Report: UK to move out of recession this quarter

Even anemic growth would be a pleasant change from recent declines. Whether the growth will continue is another story.

Britain is likely to move out of recession and post growth of 0.5 percent this quarter, a business survey by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) showed on Sunday. Posting its biggest-ever rise, ICAEW's Business Confidence Monitor (BCM) has moved to positive territory for the first time in two years. "This quarter's BCM suggests that the UK recession is at an end," said Michael Izza, chief executive of the ICAEW, predicting half a percent of growth in gross domestic product (GDP) after five quarters of declining output.

Read More......

Obama will appoint Bernanke to second term as chair of Fed

This news just broke:

President Obama plans to nominate Ben S. Bernanke to a second term as chairman of the Federal Reserve, administration officials said Monday night.

The nomination, while expected, comes after Mr. Bernanke has had perhaps the most tumultuous term of any Fed chairman, helping to steer the economy through its greatest downturn since the 1930's. Mr. Bernanke is a Republican who was appointed by President George W. Bush.

A top White House official said Mr. Obama had decided to keep Mr. Bernanke at the helm of the Fed because he had been bold and brilliant in his attempts to combat the financial crisis and the current deep economic recession.

Wall Street types love Bernanke. The big announcement will be made from Martha's Vineyard tomorrow. Making this announcement at a playground for the rich and famous is oddly appropriate.

I can't wait to read what Chris has to say about this one. Read More......

Change is tough, but being an idiot is easy

Another apologist explains why you shouldn't judge Obama "so early" in his administration.

If Obama serves two terms, we are a mere 8% of the way into his tenure. That strikes me as a little early for people to be throwing in the towel. So the interesting question of the near future will be: can the Obama movement go from the euphoric phase, in which everything seemed possible, into a more realist phase in which people come to terms with the very difficult and far less exhilarating tasks associated with governing, and the often dissatisfying victories that result from the legislative process?

Putting aside the fact that if we ignore our growing concerns about President Obama, he may not have a second term, we're back to that definition of insanity again. The concerns about Obama began almost two years ago for the gay community, when the McClurkin incident happened, and a good year ago (at least) for everyone else. This is not some "new" thing we're all noticing. It's a very old thing that has established a very disturbing, repeating, pattern of behavior. To suggest we ignore it, and perhaps this time it will go away, is both extremely naive and politically dangerous.

Now hang on to your seats for the next paragraph:

It's been a rocky month or six weeks, no denying it. The White House has made its share of errors. At the same time, I don't think anyone could have anticipated the rightwing response to the healthcare proposals. Forceful opposition and lies here and there, sure. But death panels and armed citizens coming to presidential rallies and comparisons to Hitler and polls showing that more than half of Republicans aren't convinced Obama is even an American citizen? No one saw this coming.

With all due respect, you're an idiot.

No one expected the Republicans to play dirty? No one expected them to put forth outlandish lies? No one expected them to demonize Obama and basically threaten his life, like they did for two years during the race for the presidential election? In what possible universe did you not expect the Republicans to act like they've been acting for the past twenty years, let alone the past two?

So now, liberals have to fight hard for something they're not terribly excited about. A health bill will likely have a very weak public option or it won't have one at all. But liberals will have to battle for that bill as if it's life and death (which in fact it will be for thousands of Americans), because its defeat would constitute a historic victory for the birthers and the gun-toters and the Hitler analogists.

So we should fight for a bad health care reform bill, and fight for every other "broken promise proposal" Obama puts forth on gay rights and every other issue he either has or will cave on, lest the bad guys win? The bad guys are winning, that's kind of the point.

The birthers and the teabaggers went nuts, the Dems and the White House got scared, and they caved. Well, actually, in all fairness, the White House caved early on. It's what they do, in the name of "bipartisanship."

The danger isn't that the birthers and teabaggers may win. They've already won. And you want us to codify their victory, and reinforce to the president that his actions to date have been acceptable - so we can have three more years of the same up until the Republicans win back the White House and both houses of Congress? I don't think so. Read More......

Wall Street thinks the health insurance "reform" debate has been very good for insurers too

John's post below reveals how the the new bill that is supposed to control insurance companies has instead become a financial bonanza for them. One of our very astute readers did some research to see how Wall Street has been treating those major insurance companies over the past couple weeks. It's true. August has been a financial bonanza for shareholders of Wellpoint (WLP), United Health (UNH), Aetna (AET), Cigna (CI)and Humana (HUM). While the S&P; index rose just less than 2%, those companies, which were supposed to have been reined in by health insurance reform, have seen their stocks rise from 6% to 12% since Congress recessed - that's three to six times as much (click on picture for larger image.)



