Death penalty is breaking the budget in many states

For those who can't put aside the moral issues related to the death penalty or the problem of killing innocent people from time to time or the disproportionate percentages related to race, maybe the budget problems will have an impact. Let the far right defend breaking the budget and siding with the death penalty rather than something far more valuable or effective. CNN:

At 678, California has the nation's largest death row population, yet the state has not executed anyone in four years.

But it spends more than $130 million a year on its capital punishment system -- housing and prosecuting inmates and coping with an appellate system that has kept some convicted killers waiting for an execution date since the late 1970s.

This is according to a new report that concludes that states are wasting millions on an inefficient death penalty system, diverting scarce funds from other anti-crime and law enforcement programs.

Read the rest of this post...

Being online is good for your brain

Excellent! Let's just hope the benefits are not only for older people.

Researchers found that older adults who started browsing the Web experienced improved brain function after only a few days.

"You can teach an old brain new technology tricks," said Dr. Gary Small, a psychiatry professor at the Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior at the University of California, Los Angeles, and the author of iBrain. With people who had little Internet experience, "we found that after just a week of practice, there was a much greater extent of activity particularly in the areas of the brain that make decisions, the thinking brain -- which makes sense because, when you're searching online, you're making a lot of decisions," he said. "It's interactive."

Read the rest of this post...

Rep Weiner: One Senator is not bipartisanship

From The Hill:

Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) said on Tuesday that the Obama administration is "half-pregnant" with health insurers and pharmaceutical companies, which may jeopardize the success of reform.

The congressman -- who is a leading liberal voice in the healthcare reform debate -- said that rumored deals the White House has struck with big pharmaceutical companies and insurers may guide them to abandon key elements of reform, such as a public health insurance option.

"The Obama administration is trying to be, I don't know how to put it, half-pregnant with the insurance industry and the pharmaceutical companies," he told WNYC Radio today. "They're to some degree the source of our problem."
....

"I think the White House very much wants to have, even if it's just one person, the ability to say that this is a bipartisan outcome," Weiner said. "And my frustration is we are really as a party are flirting with the notion of minority rule here."....

Weiner challenged his party leaders to include the option, saying that Democrats are "perilously close" to failing to pass a healthcare bill that would reduce costs and cover enough uninsured individuals.

"Are we going to plow through this or are we going to keep worshiping at the altar of bipartisanship even when it only means essentially one Senator?"

What's interesting is to see more and more Democrats publicly criticizing the White House approach to health care reform. Will it be enough? Read the rest of this post...

With "robust public option," House bill "scores" well

Greg Sargent got a tip from Capitol Hill with some very important news about the House health insurance reform bill:

In another step forward for the public option, I’m told reliably by a source that House leaders have been given a new Congressional Budget Office “score” finding that the evolving House bill — when you include a robust public option — reduces the deficit and is under the President’s cost goal of $900 billion.

The CBO estimate, which is newer than the one reported over the weekend, will likely be discussed at the Dem caucus meeting tonight. This is a step forward because it could make it more palatable to Blue Dogs to support a House bill with a robust public plan, meaning one that reimburses providers at Medicare rates plus five percent.

Max Baucus, Kent Conrad and the Blue Dogs have made a very big deal about the CBO score for the health care legislation. This latest development could, and should, pave the way for a solid reform bill -- with the "robust public option." It saves money. Who can argue with that? Besides the insurance industry lobbyists and their toadies in Congress. Read the rest of this post...

Compassionate conservatism: 1 in 6 Americans living in poverty

Who could have guessed that giving the richest everything they wanted would result in such embarrassing numbers?

A revised formula for calculating medical costs and geographic variations show that approximately 47.4 million Americans last year lived in poverty, 7 million more than the government's official figure.

The disparity occurs because of differing formulas the Census Bureau and the National Academy of Science use for calculating the poverty rate. The NAS formula shows the poverty rate to be at 15.8 percent, or nearly 1 in 6 Americans, according to calculations released this week. That's higher than the 13.2 percent, or 39.8 million, figure made available recently under the original government formula.

Read the rest of this post...

FOX News caught cropping Dunn quote to falsely claim she said Mao was "the man she turns to most"

Well now color me confused. I thought FOX News was Fair and Balanced? But today we learn from Media Matters that in fact FOX has been peddling a "quote" from White House communications director Anita Dunn, supposing claiming that she turns to Mao and Mother Teresa "the most" in her life, and in fact, that's not what she said at all.

