Pages

Thursday, January 28, 2010

State of the Union Address 1/27/10 by President Obama

This is the written text of President Obama's State of the Union Address, a very impressive speech and He touched on a whole range of topics making JOBS the #1 item on His list for 2010.....




The White House
Office of the Press Secretary

Remarks by the President in State of the Union Address

U.S. Capitol

9:11 P.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT:  Madam Speaker, Vice President Biden, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans:
Our Constitution declares that from time to time, the President shall give to Congress information about the state of our union.  For 220 years, our leaders have fulfilled this duty. They've done so during periods of prosperity and tranquility.  And they've done so in the midst of war and depression; at moments of great strife and great struggle.
It's tempting to look back on these moments and assume that our progress was inevitable -– that America was always destined to succeed.  But when the Union was turned back at Bull Run, and the Allies first landed at Omaha Beach, victory was very much in doubt.  When the market crashed on Black Tuesday, and civil rights marchers were beaten on Bloody Sunday, the future was anything but certain.  These were the times that tested the courage of our convictions, and the strength of our union.  And despite all our divisions and disagreements, our hesitations and our fears, America prevailed because we chose to move forward as one nation, as one people.
Again, we are tested.  And again, we must answer history's call.
One year ago, I took office amid two wars, an economy rocked by a severe recession, a financial system on the verge of collapse, and a government deeply in debt.  Experts from across the political spectrum warned that if we did not act, we might face a second depression.  So we acted -– immediately and aggressively.  And one year later, the worst of the storm has passed.
But the devastation remains.  One in 10 Americans still cannot find work.  Many businesses have shuttered.  Home values have declined.  Small towns and rural communities have been hit especially hard.  And for those who'd already known poverty, life has become that much harder.
This recession has also compounded the burdens that America's families have been dealing with for decades –- the burden of working harder and longer for less; of being unable to save enough to retire or help kids with college.
So I know the anxieties that are out there right now.  They're not new.  These struggles are the reason I ran for President.  These struggles are what I've witnessed for years in places like Elkhart, Indiana; Galesburg, Illinois.  I hear about them in the letters that I read each night.  The toughest to read are those written by children -– asking why they have to move from their home, asking when their mom or dad will be able to go back to work.
For these Americans and so many others, change has not come fast enough.  Some are frustrated; some are angry.  They don't understand why it seems like bad behavior on Wall Street is rewarded, but hard work on Main Street isn't; or why Washington has been unable or unwilling to solve any of our problems.  They're tired of the partisanship and the shouting and the pettiness.  They know we can't afford it.  Not now. 
So we face big and difficult challenges.  And what the American people hope -– what they deserve -– is for all of us, Democrats and Republicans, to work through our differences; to overcome the numbing weight of our politics.  For while the people who sent us here have different backgrounds, different stories, different beliefs, the anxieties they face are the same. The aspirations they hold are shared:  a job that pays the bills; a chance to get ahead; most of all, the ability to give their children a better life.
You know what else they share?  They share a stubborn resilience in the face of adversity.  After one of the most difficult years in our history, they remain busy building cars and teaching kids, starting businesses and going back to school. They're coaching Little League and helping their neighbors.  One woman wrote to me and said, "We are strained but hopeful, struggling but encouraged."
It's because of this spirit -– this great decency and great strength -– that I have never been more hopeful about America's future than I am tonight.  (Applause.)  Despite our hardships, our union is strong.  We do not give up.  We do not quit.  We do not allow fear or division to break our spirit.  In this new decade, it's time the American people get a government that matches their decency; that embodies their strength.  (Applause.)   
And tonight, tonight I'd like to talk about how together we can deliver on that promise.  
It begins with our economy.
Our most urgent task upon taking office was to shore up the same banks that helped cause this crisis.  It was not easy to do. And if there's one thing that has unified Democrats and Republicans, and everybody in between, it's that we all hated the bank bailout.  I hated it -- (applause.)  I hated it.  You hated it.  It was about as popular as a root canal.  (Laughter.) 
But when I ran for President, I promised I wouldn't just do what was popular -– I would do what was necessary.  And if we had allowed the meltdown of the financial system, unemployment might be double what it is today.  More businesses would certainly have closed.  More homes would have surely been lost.
So I supported the last administration's efforts to create the financial rescue program.  And when we took that program over, we made it more transparent and more accountable.  And as a result, the markets are now stabilized, and we've recovered most of the money we spent on the banks.  (Applause.)  Most but not all.
To recover the rest, I've proposed a fee on the biggest banks.  (Applause.)  Now, I know Wall Street isn't keen on this idea.  But if these firms can afford to hand out big bonuses again, they can afford a modest fee to pay back the taxpayers who rescued them in their time of need.  (Applause.)
Now, as we stabilized the financial system, we also took steps to get our economy growing again, save as many jobs as possible, and help Americans who had become unemployed.
That's why we extended or increased unemployment benefits for more than 18 million Americans; made health insurance 65 percent cheaper for families who get their coverage through COBRA; and passed 25 different tax cuts.
Now, let me repeat:  We cut taxes.  We cut taxes for 95 percent of working families.  (Applause.)  We cut taxes for small businesses.  We cut taxes for first-time homebuyers.  We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children.  We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college.  (Applause.)
I thought I'd get some applause on that one.  (Laughter and applause.)
As a result, millions of Americans had more to spend on gas and food and other necessities, all of which helped businesses keep more workers.  And we haven't raised income taxes by a single dime on a single person.  Not a single dime.  (Applause.)
Because of the steps we took, there are about two million Americans working right now who would otherwise be unemployed.  (Applause.)  Two hundred thousand work in construction and clean energy; 300,000 are teachers and other education workers.  Tens of thousands are cops, firefighters, correctional officers, first responders.  (Applause.)  And we're on track to add another one and a half million jobs to this total by the end of the year.
The plan that has made all of this possible, from the tax cuts to the jobs, is the Recovery Act.  (Applause.)  That's right -– the Recovery Act, also known as the stimulus bill.  (Applause.)  Economists on the left and the right say this bill has helped save jobs and avert disaster.  But you don't have to take their word for it.  Talk to the small business in Phoenix that will triple its workforce because of the Recovery Act.  Talk to the window manufacturer in Philadelphia who said he used to be skeptical about the Recovery Act, until he had to add two more work shifts just because of the business it created.  Talk to the single teacher raising two kids who was told by her principal in the last week of school that because of the Recovery Act, she wouldn't be laid off after all.
There are stories like this all across America.  And after two years of recession, the economy is growing again.  Retirement funds have started to gain back some of their value.  Businesses are beginning to invest again, and slowly some are starting to hire again.  
But I realize that for every success story, there are other stories, of men and women who wake up with the anguish of not knowing where their next paycheck will come from; who send out resumes week after week and hear nothing in response.  That is why jobs must be our number-one focus in 2010, and that's why I'm calling for a new jobs bill tonight.  (Applause.) 