This is embarrassing. Wall Street, which nearly destroyed the American economy last year, has already decided that Congress won't enact real health insurance reform. Read More......

The role of the media in the "death panel" lie

Ezra Klein has an interesting analysis of why the media reports on things like the "death panels" when they know it's not true:

One more thing that needs to be said on the media's role in health-care misinformation: This is not the fault of any -- or at least most -- individual reporters. Journalists hear this sort of criticism and, quite rightly, get their back up. After all, they don't tell lies. They often call out falsehoods. They write lots of good stories. Anyone reading them would be better informed for their troubles.

The problem isn't in the particulars. It's in the profession. Namely, it's in the competitive pressures to drift toward sensationalism and hot stories. A smear like "death panels" emerges and catches fire because it's fundamentally interesting. You could write a great thriller, or film a poignant drama, about death panels. Not so about health insurance exchanges. That said, the New York Times would probably never mention the lie if given the opportunity. But after it hits talk radio and explodes onto cable news and rips through the blogosphere, it stops being a lie and begins being a story. And though you can refuse to cover a lie, you can't refuse to cover a story. Nor is it even obvious you should. After all, if you don't correct the record, who will?

And before everyone beats up the media, the only reason the conservatives are able to take advantage of this fact about the media, and we aren't, is that our people are a bit dumb. I've taken advantage of this fact in the media for years with my advocacy campaigns. It doesn't always work, but it works a lot - if you have half a brain, and the backbone, to take advantage of it. Our side often has neither, and then complains when the conservatives blow things things up in the press. Read More......

Health care reform has become a "financial bonanza" for insurers

This is what you're being asked to fight, and pay $1 trillion, for. From the LA Times:

Lashed by liberals and threatened with more government regulation, the insurance industry nevertheless rallied its lobbying and grass-roots resources so successfully in the early stages of the healthcare overhaul deliberations that it is poised to reap a financial windfall.

The half-dozen leading overhaul proposals circulating in Congress would require all citizens to have health insurance, which would guarantee insurers tens of millions of new customers -- many of whom would get government subsidies to help pay the companies' premiums.

"It's a bonanza," said Robert Laszewski, a health insurance executive for 20 years who now tracks reform legislation as president of the consulting firm Health Policy and Strategy Associates Inc.

Some insurance company leaders continue to profess concern about the unpredictable course of President Obama's massive healthcare initiative, and they vigorously oppose elements of his agenda. But Laszewski said the industry's reaction to early negotiations boiled down to a single word: "Hallelujah!"

Read More......

Holder launches preliminary investigation into whether interrogation of detainees broke federal law

Att. Gen. Holder's statement is below, and here is Reuters' reporting.

STATEMENT OF ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER REGARDING A PRELIMINARY REVIEW INTO THE INTERROGATION OF CERTAIN DETAINEES

“The Office of Professional Responsibility has now submitted to me its report regarding the Office of Legal Counsel memoranda related to so-called enhanced interrogation techniques. I hope to be able to make as much of that report available as possible after it undergoes a declassification review and other steps. Among other findings, the report recommends that the Department reexamine previous decisions to decline prosecution in several cases related to the interrogation of certain detainees.

“I have reviewed the OPR report in depth. Moreover, I have closely examined the full, still-classified version of the 2004 CIA Inspector General’s report, as well as other relevant information available to the Department. As a result of my analysis of all of this material, I have concluded that the information known to me warrants opening a preliminary review into whether federal laws were violated in connection with the interrogation of specific detainees at overseas locations. The Department regularly uses preliminary reviews to gather information to determine whether there is sufficient predication to warrant a full investigation of a matter. I want to emphasize that neither the opening of a preliminary review nor, if evidence warrants it, the commencement of a full investigation, means that charges will necessarily follow.

“Assistant United States Attorney John Durham was appointed in 2008 by then-Attorney General Michael Mukasey to investigate the destruction of CIA videotapes of detainee interrogations. During the course of that investigation, Mr. Durham has gained great familiarity with much of the information that is relevant to the matter at hand. Accordingly, I have decided to expand his mandate to encompass this related review. Mr. Durham, who is a career prosecutor with the Department of Justice and who has assembled a strong investigative team of experienced professionals, will recommend to me whether there is sufficient predication for a full investigation into whether the law was violated in connection with the interrogation of certain detainees.