Dunn said that she turns to them most "to basically deliver a simple point, which is, you're going to make choices." The difference isn't insignificant. The FOX quote says that Dunn turns to Mao the most in her life, on any and every issue - that there is no one in the world (other than Mother Teresa) who Dunn looks to for guidance on everything in her life than Mao. What Dunn actually said is that, on the singular lesson of "having to make choices" in life, her favorite quotes are from Mao and Mother Teresa. A rather huge difference, especially since FOX News is now claiming that Dunn is a Maoist who endorsed the murders of countless Chinese during the Cultural Revolution.

It's really rather sick what FOX is doing. And, ironically, FOX has now proven Dunn's point she made last week, that FOX is nothing more than a political operation of the Republican party.

FOX also needs to answer the question of whether their own "news" host Chris Wallace was the secret "concerned parent" they had on Glenn Beck's show yesterday to, again, slur Anita Dunn. Newsweek's Richard Wolffe was on Olbermann last night asking what ties Chris Wallace may have had to this entire smear. If Wallace was truly involved, then any lingering questions about his status as a GOP activist, rather than a real journalist, will be resolved.

At some point, someone needs to ask Democratic members of Congress why they keep going on FOX. Someone needs to ask them whose side they're on - the White House's, or FOX's. Read the rest of this post...

Healthcare bills lack protections against treatment denials, experts say

Great. This is why we need a public option. So that there is a true alternative to the private insurance market. Who out there honestly thinks the insurance companies are going to implement whatever be we pass in good faith? According to this story in the LA Times, they're just going to deny us various treatments.

Despite growing frustration with the way health insurers deny medical treatments, major healthcare bills pending in Congress would give patients little new power to challenge those sometimes life-and-death decisions....

By requiring insurers to cover everyone, regardless of pre-existing conditions, healthcare reform will make it more difficult for insurers to control their costs, or "bend the cost curve," by avoiding sick people.

That leaves insurers with the other big cost-containment tool: turning down requests to cover treatments.

"There are going to be a lot of denials," said insurance industry analyst Robert Laszewski, a former health insurance executive....

Experts said the legislation under consideration does not significantly enhance patient protections against insurers refusing to cover requests for treatment. Most people currently have no right to challenge health insurers' treatment decisions by suing them for damages.

Read the rest of this post...

Hill Aides: More senators would back Public Plan if Obama pushed harder

Joe and I have been arguing this for a while. Now Sam Stein at the Huffington Post has found Democratic Hill staffers confirming it. If the White House actually tried, we could have the public option. Let me repeat - the problem isn't that we don't have the votes, the problem is that the White House refuses to even try to get the votes. And if they did try, they could likely get them.

There is a growing sense on Capitol Hill that the White House's refusal to weigh in more forcefully in the health care debate could come at the cost of a public option for insurance coverage.

Democratic aides said that a "handful" of senators who are skeptical of a public plan likely could be persuaded if not to support it then at least to oppose a Republican filibuster, if the administration were to apply a bit more pressure -- or even guidance.
"There is a clear sense that it would be helpful," said one senior Democratic aide. "Throughout this entire debate the White House line has been 'We will weigh in when it is necessary'.... Well now we need 60 votes. So if it's not necessary now, then when will it be?"

"I think folks in general in Congress were looking to the president to clearly define his feeling on the issue," another aide said. "And I don't think he has done that on the public option from the get-go... With a lot of senators nervous because of elections or other political dynamics, it would be helpful for the president to send a strong signal that this is what he wants in the final bill."

Joe and I have lived in this town a long time. We've worked in politics just as long. The President's "I care, but not that much" message about the public option is signaling that he doesn't care about the public option at all. And the Hill is responding in kind. All we need to pass thing thing is for the president to lead. That's how legislating works in this town. The President has enormous influence - enormous. And the fact that he's still sitting out, the fact that Rahm again said on Sunday that it isn't yet time for the President to get involved in health care reform, is simply bizarre.

The polls about the public option are on our side. Is the White House? Read the rest of this post...

CEO benefits continue at bailed out banks

In the real world, failed CEOs would pay a price for their failed actions. On Wall Street, results are meaningless for so-called business leaders. How much longer can such behavior be tolerated?

Even as the nation's biggest financial firms were struggling and the federal government was spending hundreds of billions of dollars to save many of them, the companies as a group were boosting the perks and benefits they pay their chief executives.

The firms, accounting for more $350 billion in federal bailout funds, increased these perks and benefits 4 percent on average last year, according to an analysis of corporate disclosures filed in recent months.

Read the rest of this post...

If this video is real... wow

Read the rest of this post...

Another Republican talks about killing Democrats

The talk began during the Sarah Palin rallies on the campaign, when a Palin supporter yelled "Kill him!" about Obama while Palin did nothing, and continues to this day. Remember the Teabaggers marching on the mall, talking about "next time we bring our guns"? Remember the crazy Republicans bringing guns to meeting where Obama was speaking? There is a serious violence and extremism problem in the Republican party. If you or I were to joke about assassinating members of Congress, the FBI wouldn't let us shrug it off as a joke. But this joker talks about shooting congressional Democrats, and it's funny. FOX News' Glenn Beck talks about poisoning House Speaker Pelosi and it's funny.