Now, the true engine of job creation in this country will always be America's businesses.  (Applause.)  But government can create the conditions necessary for businesses to expand and hire more workers.
We should start where most new jobs do –- in small businesses, companies that begin when -- (applause) -- companies that begin when an entrepreneur -- when an entrepreneur takes a chance on a dream, or a worker decides it's time she became her own boss.  Through sheer grit and determination, these companies have weathered the recession and they're ready to grow.  But when you talk to small businessowners in places like Allentown, Pennsylvania, or Elyria, Ohio, you find out that even though banks on Wall Street are lending again, they're mostly lending to bigger companies.  Financing remains difficult for small businessowners across the country, even those that are making a profit.
So tonight, I'm proposing that we take $30 billion of the money Wall Street banks have repaid and use it to help community banks give small businesses the credit they need to stay afloat. (Applause.)  I'm also proposing a new small business tax credit
-– one that will go to over one million small businesses who hire new workers or raise wages.  (Applause.)  While we're at it, let's also eliminate all capital gains taxes on small business investment, and provide a tax incentive for all large businesses and all small businesses to invest in new plants and equipment.  (Applause.)
Next, we can put Americans to work today building the infrastructure of tomorrow.  (Applause.)  From the first railroads to the Interstate Highway System, our nation has always been built to compete.  There's no reason Europe or China should have the fastest trains, or the new factories that manufacture clean energy products.
Tomorrow, I'll visit Tampa, Florida, where workers will soon break ground on a new high-speed railroad funded by the Recovery Act.  (Applause.)  There are projects like that all across this country that will create jobs and help move our nation's goods, services, and information.  (Applause.)
We should put more Americans to work building clean energy facilities -- (applause) -- and give rebates to Americans who make their homes more energy-efficient, which supports clean energy jobs.  (Applause.)  And to encourage these and other businesses to stay within our borders, it is time to finally slash the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas, and give those tax breaks to companies that create jobs right here in the United States of America.  (Applause.)
Now, the House has passed a jobs bill that includes some of these steps.  (Applause.)  As the first order of business this year, I urge the Senate to do the same, and I know they will.  (Applause.)  They will.  (Applause.)  People are out of work.  They're hurting.  They need our help.  And I want a jobs bill on my desk without delay.  (Applause.)
But the truth is, these steps won't make up for the seven million jobs that we've lost over the last two years.  The only way to move to full employment is to lay a new foundation for long-term economic growth, and finally address the problems that America's families have confronted for years. 
We can't afford another so-called economic "expansion" like the one from the last decade –- what some call the "lost decade" -– where jobs grew more slowly than during any prior expansion; where the income of the average American household declined while the cost of health care and tuition reached record highs; where prosperity was built on a housing bubble and financial speculation.
From the day I took office, I've been told that addressing our larger challenges is too ambitious; such an effort would be too contentious.  I've been told that our political system is too gridlocked, and that we should just put things on hold for a while.
For those who make these claims, I have one simple question: How long should we wait?  How long should America put its future on hold?  (Applause.)
You see, Washington has been telling us to wait for decades, even as the problems have grown worse.  Meanwhile, China is not waiting to revamp its economy.  Germany is not waiting.  India is not waiting.  These nations -- they're not standing still.  These nations aren't playing for second place.  They're putting more emphasis on math and science.  They're rebuilding their infrastructure.  They're making serious investments in clean energy because they want those jobs.  Well, I do not accept second place for the United States of America.  (Applause.)
As hard as it may be, as uncomfortable and contentious as the debates may become, it's time to get serious about fixing the problems that are hampering our growth.
Now, one place to start is serious financial reform.  Look, I am not interested in punishing banks.  I'm interested in protecting our economy.  A strong, healthy financial market makes it possible for businesses to access credit and create new jobs. It channels the savings of families into investments that raise incomes.  But that can only happen if we guard against the same recklessness that nearly brought down our entire economy.
We need to make sure consumers and middle-class families have the information they need to make financial decisions.  (Applause.)  We can't allow financial institutions, including those that take your deposits, to take risks that threaten the whole economy. 
Now, the House has already passed financial reform with many of these changes.  (Applause.)  And the lobbyists are trying to kill it.  But we cannot let them win this fight.  (Applause.)  And if the bill that ends up on my desk does not meet the test of real reform, I will send it back until we get it right.  We've got to get it right.  (Applause.)
Next, we need to encourage American innovation.  Last year, we made the largest investment in basic research funding in history -– (applause) -- an investment that could lead to the world's cheapest solar cells or treatment that kills cancer cells but leaves healthy ones untouched.  And no area is more ripe for such innovation than energy.  You can see the results of last year's investments in clean energy -– in the North Carolina company that will create 1,200 jobs nationwide helping to make advanced batteries; or in the California business that will put a thousand people to work making solar panels.
But to create more of these clean energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, more incentives.  And that means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country.  (Applause.)  It means making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development.  (Applause.)  It means continued investment in advanced biofuels and clean coal technologies.  (Applause.)  And, yes, it means passing a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America.  (Applause.)
I am grateful to the House for passing such a bill last year.  (Applause.)  And this year I'm eager to help advance the bipartisan effort in the Senate.  (Applause.)
I know there have been questions about whether we can afford such changes in a tough economy.  I know that there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change.  But here's the thing -- even if you doubt the evidence, providing incentives for energy-efficiency and clean energy are the right thing to do for our future -– because the nation that leads the clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy.  And America must be that nation.  (Applause.)
Third, we need to export more of our goods.  (Applause.)  Because the more products we make and sell to other countries, the more jobs we support right here in America.  (Applause.)  So tonight, we set a new goal:  We will double our exports over the next five years, an increase that will support two million jobs in America.  (Applause.)  To help meet this goal, we're launching a National Export Initiative that will help farmers and small businesses increase their exports, and reform export controls consistent with national security.  (Applause.)
We have to seek new markets aggressively, just as our competitors are.  If America sits on the sidelines while other nations sign trade deals, we will lose the chance to create jobs on our shores.  (Applause.)  But realizing those benefits also means enforcing those agreements so our trading partners play by the rules.  (Applause.)  And that's why we'll continue to shape a Doha trade agreement that opens global markets, and why we will strengthen our trade relations in Asia and with key partners like South Korea and Panama and Colombia.  (Applause.)
Fourth, we need to invest in the skills and education of our people.  (Applause.)