“There are those who will use my decision to open a preliminary review as a means of broadly criticizing the work of our nation’s intelligence community. I could not disagree more with that view. The men and women in our intelligence community perform an incredibly important service to our nation, and they often do so under difficult and dangerous circumstances. They deserve our respect and gratitude for the work they do. Further, they need to be protected from legal jeopardy when they act in good faith and within the scope of legal guidance. That is why I have made it clear in the past that the Department of Justice will not prosecute anyone who acted in good faith and within the scope of the legal guidance given by the Office of Legal Counsel regarding the interrogation of detainees. I want to reiterate that point today, and to underscore the fact that this preliminary review will not focus on those individuals.

“I share the President’s conviction that as a nation, we must, to the extent possible, look forward and not backward when it comes to issues such as these. While this Department will follow its obligation to take this preliminary step to examine possible violations of law, we will not allow our important work of keeping the American people safe to be sidetracked.

“I fully realize that my decision to commence this preliminary review will be controversial. As Attorney General, my duty is to examine the facts and to follow the law. In this case, given all of the information currently available, it is clear to me that this review is the only responsible course of action for me to take.”

Read More......

Lost opportunity on health care and banking reform

Paul Krugman:

The debate over the public option has, as I said, been depressing in its inanity. Opponents of the option — not just Republicans, but Democrats like Senator Kent Conrad and Senator Ben Nelson — have offered no coherent arguments against it. Mr. Nelson has warned ominously that if the option were available, Americans would choose it over private insurance — which he treats as a self-evidently bad thing, rather than as what should happen if the government plan was, in fact, better than what private insurers offer.

But it’s much the same on other fronts. Efforts to strengthen bank regulation appear to be losing steam, as opponents of reform declare that more regulation would lead to less financial innovation — this just months after the wonders of innovation brought our financial system to the edge of collapse, a collapse that was averted only with huge infusions of taxpayer funds....

[I]t’s hard to avoid the sense that a crucial opportunity is being missed, that we’re at what should be a turning point but are failing to make the turn.

Read More......

Is Wall Street pay disclosure asking for too much?

It seems as though asking for a bailout so the select few could maintain an extravagant lifestyle and multi-million dollar payouts was too much. Their lobbyist is now even bringing in a touching little story about one $25 million/year CEO who drives a simple car and who would be embarrassed if the news was published. Really? Is the Obama administration really protecting such characters? When Washington gives such a free ride to Wall Street while Americans are still bleeding is the problem. Perhaps Americans would be even more upset if they could put a name to a bonus but that sounds like more of a Wall Street problem. Maybe they would then start to realize just how excessive their pay was if the details were made public. Reuters:

As of now, the Treasury Department does not expect to make public information that would identify individual employees. It has said it will publish final determinations on pay packages in compliance with the Privacy Act, a federal law limiting disclosure of personal information.

Reuters last Wednesday submitted a request under freedom-of-information laws to review the pay proposals submitted by the seven companies. The Treasury has yet to respond.

Steven Eckhaus, a New York executive compensation attorney who represents executives on the lists submitted to the pay czar, said his clients have concerns about disclosure.

"One of my clients makes $25 million a year and drives a Honda," said Eckhaus, of Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP. "He tries to lead a fairly modest life and he would be horrified if what he makes appeared in the paper. Not only would his neighbors know, but his kids would know, and it would affect his ability to raise his kids. These are people, not a circus sideshow."

Read More......

Whose side are Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) and Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN) on in the health insurance reform debate? Not their constituents.

It's been maddening to watch Democrats on Capitol Hill undermine the health insurance reform agenda. Two of the biggest culprits are Senator Max Baucus, who basically gave all control of the process to Republican Chuck Grassley, and Blue Dog Rep. Jim Cooper, who helped kill health care reform back in 1994.

The question is: who are they representing in this discussion? Thanks to polling from DailyKos, we now know for sure, those two aren't representing their constituents.

On Baucus, after looking at the numbers, which showed more Montanans disapprove of his actions on health care and a plurality, by a 47% - 43% margin, want a public option, Markos asked:

So who is Baucus working for? The Republicans in (and outside) his state? The health care insurance companies that have purchased his Senate seat?

The DailyKos poll numbers for Cooper are even worse. 60% of his constituents disapprove of Cooper's actions on health care and 61% want a public option. Also, this is key info. about Cooper's district:

This is a Democratic district. Obama won it easily 56-43. Even John Kerry won it in 2004.

With that in mind, Jane Hamsher highlights one of the key findings: Cooper has a 16% approval on health care from Democrats in this very Democratic district. Cooper has made himself vulnerable.

