least give you the link. At the time of this post. 6/8/2009 @ 8:40 CST the national debt is climbing at a record pace.

National Debt: $11,398,000,000,000.00 and climbing.

Cost Per Citizen: $37,165.00

U.S. Spending Year To Date: $1,760,000,000,000.00

Spending Per Citizen: $5,753.00

U.S. Budget Deficit Year To Date: $791,761,000,000.00

Est. Medicare Fraud Year To Date: $26,000,000,000.00

There are many more stats on the list:

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , | posted in Cut Taxes

June 7, 2009

Europe leans right as voters choose EU Parliament, AP Story

By The Move Right

Europe leans right as voters choose EU Parliament, AP Story

ap_logo_106

By MICHAEL WEISSENSTEIN and ROBERT WIELAARD, Associated Press Writer –

BRUSSELS – Europe was leaning to the right Sunday as tens of millions of people voted in European Parliament elections, with conservative parties favored in many countries amid a global economic crisis.

Opinion surveys and exit polls showed right-leaning governments edging the opposition in Germany, Italy, France, Belgium and elsewhere. Conservative opposition parties were tied or ahead in Britain, Spain and some smaller countries.

Britain, Ireland, the Netherlands and five other EU nations cast ballots in the last three days, while the rest of the 27-nation bloc voted Sunday. Results for most countries were expected later in the day.

The EU parliament has evolved over five decades from a consultative legislature to one with the power to vote on or amend two-thirds of all EU laws.

But the Europe-wide elections were most important for many people as a snapshot of national political sentiment. High unemployment across Europe has increased voter dissatisfaction with mainstream parties, and skepticism over the EU’s power to help spur economic recovery.

Exit polls showed gains for far-right groups and other fringe parties amid predictions of record low turnout.

Exit polls in Germany showed Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservative Christian Democrats leading the center-left Social Democrats in Sunday’s EU vote but suffering some losses compared with the party’s strong performance in 2004. The pro-business Free Democrats scored up to 11 percent of the vote.

After Germany holds national elections in September, Merkel hopes to form a center-right government with the Free Democrats.

With most votes counted in Austria, the main rightist party gained strongly while the Social Democrats, the main party in the governing coalition, lost substantial ground.

But the big winner was the rightist Freedom Party, which more than doubled its strength over the 2004 elections to 13 percent of the vote. It campaigned on an anti-Islam platform, with posters proclaiming “The Occident in Christian hands.”

In the Netherlands, exit polls predicted Geert Wilders‘ anti-Islamic party would win more than 15 percent of the country’s votes, bruising a ruling alliance of Conservatives and Socialists.

Fringe groups could use five-year terms in the EU parliament’s 736 seats as a platform for their extreme views but were not expected to affect the assembly’s increasingly influential lawmaking on issues ranging from climate change to cell-phone roaming charges.

The parliament can also amend the EU budget — euro120 billion ($170 billion) this year — and approves candidates for the European Commission, the EU administration and the board of the European Central Bank.

In France, President Nicolas Sarkozy’s conservative UMP party has steadily held the lead in polls, with the Socialist Party second.

Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi’s Freedom People’s Party held a two-digit lead over his main center-left rival in the most recent polling despite a deep recession and a scandal over allegations he had an inappropriate relationship with an 18-year-old model.

“It shows how divided the center-left forces are at the moment. Normally sitting governments are punished at European elections,” said Jackie Davis, an analyst at the European Policy Centre in Brussels.

In Britain, dissident Labour legislators said a plot to oust Prime Minister Gordon Brown could accelerate after the party’s expected dismal results in the European elections are announced.

Opponents say the Labour leader has been so tainted by the economic crisis and a scandal over lawmakers’ expenses that the opposition Conservatives are virtually guaranteed to win the next national election, which must be called by June 2010.

Exit polls in Greece suggested the governing conservatives were set to suffer a defeat in the European Parliament elections, with the Eco-Greens, a new environmental party, making a strong showing.

Advance polls also favored the left-leaning party in Portugal.

In Spain, where the recession has driven unemployment to 17.4 percent, Europe‘s highest, a close race was expected between the ruling Socialists and the conservative opposition.

Poland‘s governing pro-business Civic Platform party was expected to claim around half of the country’s 50 seats, followed by the conservative nationalist Law and Justice party — a shift to the right for Poland at the European parliament.

In Hungary, where the governing Socialist Party raised taxes and cut social programs in a deep financial crisis, the main center-right opposition party, Fidesz, was slated to win at least 15 of 22 seats. Jobbik, a far-right party accused by critics of racism and anti-Semitism, was expected to win one or two.

In Sweden, the Green Party was expected to increase its support dramatically. The Pirate Party, which advocates shortening the duration of copyright protection and allowing noncommercial file-sharing between individuals, was expected to get one or two seats for the first time.

Romanian police set up checkpoints around the country after widespread allegations of voting fraud. Officials said parties were offering voters from 50-100 lei (euros 12-24, $17-$34) to vote in several towns.

___

Associated Press writers Geir Moulson and Patrick McGroarty in Berlin, Elaine Ganley in Paris, Daniel Woolls and Harold Heckle in Madrid, Danica Kirka in London, Constant Brand in Brussels, Ryan Lucas in Warsaw, George Jahn in Vienna, Derek Gatopoulos in Athens, Barry Hatton in Lisbon, Alison Mutler in Bucarest, Romania, Keith Moore in Stockholm and Veselin Toshkov in Sofia, Bulgaria, contributed to this report.

____________________

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090607/ap_on_re_eu/european_elections

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Conservatism, European Parliment, European Union

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.