Now, this year, we've broken through the stalemate between left and right by launching a national competition to improve our schools.  And the idea here is simple:  Instead of rewarding failure, we only reward success.  Instead of funding the status quo, we only invest in reform -- reform that raises student achievement; inspires students to excel in math and science; and turns around failing schools that steal the future of too many young Americans, from rural communities to the inner city.  In the 21st century, the best anti-poverty program around is a world-class education.  (Applause.)  And in this country, the success of our children cannot depend more on where they live than on their potential.
When we renew the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, we will work with Congress to expand these reforms to all 50 states.  Still, in this economy, a high school diploma no longer guarantees a good job.  That's why I urge the Senate to follow the House and pass a bill that will revitalize our community colleges, which are a career pathway to the children of so many working families.  (Applause.)
To make college more affordable, this bill will finally end the unwarranted taxpayer subsidies that go to banks for student loans.  (Applause.)  Instead, let's take that money and give families a $10,000 tax credit for four years of college and increase Pell Grants.  (Applause.)  And let's tell another one million students that when they graduate, they will be required to pay only 10 percent of their income on student loans, and all of their debt will be forgiven after 20 years –- and forgiven after 10 years if they choose a career in public service, because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they chose to go to college.  (Applause.)
And by the way, it's time for colleges and universities to get serious about cutting their own costs -– (applause) -- because they, too, have a responsibility to help solve this problem.
Now, the price of college tuition is just one of the burdens facing the middle class.  That's why last year I asked Vice President Biden to chair a task force on middle-class families.  That's why we're nearly doubling the child care tax credit, and making it easier to save for retirement by giving access to every worker a retirement account and expanding the tax credit for those who start a nest egg.  That's why we're working to lift the value of a family's single largest investment –- their home.  The steps we took last year to shore up the housing market have allowed millions of Americans to take out new loans and save an average of $1,500 on mortgage payments.    
This year, we will step up refinancing so that homeowners can move into more affordable mortgages.  (Applause.)  And it is precisely to relieve the burden on middle-class families that we still need health insurance reform.  (Applause.)  Yes, we do.  (Applause.)
Now, let's clear a few things up.  (Laughter.)  I didn't choose to tackle this issue to get some legislative victory under my belt.  And by now it should be fairly obvious that I didn't take on health care because it was good politics.  (Laughter.)  I took on health care because of the stories I've heard from Americans with preexisting conditions whose lives depend on getting coverage; patients who've been denied coverage; families –- even those with insurance -– who are just one illness away from financial ruin.
After nearly a century of trying -- Democratic administrations, Republican administrations -- we are closer than ever to bringing more security to the lives of so many Americans.  The approach we've taken would protect every American from the worst practices of the insurance industry.  It would give small businesses and uninsured Americans a chance to choose an affordable health care plan in a competitive market.  It would require every insurance plan to cover preventive care.
And by the way, I want to acknowledge our First Lady, Michelle Obama, who this year is creating a national movement to tackle the epidemic of childhood obesity and make kids healthier. (Applause.)  Thank you.  She gets embarrassed.  (Laughter.)
Our approach would preserve the right of Americans who have insurance to keep their doctor and their plan.  It would reduce costs and premiums for millions of families and businesses.  And according to the Congressional Budget Office -– the independent organization that both parties have cited as the official scorekeeper for Congress –- our approach would bring down the deficit by as much as $1 trillion over the next two decades.  (Applause.)
Still, this is a complex issue, and the longer it was debated, the more skeptical people became.  I take my share of the blame for not explaining it more clearly to the American people.  And I know that with all the lobbying and horse-trading, the process left most Americans wondering, "What's in it for me?"
But I also know this problem is not going away.  By the time I'm finished speaking tonight, more Americans will have lost their health insurance.  Millions will lose it this year.  Our deficit will grow.  Premiums will go up.  Patients will be denied the care they need.  Small business owners will continue to drop coverage altogether.  I will not walk away from these Americans, and neither should the people in this chamber.  (Applause.)
So, as temperatures cool, I want everyone to take another look at the plan we've proposed.  There's a reason why many doctors, nurses, and health care experts who know our system best consider this approach a vast improvement over the status quo.  But if anyone from either party has a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors, and stop insurance company abuses, let me know.  (Applause.)  Let me know.  Let me know.  (Applause.)  I'm eager to see it.
Here's what I ask Congress, though:  Don't walk away from reform.  Not now.  Not when we are so close.  Let us find a way to come together and finish the job for the American people.  (Applause.)  Let's get it done.  Let's get it done.  (Applause.)
Now, even as health care reform would reduce our deficit, it's not enough to dig us out of a massive fiscal hole in which we find ourselves.  It's a challenge that makes all others that much harder to solve, and one that's been subject to a lot of political posturing.  So let me start the discussion of government spending by setting the record straight.
At the beginning of the last decade, the year 2000, America had a budget surplus of over $200 billion.  (Applause.)  By the time I took office, we had a one-year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade.  Most of this was the result of not paying for two wars, two tax cuts, and an expensive prescription drug program.  On top of that, the effects of the recession put a $3 trillion hole in our budget.  All this was before I walked in the door.  (Laughter and applause.)
Now -- just stating the facts.  Now, if we had taken office in ordinary times, I would have liked nothing more than to start bringing down the deficit.  But we took office amid a crisis.  And our efforts to prevent a second depression have added another $1 trillion to our national debt.  That, too, is a fact.
I'm absolutely convinced that was the right thing to do.  But families across the country are tightening their belts and making tough decisions.  The federal government should do the same.  (Applause.)  So tonight, I'm proposing specific steps to pay for the trillion dollars that it took to rescue the economy last year.
Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years.  (Applause.)  Spending related to our national security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will not be affected.  But all other discretionary government programs will.  Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need and sacrifice what we don't.  And if I have to enforce this discipline by veto, I will.  (Applause.) 
We will continue to go through the budget, line by line, page by page, to eliminate programs that we can't afford and don't work.  We've already identified $20 billion in savings for next year.  To help working families, we'll extend our middle-class tax cuts.  But at a time of record deficits, we will not continue tax cuts for oil companies, for investment fund managers, and for those making over $250,000 a year.  We just can't afford it.  (Applause.)
Now, even after paying for what we spent on my watch, we'll still face the massive deficit we had when I took office.  More importantly, the cost of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will continue to skyrocket.  That's why I've called for a bipartisan fiscal commission, modeled on a proposal by Republican Judd Gregg and Democrat Kent Conrad.  (Applause.)  This can't be one of those Washington gimmicks that lets us pretend we solved a problem.  The commission will have to provide a specific set of solutions by a certain deadline.
Now, yesterday, the Senate blocked a bill that would have created this commission.  So I'll issue an executive order that will allow us to go forward, because I refuse to pass this problem on to another generation of Americans.  (Applause.)  And when the vote comes tomorrow, the Senate should restore the pay-as-you-go law that was a big reason for why we had record surpluses in the 1990s.  (Applause.) 