All we've asked from Obama is to enact the agenda he promised us. That's all we want from Democrats on the Hill, too. It's what their constituents want. But, Baucus and Cooper, among others, have sold out to the insurance industry and the GOP. Read More......

Lieberman undercuts health care reform effort

Bloomberg:

Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman, speaking on CNN, called it “a real mistake to try to jam through” the total health overhaul package when the public is “nervous” about it.

President Obama intervened and saved Joe Liberman's political ass. Why is Lieberman being permitted, yet again, to undercut Obama on yet another legislative goal, this time Obama's number one issue of his entire administration? This is what we mean by telegraphing weakness. Read More......

GOP Latino outreach implodes

There is no excuse for Democrats having re-empowered people that are in such dire straits as the Republicans. Politics should be a cake walk against these folks. Read More......

Those patriotic Americans exercising their First Amendment rights at the health care forums have a new question for our president...

Had the White House demonized, rather than praised, these people several weeks ago, we might be in a different place today. Wonder how the White House feels about that "long tradition" now? Read More......

Dems considering using reconciliation for health care reform, but sounding 'wary' of it

Well, keep telegraphing weakness and wariness, and we can pretty much guarantee it either won't happen, or if it does, it will be an utter disaster. Why do Democrats insist on making their therapy sessions public?

"Senators from both parties are holding out hope for a bipartisan health care bill, but with a deal still elusive Democrats are eyeing an unpopular proposal to pass reform legislation under budget rules that would require the measure to get only 51 votes," Roll Call reports.

Even Democrats on the Sunday morning talk shows "sounded wary of using the reconciliation process in order to pass a health reform bill."

Read More......

Monday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

Your president is on vacation. Not expecting much action up on Martha's Vineyard. The Obama family is going to be very low-key. According to Bill Burton, Obama is "on vacation, though, and there are no scheduled plans."

The battle for real health insurance reform, however, continues unabated. "The Standing Up for the Public Option" ActBlue page has raised $391,000 for those members of the House who won't vote for a bill without a public option.

Cash for clunkers winds down today. Now, we can expect endless discussion about whether it worked.

We'll see what else pops up in this last week of August. Read More......

Roubini: "big risk" of double dip recession

It's hard to argue against Roubini's concern. Nothing out there suggests any immediate return to respectable economic growth and with costs mounting and government income declining, the return to higher taxes is inevitable. Sure the GOP cut taxes too deeply but when the Democrats raise taxes, the Republicans will have a feeding frenzy on the subject. The steady rise of inflation is a major concern as the dollar continues to get kicked around. Reuters:

Nouriel Roubini, one of the few economists who accurately predicted the magnitude of the world's recent financial troubles, sees a "big risk" of a double-dip recession, according to an opinion piece posted on the Financial Times' Web site on Sunday.

Roubini, a professor at New York University's Stern School of Business, said it appears the global economy will bottom out in the second half of this year, and that U.S. and western
European economies will likely experience "anemic" and "below trend" growth for at least a couple of years.

Yet he warned that policymakers face a "damned if they do and damned if they don't" conundrum in trying to unwind their massive fiscal and monetary stimuli to keep the global economy from toppling into a depression.

Read More......

Social Security checks to decrease for millions

Reduced checks for seniors will not go over well with this large voting block. Anyone who thinks seniors are not paying attention to the shocking pay increases on Wall Street following the massive bailout is kidding themselves. People can tolerate a few less bucks but not while they are having their noses rubbed in the extravagance of Wall Street. Especially when their own retirement investments are years away from recovering.

Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

The trustees who oversee Social Security are projecting there won't be a cost of living adjustment (COLA) for the next two years. That hasn't happened since automatic increases were adopted in 1975.

By law, Social Security benefits cannot go down. Nevertheless, monthly payments would drop for millions of people in the Medicare prescription drug program because the premiums, which often are deducted from Social Security payments, are scheduled to go up slightly.

Read More......

Small UK company executives also rewarding themselves despite recession

Maybe they're preparing themselves for the big stage, where small details such as falling profits means less bonus money but higher salaries. This is unsustainable.

Chief executives of companies listed on the Alternative Investment Market (Aim) enjoyed a pay rise of 10.8% in the last financial year – three times the rate of salary growth across the UK – despite a plunge in shares across the market.

The basic pay of Aim bosses rose to an average of £198,706 after the increase, according to the Incomes Data Services (IDS) executive compensation review, published today. The increase was well above the growth rate of pay across Britain in 2008, which was 3.6%.

Over the same period, the Aim all-share index, made up of Britain's publicly traded smaller and medium-sized companies, fell by 60%, the study said.

Read More......