The GOP is a party rather focused on jokes about murder and assassination. Is this a reflection on the poor caliber of its politicians, or the poor caliber of its voters? Read the rest of this post...

There will be a run-off in Afghanistan

The first election was, basically, a disaster. And, after eight years of neglect from the Bush administration, that flawed presidential race -- with no legitimate outcome -- put the U.S. in an even worse position. From Reuters:

Afghan President Hamid Karzai must face an election run-off against his main rival on November 7, officials said on Tuesday, to resolve a disputed first round that plunged the country into months of political uncertainty.

So, Karzai's acceptance of the run-off is an important step for progress. And, it surely helped to have Senator John Kerry in Afghanistan when this decision was made. Read the rest of this post...

In NJ, GOPer Christie may have used US Attorney's office to benefit his political campaign. That's so Karl Rove (and so illegal).

The GOP candidate for Governor in New Jersey, Chris Christie, began the race by touting his law enforcement and ethics credentials. Over the summer, we learned that the reality didn't match the rhetoric. A story in today's New York Times completely destroyed what's left of Christie's credibility. Christie's former top aide, Michelle Brown, used the U.S. Attorney's Office to aid Christie's gubernatorial campaign:

When news broke in August that the former United States attorney, Christopher J. Christie, had lent $46,000 to a top aide in the federal prosecutor’s office, he said he was merely helping a friend in need. He also said the aide, Michele Brown, had done nothing to help his gubernatorial campaign.

But interviews with federal law enforcement officials suggest that Ms. Brown used her position in two significant and possibly improper ways to try to aid Mr. Christie in his run for governor.

Brown interfered with Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and tried to time a major corruption bust to benefit Christie. As we've become well aware, Karl Rove completely politicized the U.S. Attorneys across the country. Christie's actions were standard operating procedure for appointees of George Bush. Here's the key paragraph:

The possibility that Ms. Brown may have helped Mr. Christie’s campaign from inside the United States attorney’s office casts a new light on their relationship and on the prosecutor’s office. Federal law and Justice Department policy prohibit prosecutors from using their “official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election.”

Devastating.

It sure does cast new light on the relationship between Christie and Brown. Over the summer, polls showed Christie way ahead of Governor Corzine. Latest polling, via Taegan Goddard, shows a dead heat -- and Democrats are coming home to Corzine. Read the rest of this post...

Tuesday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

This morning, the President has a meeting in the Oval Office with Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. That war finally seems to be winding down even as the war in Afghanistan, which George Bush and Dick Cheney ignored, gets worse.

Still waiting for the Department of Defense Authorization conference report to hit the Senate floor. It's already been approved by the House. We're starting to hear that Republicans are playing games to prevent this bill from moving. Why? Because the Defense authorization conference reports contains the Hate Crimes bill. We'll have more on this, but it's looking like the GOP's homophobia is the culprit -- again.

Two weeks til Election Day in Virginia (Governor and Legislature), New Jersey (Governor and Legislature) and the ballot measures in Maine (No on 1), Washington State (Approve Referendum 71) and Kalamazoo, Michigan.

Let's thread the news.... Read the rest of this post...

Another oil price spike around the corner?

The global economy could be in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation with energy prices. Oil has been climbing yet again and for the moment, supplies appear to be OK. The problem ahead is that if the global economy is indeed recovering (a debatable point though trending in that direction) then the current supply levels will be inadequate. That's where we start to have a problem with steep prices, again.

US light crude futures pushed above $79 a barrel, supported by the view that a recovering world economy would raise demand for crude. Oil prices have more than doubled from the low point they hit in the spring, but are still around half the all-time high of nearly $150 a barrel they reached in early summer last year.

Analysts have been surprised at the recent resilience of oil prices given the impact on energy demand of the global recession. In spite of this year's volatility in the oil price, the underlying trend for a decade has been for it to rise steadily.

Read the rest of this post...

Afghanistan to hold new round of voting

It's been obvious for some time that the voting was riddled with problems. Karzai has finally come around to accepting that he did not really cross the 50% mark required for a victory. On to round two.

Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, will bow to international pressure today and concede that he did not win a clear ­majority in Afghanistan's bitterly contested election, and also accept there should be a second round of voting.

Senior officials in Kabul said Karzai would resolve the political crisis that has developed over the widespread fraud in the August presidential election, after a frantic round of diplomatic manoeuvring led by John Kerry, the chairman of the Senate foreign affairs committee.

Read the rest of this post...