Now, I know that some in my own party will argue that we can't address the deficit or freeze government spending when so many are still hurting.  And I agree -- which is why this freeze won't take effect until next year -- (laughter) -- when the economy is stronger.  That's how budgeting works.  (Laughter and applause.)  But understand –- understand if we don't take meaningful steps to rein in our debt, it could damage our markets, increase the cost of borrowing, and jeopardize our recovery -– all of which would have an even worse effect on our job growth and family incomes.
From some on the right, I expect we'll hear a different argument -– that if we just make fewer investments in our people, extend tax cuts including those for the wealthier Americans, eliminate more regulations, maintain the status quo on health care, our deficits will go away.  The problem is that's what we did for eight years.  (Applause.)  That's what helped us into this crisis.  It's what helped lead to these deficits.  We can't do it again.
Rather than fight the same tired battles that have dominated Washington for decades, it's time to try something new.  Let's invest in our people without leaving them a mountain of debt.  Let's meet our responsibility to the citizens who sent us here.  Let's try common sense.  (Laughter.)  A novel concept.
To do that, we have to recognize that we face more than a deficit of dollars right now.  We face a deficit of trust -– deep and corrosive doubts about how Washington works that have been growing for years.  To close that credibility gap we have to take action on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue -- to end the outsized influence of lobbyists; to do our work openly; to give our people the government they deserve.  (Applause.)
That's what I came to Washington to do.  That's why -– for the first time in history –- my administration posts on our White House visitors online.  That's why we've excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs, or seats on federal boards and commissions.
But we can't stop there.  It's time to require lobbyists to disclose each contact they make on behalf of a client with my administration or with Congress.  It's time to put strict limits on the contributions that lobbyists give to candidates for federal office.
With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests –- including foreign corporations –- to spend without limit in our elections.  (Applause.)  I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities.  (Applause.)  They should be decided by the American people.  And I'd urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems.
I'm also calling on Congress to continue down the path of earmark reform.  Applause.)  Democrats and Republicans.  (Applause.)  Democrats and Republicans.  You've trimmed some of this spending, you've embraced some meaningful change.  But restoring the public trust demands more.  For example, some members of Congress post some earmark requests online.  (Applause.)  Tonight, I'm calling on Congress to publish all earmark requests on a single Web site before there's a vote, so that the American people can see how their money is being spent. (Applause.)
Of course, none of these reforms will even happen if we don't also reform how we work with one another.  Now, I'm not naïve.  I never thought that the mere fact of my election would usher in peace and harmony -- (laughter) -- and some post-partisan era.  I knew that both parties have fed divisions that are deeply entrenched.  And on some issues, there are simply philosophical differences that will always cause us to part ways. These disagreements, about the role of government in our lives, about our national priorities and our national security, they've been taking place for over 200 years.  They're the very essence of our democracy.
But what frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is Election Day.  We can't wage a perpetual campaign where the only goal is to see who can get the most embarrassing headlines about the other side -– a belief that if you lose, I win.  Neither party should delay or obstruct every single bill just because they can.  The confirmation of -- (applause) -- I'm speaking to both parties now.  The confirmation of well-qualified public servants shouldn't be held hostage to the pet projects or grudges of a few individual senators.  (Applause.)
Washington may think that saying anything about the other side, no matter how false, no matter how malicious, is just part of the game.  But it's precisely such politics that has stopped either party from helping the American people.  Worse yet, it's sowing further division among our citizens, further distrust in our government.
So, no, I will not give up on trying to change the tone of our politics.  I know it's an election year.  And after last week, it's clear that campaign fever has come even earlier than usual.  But we still need to govern.
To Democrats, I would remind you that we still have the largest majority in decades, and the people expect us to solve problems, not run for the hills.  (Applause.)  And if the Republican leadership is going to insist that 60 votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town -- a supermajority -- then the responsibility to govern is now yours as well.  (Applause.)  Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it's not leadership.  We were sent here to serve our citizens, not our ambitions.  (Applause.)  So let's show the American people that we can do it together.  (Applause.)
This week, I'll be addressing a meeting of the House Republicans.  I'd like to begin monthly meetings with both Democratic and Republican leadership.  I know you can't wait.  (Laughter.)
Throughout our history, no issue has united this country more than our security.  Sadly, some of the unity we felt after 9/11 has dissipated.  We can argue all we want about who's to blame for this, but I'm not interested in re-litigating the past. I know that all of us love this country.  All of us are committed to its defense.  So let's put aside the schoolyard taunts about who's tough.  Let's reject the false choice between protecting our people and upholding our values.  Let's leave behind the fear and division, and do what it takes to defend our nation and forge a more hopeful future -- for America and for the world.  (Applause.)
That's the work we began last year.  Since the day I took office, we've renewed our focus on the terrorists who threaten our nation.  We've made substantial investments in our homeland security and disrupted plots that threatened to take American lives.  We are filling unacceptable gaps revealed by the failed Christmas attack, with better airline security and swifter action on our intelligence.  We've prohibited torture and strengthened partnerships from the Pacific to South Asia to the Arabian Peninsula.  And in the last year, hundreds of al Qaeda's fighters and affiliates, including many senior leaders, have been captured or killed -- far more than in 2008.
And in Afghanistan, we're increasing our troops and training Afghan security forces so they can begin to take the lead in July of 2011, and our troops can begin to come home.  (Applause.)  We will reward good governance, work to reduce corruption, and support the rights of all Afghans -- men and women alike.  (Applause.)  We're joined by allies and partners who have increased their own commitments, and who will come together tomorrow in London to reaffirm our common purpose.  There will be difficult days ahead.  But I am absolutely confident we will succeed.
As we take the fight to al Qaeda, we are responsibly leaving Iraq to its people.  As a candidate, I promised that I would end this war, and that is what I am doing as President.  We will have all of our combat troops out of Iraq by the end of this August.  (Applause.)  We will support the Iraqi government -- we will support the Iraqi government as they hold elections, and we will continue to partner with the Iraqi people to promote regional peace and prosperity.  But make no mistake:  This war is ending, and all of our troops are coming home.  (Applause.)  
Tonight, all of our men and women in uniform -- in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and around the world –- they have to know that we -- that they have our respect, our gratitude, our full support.  And just as they must have the resources they need in war, we all have a responsibility to support them when they come home.  (Applause.)  That's why we made the largest increase in investments for veterans in decades -- last year.  (Applause.)   That's why we're building a 21st century VA.  And that's why Michelle has joined with Jill Biden to forge a national commitment to support military families.  (Applause.)
Now, even as we prosecute two wars, we're also confronting perhaps the greatest danger to the American people -– the threat of nuclear weapons.  I've embraced the vision of John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan through a strategy that reverses the spread of these weapons and seeks a world without them.  To reduce our stockpiles and launchers, while ensuring our deterrent, the United States and Russia are completing negotiations on the farthest-reaching arms control treaty in nearly two decades.  (Applause.)  And at April's Nuclear Security Summit, we will bring 44 nations together here in Washington, D.C. behind a clear goal:  securing all vulnerable nuclear materials around the world in four years, so that they never fall into the hands of terrorists.  (Applause.)
Now, these diplomatic efforts have also strengthened our hand in dealing with those nations that insist on violating international agreements in pursuit of nuclear weapons.  That's why North Korea now faces increased isolation, and stronger sanctions –- sanctions that are being vigorously enforced.  That's why the international community is more united, and the Islamic Republic of Iran is more isolated.  And as Iran's leaders continue to ignore their obligations, there should be no doubt:  They, too, will face growing consequences.  That is a promise.  (Applause.)
That's the leadership that we are providing –- engagement that advances the common security and prosperity of all people. We're working through the G20 to sustain a lasting global recovery.  We're working with Muslim communities around the world to promote science and education and innovation.  We have gone from a bystander to a leader in the fight against climate change. We're helping developing countries to feed themselves, and continuing the fight against HIV/AIDS.  And we are launching a new initiative that will give us the capacity to respond faster and more effectively to bioterrorism or an infectious disease -– a plan that will counter threats at home and strengthen public health abroad.
As we have for over 60 years, America takes these actions because our destiny is connected to those beyond our shores.  But we also do it because it is right.  That's why, as we meet here tonight, over 10,000 Americans are working with many nations to help the people of Haiti recover and rebuild.  (Applause.)  That's why we stand with the girl who yearns to go to school in Afghanistan; why we support the human rights of the women marching through the streets of Iran; why we advocate for the young man denied a job by corruption in Guinea.  For America must always stand on the side of freedom and human dignity.  (Applause.)  Always.  (Applause.)
Abroad, America's greatest source of strength has always been our ideals.  The same is true at home.  We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution:  the notion that we're all created equal; that no matter who you are or what you look like, if you abide by the law you should be protected by it; if you adhere to our common values you should be treated no different than anyone else.   
We must continually renew this promise.  My administration has a Civil Rights Division that is once again prosecuting civil rights violations and employment discrimination.  (Applause.)  We finally strengthened our laws to protect against crimes driven by hate.  (Applause.)  This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.  (Applause.)  It's the right thing to do.  (Applause.) 
We're going to crack down on violations of equal pay laws -– so that women get equal pay for an equal day's work.  (Applause.) And we should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system -– to secure our borders and enforce our laws, and ensure that everyone who plays by the rules can contribute to our economy and enrich our nation.  (Applause.)
In the end, it's our ideals, our values that built America  -- values that allowed us to forge a nation made up of immigrants from every corner of the globe; values that drive our citizens still.  Every day, Americans meet their responsibilities to their families and their employers.  Time and again, they lend a hand to their neighbors and give back to their country.  They take pride in their labor, and are generous in spirit.  These aren't Republican values or Democratic values that they're living by; business values or labor values.  They're American values. 
Unfortunately, too many of our citizens have lost faith that our biggest institutions -– our corporations, our media, and, yes, our government –- still reflect these same values.  Each of these institutions are full of honorable men and women doing important work that helps our country prosper.  But each time a CEO rewards himself for failure, or a banker puts the rest of us at risk for his own selfish gain, people's doubts grow.  Each time lobbyists game the system or politicians tear each other down instead of lifting this country up, we lose faith.  The more that TV pundits reduce serious debates to silly arguments, big issues into sound bites, our citizens turn away. 
No wonder there's so much cynicism out there.  No wonder there's so much disappointment.
I campaigned on the promise of change –- change we can believe in, the slogan went.  And right now, I know there are many Americans who aren't sure if they still believe we can change –- or that I can deliver it.
But remember this –- I never suggested that change would be easy, or that I could do it alone.  Democracy in a nation of 300 million people can be noisy and messy and complicated.  And when you try to do big things and make big changes, it stirs passions and controversy.  That's just how it is.
Those of us in public office can respond to this reality by playing it safe and avoid telling hard truths and pointing fingers.  We can do what's necessary to keep our poll numbers high, and get through the next election instead of doing what's best for the next generation.
But I also know this:  If people had made that decision 50 years ago, or 100 years ago, or 200 years ago, we wouldn't be here tonight.  The only reason we are here is because generations of Americans were unafraid to do what was hard; to do what was needed even when success was uncertain; to do what it took to keep the dream of this nation alive for their children and their grandchildren.
Our administration has had some political setbacks this year, and some of them were deserved.  But I wake up every day knowing that they are nothing compared to the setbacks that families all across this country have faced this year.  And what keeps me going -– what keeps me fighting -– is that despite all these setbacks, that spirit of determination and optimism, that fundamental decency that has always been at the core of the American people, that lives on.  
It lives on in the struggling small business owner who wrote to me of his company, "None of us," he said, "…are willing to consider, even slightly, that we might fail."
It lives on in the woman who said that even though she and her neighbors have felt the pain of recession, "We are strong.  We are resilient.  We are American."
It lives on in the 8-year-old boy in Louisiana, who just sent me his allowance and asked if I would give it to the people of Haiti.
And it lives on in all the Americans who've dropped everything to go someplace they've never been and pull people they've never known from the rubble, prompting chants of "U.S.A.! U.S.A.!  U.S.A!" when another life was saved.
The spirit that has sustained this nation for more than two centuries lives on in you, its people.  We have finished a difficult year.  We have come through a difficult decade.  But a new year has come.  A new decade stretches before us.  We don't quit.  I don't quit.  (Applause.)  Let's seize this moment -- to start anew, to carry the dream forward, and to strengthen our union once more.  (Applause.)
Thank you.  God bless you.  And God bless the United States of America.  (Applause.)
                                         END                   10:20 P.M. EST

Putting Washington at the Service of the Middle Class

The White House Blog

In his State of the Union Address tonight, the President laid out an agenda attempting to attack one problem from every conceivable angle: the terrible squeeze felt by America’s middle class.  Fundamentally, that means prying government away from special interests and dedicating it to measures that put Americans to work and lay the foundation for a stronger economy for our country – lowering health care and tuition costs, spurring creation of the next generation of clean energy jobs.  It also means putting a cop on the beat on Wall Street, so major banks can no longer take advantage of families and taxpayers.
To do all that, though, we need to change the way Washington works.  Already the President has taken unprecedented steps in this direction, from releasing the names of all visitors to the White House for the first time ever to clamping down on the revolving door between government and lobbying.  But as much progress was made on this front in this first year, it was still only the first year, and the President will keep pushing forward, whether that’s shining sunlight on any contact between lobbyists and the White House, or pushing Congress to disclose all earmark requests in one place for Americans to see.
This was the vision that shaped the President's address, but this is not just a matter of rhetoric.  The President made clear that there is tremendously busy agenda ahead for his second year – the policies and proposals below are just examples of the plans the President laid out in his address to put government to work for the middle class.
Here are a few initiatives you might have missed in the course of the speech:
  • The President called on the Senate to pass a financial reform package. “A strong, healthy financial market makes it possible for businesses to access credit and create new jobs. It channels the savings of families into investments that raise incomes.  But that can only happen if we guard against the same recklessness that nearly brought down our entire economy.” Essential reforms include measures to protect consumers and investors from financial abuse; close loopholes, raise standards, and create accountability for supervision of major financial firms; restrict the size and scope of financial institutions to reign in excesses and protect taxpayers and address the ‘too big to fail’ problem; and establish comprehensive supervision of financial markets.
  • A vision for a clean energy economy“…to create more of these clean energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, and more incentives.” We will build on the historic $80 billion investment made through the Recovery Act.  The President’s vision includes investments in important technologies to diversity our energy sources and reduce our dependence on foreign oil, including:  the renewal of our nation’s nuclear energy industry after a 30-year hiatus, cutting edge biofuel and clean coal technologies, and additional offshore oil and gas drilling.  To fully transition to a clean energy economy and create millions of new American jobs, we must pass comprehensive energy and climate legislation to promote energy independence and address climate change.
  • The President will continue his push to invest in the skills and education of our people. “This year, we have broken through the stalemate between left and right by launching a national competition to improve our schools. And the idea here is simple: instead of rewarding failure, we only reward success... In this country, the success of our children cannot depend more on where they live than on their potential.” The Obama Administration supports a new vision for increasing student achievement, delivering opportunity, and supporting excellence in America’s public schools. The President’s 2011 budget supports a new framework for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act that will foster innovation, reward excellence, and promote reform in our schools, as well as invests an additional $1.35 billion to continue the historic Race to the Top program to open it up to districts in order to spur innovation and additional progress. At the same time, the Administration is moving to consolidate ineffective policies and practices. The President’s Budget eliminates six programs and consolidates 38 others into 11 new programs that emphasize using competition to allocate funds, giving communities more choices around activities, and using rigorous evidence to fund what works.
  • The President is committed to making college affordable for all Americans. “(I)n this economy, a high school diploma no longer guarantees a good job.” To increase college access and completion, the Administration will make student loans more affordable by limiting a borrower’s payments to 10 percent of his/her income and forgives remaining debt after 20 years – 10 years for public service works. We will also make permanent the American Opportunity Tax Credit. The President urges the Senate to pass the American Graduation Initiative, which invests more than $10 billion over the next decade in reforming our nation’s community colleges, promoting college completion, and moving toward the President’s goal of having the highest proportion of college graduates in the world by 2020. The President is also asking colleges and universities to do their share to make college affordable for all Americans cutting their own costs.
  • The President is making investments to ensure that the middle class benefits from this economic recovery.   “(T)he price of college tuition is just one of the burdens facing the middle class.  That's why last year I asked Vice President Biden to chair a task force on middle-class families.” The President has outlined immediate steps to reduce the strain on family budgets and help middle class families manage their child and elder care responsibilities, save for retirement and pay for college. He will double the child tax credit this year, make it easier to save for retirement with automatic IRAs for workers without access to existing retirement plans, provide  larger tax credits to match retirement savings for millions of additional workers, and provide new safeguards to protect retirement savings.
  • Changing the way we do business. “To close that credibility gap we have to take action on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue to end the outsized influence of lobbyists; to do our work openly; to give our people the government they deserve.” The President has called for additional new lobbyist reforms, including enhanced disclosure of lobbyist contacts, strict campaign contribution limits by lobbyists, and a single earmark database, so American taxpayers find out what earmarks are being requested, and where their money is going.
  • Countering Citizens United. “I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities.” Last week’s Supreme Court Citizen’s United decision opens the floodgates to special interests and foreign countries and companies bankrolling national campaigns.  The President called for bipartisan support for legislation that will remedy the Supreme Court’s unprecedented and troubling decision. 
  • The President stands by military families. “Tonight, all of our men and women in uniform...have to know that they have our respect, our gratitude, our full support.” The President’s 2011 budget announces significant new investments, totaling more than $8 billion, and protections for our nation’s military families, including increased military pay and housing allowances, increased funding for family support programs, expanded availability of affordable, high-quality child care, the renovation or replacement of schools, and expanded and improved care for wounded, ill and injured service members. 
  • The President is establishing a National Equal Pay Enforcement Task Force.  “We're going to crack down on violations of equal pay laws -– so that women get equal pay for an equal day's work.” To make sure we uphold our nation’s core commitment to equality of opportunity, the Obama Administration is implementing an Equal Pay initiative to improve compliance, public education, and enforcement of equal pay laws. The Task Force will ensure that the agencies with responsibility for equal pay enforcement are coordinating efforts and limiting potential gaps in enforcement. The Administration also continues to support the Paycheck Fairness Act, and is increasing funding for the agencies enforcing equal pay laws and other key civil rights statutes. 
  • Immigration reform. “And we should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system - to secure our borders and enforce our laws, and ensure that everyone who plays by the rules can contribute to our economy and enrich our nation.” The President is pleased Congress is taking steps forward on immigration reform that includes effective border security measures with a path for legalization for those who are willing to pay taxes and abide by the law. He is committed to confronting this problem in practical, effective ways, using the current tools at our disposal while we work with Congress to enact comprehensive reform.
  • The President will fight to recover the money American taxpayers spent to bailout the banks. To recover the rest, I've proposed a fee on the biggest banks. Now, I know Wall Street isn't keen on this idea. But if these firms can afford to hand out big bonuses again, they can afford a modest fee to pay back the taxpayers who rescued them in their time of need.”   The President has proposed the Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee, which will require the largest and most highly leveraged Wall Street firms to pay back taxpayers and provide a deterrent against excessive leverage for the largest firms. The conservative estimate for the cost of TARP in the budget is $117 billion, but the Treasury Department expects it to be much less and the fee will be in place for a minimum of ten years or however long it takes to recoup every last penny to the American taxpayer.
  • The President recognizes that Small Businesses will be key to our nation’s economic recoveryI'm proposing that we take $30 billion of the money Wall Street banks have repaid and use it to help community banks give small businesses the credit they need to stay afloat. I'm also proposing a new small business tax credit – one that will go to over one million small businesses who hire new workers or raise wages.” To get small businesses growing again, and growing our economy, the President has proposed a range of provisions that include tax incentives to spur investment; expanded access to capital and growth opportunities to create jobs; and increased support for entrepreneurship to foster innovation. He is proposing an employment tax credit for small businesses to encourage hiring, eliminating capital gains taxes on small business investments, extending enhanced small business expensing, and transferring $30 billion in resources from TARP to a new program to help community and smaller banks give small businesses the credit they need. The President and members of his Administration will announce additional details in the coming weeks
  • The President reiterates his support for continued investment in our nation’s infrastructure.  “Tomorrow, I'll visit Tampa, Florida, where workers will soon break ground on a new high-speed railroad funded by the Recovery Act. There are projects like that all across this country that will create jobs and help move our nation's goods, services, and information.” Through the Recovery Act, we made the largest investment in our nation’s infrastructure since President Eisenhower called for the creation of our national highway system over half a century ago.  In his speech, the President announced funding to make a  down-payment on a new nationwide high-speed rail system being built in-part with ARRA dollars. 
  • Tax breaks to keep jobs at home. “(I)t’s time to finally slash the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas, and give those tax breaks to companies that create jobs right here in the United States of America.”  The President has called for an end for tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas to help fund tax cuts – like making the R & E credit permanent – that reward companies for investing and creating jobs in the United States.
  • The President also called on the Senate to pass a jobs bill that he can sign. “The House has passed a jobs bill…. As the first order of business this year, I urge the Senate to do the same, and I know they will. People are out of work. They are hurting. They need our help. And I want a jobs bill on my desk without delay.” The bold and difficult steps the President took to stabilize the financial system have reduced the cost of TARP by more than $200 billion, providing additional resources for job creation and for deficit reduction. In December, the President outlined a package of targeted measures to help further stimulate private sector hiring, including measures to facilitate small business growth, green jobs and infrastructure. The House has passed strong legislation - it is time for the Senate to do the same.
  • We must invest in American ingenuity and innovation. We need to encourage American innovation.” The Obama Innovation Agenda will get us closer to the President’s long-term goal of increasing combined private and public R&D investment to three percent of GDP. The Obama 2011 budget will move us closer to restoring America to first in the world in college completion; and invest in the next generation of scientists so we will not lag behind countries like China in science and engineering graduates. More details will be announced in the coming weeks.
  • We need to export more of our goods around the world. “We will double our exports over the next five years, an increase that will support two million jobs in America.” To meet this goal, we’re launching a National Export Initiative that will help farmers and small businesses increase their exports and expand their markets. Details will be announced in the coming weeks, but the NEI includes the creation of the President’s Export Promotion Cabinet and an enhancement of funding for key export promotion programs. We will work to shape a Doha trade agreement that opens markets and will continue to work with key allies like South Korea, Panama, and Colombia on trade agreements that provide real benefits to our workers.  The President and members of his Administration will announce additional details in the coming week. 
  • The President remains committed to helping Americans stay in their homes and help their homes retain their value. “… we’re working to lift the value of a family’s single largest investment – their home.” Last year, we took steps allowing millions of Americans to take out new loans and save an average of $1,500 per family on mortgage payments.  This year, we will step up programs that encourage re-financing so that homeowners can move into more affordable and sustainable mortgages.   In addition to the changes proposed last week to ensure sound risk management, the FHA is continuing to evaluate its mortgage insurance underwriting standards and its measures to help distressed and underwater borrowers through other FHA initiatives going forward.   In order to ensure American families receive the same consideration American corporations do, the Obama Administration remains supportive of efforts to allow bankruptcy proceedings to renegotiate all debts, including home mortgages.
  • As Americans are getting their budgets in order, the President is getting the nation’s financial house in order. Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need and sacrifice what we don’t.” The President has announced the three year, non-security discretionary spending freeze, and also called for a bipartisan Fiscal Commissionto identify policies to improve the fiscal situation in the medium term and to achieve fiscal sustainability over the long run. The President and members of his Administration will announce additional details in the coming weeks.   
  • The President’s focus on national security includes rooting out terrorists where they hide. Since the day I took office, we have renewed our focus on the terrorists who threaten our nation.” In the last year, hundreds of Al Qaeda’s fighters and affiliates have been captured or killed – far more than in 2008. 
  • The President’s commitment to Non-Proliferation results. “Even as we prosecute two wars, we're also confronting perhaps the greatest danger to the American people - the threat of nuclear weapons.” The United States and Russia are completing negotiations on the farthest-reaching arms control treaty in nearly twenty years.   He will also host a Nuclear Security Summit in April, which will bring forty-four nations together behind a clear goal: to secure all loose nuclear materials around the world in four years, so that they never fall into the hands of terrorists.
  • The President is launching a bioterror and pandemic threat initiative. “We are launching a new initiative that will give us the capacity to respond faster and more effectively to bioterrorism or an infectious disease - a plan that will counter threats at home and strengthen public health abroad.” The President called to action key U.S. Government leaders to re-design our medical countermeasure enterprise to protect Americans from bioterror or infectious health threats. We will pursue a business model that leverages market forces and reduces risk to attract pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry collaboration with the U.S. Government.
  • The President announced that he will work this year to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” “I will work with Congress and the military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.” 
Mona Sutphen is Deputy Chief of Staff

STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS 1/27/10 BY PRESIDENT OBAMA

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Supreme Court Ruling on Campaign Finance Undermines Free and Fair Elections and Democracy

National Press Release


DNC Chairman Tim Kaine Says Supreme Court Ruling on Campaign Finance Undermines Free and Fair Elections and Democracy - Must Not be Allowed to Stan

WASHINGTON, Jan. 21 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairman Tim Kaine released the following statement after the Supreme Court's decision on the Citizens United campaign finance case today:


"The Supreme Court's ruling today will allow the money of corporate interests to flood the political process, will undermine free and fair elections and further erode voters' confidence in our system of Democracy.  It is a major victory for oil companies, banks, health insurance companies and other special interests that already use their power over Washington to drown out the voices of regular Americans.
"As we said in our amicus brief on this case, restrictions on corporate influence over elections are necessary if we are to have a system that allows actual voters and candidates to be heard and if we are to encourage the record number of small donors who participated in the 2008 election to remain involved.  This ruling changes the rules just as more small donors are beginning to play a greater role in the political process.
"Voters are angry and anxious because they believe the system is tilted against them and instead is designed to benefit the special interests.  The concerns of voters are well founded -- as we have seen over and over again how armies of corporate lobbyists descend on Capitol Hill to fight everything from health care and financial regulatory reform to efforts to lower energy costs and reverse the effects of global climate change. This ruling undermines the free speech rights of citizens whose views will be drowned out by wealthy corporate interests whose aim will not just be to influence which candidates get elected -- but how they vote once they are in office.
"Not surprisingly, Republicans have hailed this decision -- the same Republicans who have stood with corporate America year after year to block any measure that would benefit Middle Class Americans at the expense of the corporate bottom line.  Republicans are tone deaf if they believe that the anger and disgust that voters have right now towards our political system is not borne in large part out of their rightful belief that the corporate special interests have too much sway over elected officials and public policy.  On this, Republicans are again taking the side of the special interests over the people's interests.
"President Obama has said that his Administration will immediately work with Congress to develop a forceful response to this decision which, in the public interest, simply must not be allowed to stand."
SOURCE Democratic National Committee

Brown Scores Upset Victory Over Coakley in Massachusetts Senate Race

I have to give the opposition, a voice.  This is Fox News fair and balanced.  Please check out

Updated January 19, 2010

RAW DATA: Martha Coakley Biography

FOXNews.com

Democrat Martha Coakley, Massachusetts' Attorney General, is vying to win over the U.S. Senate seat vacated by the late Sen. Ted Kennedy in Tuesday's special election. 


Martha Coakley (D)
AGE: 56; born July 14, 1953.
EDUCATION: B.A. from Williams College, 1975, J.D. degree from Boston University Law School, 1979
CAREER: attorney, Parker, Coulter, Daley & White, 1979-1980; attorney, Goodwin Proctor LLP, 1980-1986; assistant district attorney, Middlesex District Attorney's office 1986-1987 and 1989-1997. special attorney, Boston Organized Crime Strike Force, 1987-1989; Middlesex District Attorney, 1999-2007; president, Massachusetts District Attorney's Association, 2001; Attorney General of Massachusetts, 2007-present; served as president of Women's Bar Association of Massachusetts, and on board of directors of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.
FAMILY: Lives in Medford with her husband, Thomas F. O'Connor, Jr.
Martha Mary Coakley grew up in North Adams, a mill town in the Berkshires, the third of five children in a middle-class Roman Catholic family. A star debater in high school, she was among the first women admitted to Williams College, a few miles from her hometown.
Coakley graduated cum laude, from Williams College, in 1975. In 1979, she received her law degree from Boston University. Coakley began her career in civil litigation at two Boston law firms before joining the Middlesex District Attorney's office in 1986.
After working for the U.S. Justice Department in its Boston Organized Crime Strike Force, she returned to the DA's office and became head of its child abuse prosecution unit in 1991.
In late 1997 Coakley made a timely return to the district attorney's office after an unsuccessful run for the state Legislature earlier in the year -- Coakley finished fourth in a field of six.
In 1998, she was elected district attorney in Middlesex County.
The race to fill Kennedy's seat is the culmination of a decade's long quest for Coakley, 56, who grabbed the public's attention with the high-profile prosecution of Louise Woodward, a British nanny charged with shaking to death a Newton couple's infant son in 1997.
Coakley's polished appearances on national television during the trial brought her fans and broad name recognition.
She made her first statewide run in 2006 and became the first woman elected attorney general.
Perhaps Coakley's biggest case as attorney general was her handling of a fatal 2006 tunnel ceiling collapse in the newly opened Big Dig.
The incident gave a focal point to public outrage over the massive project's delays and soaring costs, but instead of pursuing jail terms, Coakley reached a settlement with the project's top contractor. Coakley blamed weak state liability laws, noting she won nearly $500 million.
In the December 2009 special Senate primary, Coakley had more votes than her two closest competitors combined in the four-candidate field.
Coakley married in her late 40s; she and her husband, Thomas O'Connor, a retired deputy police superintendent, have two dogs and no children.



Updated January 19, 2010

RAW DATA: Scott Brown Biography

FOXNews.com

Republican Scott Brown, a Massachusetts state senator, is hoping for victory in Tuesday's pivotal race to fill the Senate seat held by the late Sen. Edward Kennedy. 

Scott Brown (R)
AGE: 50; born Sept. 12, 1959
EDUCATION: B.A. from Tufts University, 1981, J.D. from Boston College Law School, 1985
CAREER: Wrentham selectman, 1995-1998; State Rep. 1999-2004; State Senate 2004-present. Serves on Joint Committee on Consumer Protection & Professional Licensure; Joint Committee on Education; Joint Committee on Election Laws; Joint Committee on Higher Education; Joint Committee on Public Safety; and Homeland Security Joint Committee on Veterans & Federal Affairs. Massachusetts Army National Guard, 1979-present, currently holds rank of Lieutenant Colonel.
FAMILY: Lives in Wrentham with his wife, Gail Huff. The couple has two daughters in college, Ayla and Arianna.
Brown grew up in Wakefield, Mass., and had a tough childhood. His parents divorced when he was a baby, and each remarried three times. He spent his youth living with various relatives and getting into trouble, the New York Times reported.
Brown reportedly said that he was caught for stealing records as a 12-year-old, and that an encounter with a judge helped send him on the right path.
Brown was a basketball player in high school and went on to Tufts University. As an undergraduate he joined the Massachusetts National Guard (where he still serves as a lieutenant colonel in the Judge Advocate General's Corps), all while reportedly singing and acting in campus productions and picking up modeling work.
In 1982, Brown, as a 22-year-old law student, was named ''America's Sexiest Man'' by Cosmopolitan magazine. The title netted him $1,000 and a photo shoot, including one picture in which Mr. Brown was covered only by his strategically placed arm. Brown said the money helped him pay for law school, according to the New York Times.
In August 1983, he completed airborne training at Fort Bragg, N.C., National Guard records show. Brown returned to Boston College that fall and received his law degree in 1985.
Brown's political career started in 1992 when he was elected assessor in Wrentham, the Massachusetts town where he and his family live. Three years later, he served as a selectman, and was elected to the state House of Representatives in 1998. In March 2004 he was elected tothe State Senate in a special election to fill the seat of Cheryl Jacques.
During six terms in the Legislature, three each in the House and Senate, Brown has a modest record of legislative initiatives, but he has carved out a niche as a leading advocate for veterans, colleagues on both sides of the aisle said.
As a legislator, he has served on the Veterans and Federal Affairs Committee, the Hidden Wounds of War Commission, and the Governor's Task Force on Returning Veterans. He lists among his achievements his authorship of a 2007 law that created a check-off box on state income tax forms for veterans to indicate whether they served in Iraq or Afghanistan.
The state uses the information to notify veterans of available services and benefits, including the "Welcome Home Bonus" that provides $1,000 for those returning from active duty in Afghanistan or Iraq.
He was promoted to lieutenant colonel in 2006. Despite his long career, Brown, as a judge advocate, has never been in a unit sent to a combat zone such as Iraq or Afghanistan.
Brown did brief assignments in Paraguay in 2005 and in Kazakhstan in 2007. In Paraguay, he was part of an effort with US diplomats to raise awareness of American principles of justice, including cases involving military personnel, according to the Boston Globe. In Kazakhstan, he said he spent a week on a disaster, terrorism, and emergency preparedness exercise with military and civilian personnel from Afghanistan, Pakistan, and three former Soviet republics, the newspaper reported.
Brown was the landslide winner of the December 2009 Republican contest, with 89 percent of the vote; Jack E. Robinson, a businessman, garnered 11 percent.

Poll: American public fed up with Washington

Mind you We are pissed off at Congress, Federal Government,  Wall Street, we are not blaming Obama, but He needs to reorder his priorities, Economy and Jobs. Health Care would be great, but at this time the Congress is SLEEPING ON IT.....SHHHHHHHHHHHHH  they are tired..........
GET OFF YOUR LAZY  A_ _ _ _, and look like your doing your jobs.
The Government is 'stagnant' 'lazy' 'boring' 'predictable' It needs to spiced up just a little.

Poll: Public fed up with Washington
70% say government isn't working well; Obama approval back at 50%
 
By Mark Murray
Deputy political director
NBC News
updated 6:32 p.m. ET, Tues., Jan. 26, 2010
WASHINGTON - As President Barack Obama prepares to deliver his first State of the Union address Wednesday night, he will be speaking to an American public that’s fed up with Congress, the country’s two main political parties, and the federal government, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.
Only 28 percent believe the federal government is “working well” or even works “okay,” versus seven in 10 who think it’s “unhealthy,” “stagnant” or needs large reforms.
By comparison, in December of 2000 — during the height of the disputed Bush-Gore presidential election — 55 percent said the government was working well or okay.
What’s more, a whopping 93 percent believe there’s too much partisan infighting; 84 percent think the special interests have too much influence over legislation; nearly three-quarters say that not enough has been done to regulate Wall Street and the banking industry; and an equal 61 percent complain that both Democrats and Republicans in Congress aren’t willing to compromise.
And the percentage who believe the country is headed in the wrong direction now stands at 58 percent, the highest level of Obama’s presidency.
“The message is a big one,” said Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted this survey with Republican pollster Bill McInturff. “The message is, ‘We hate what’s going in Washington.’”
Public’s anger isn’t directed at Obama
Indeed, the NBC/Journal survey finds that nearly half of the country (48 percent) said last week’s stunning election in Massachusetts, in which Republican candidate Scott Brown won a Senate contest in one of the nation’s most Democratic-leaning states, was aimed at sending a message to Washington. Only 15 percent disagreed.
But if the public is fed up with Washington, its anger isn’t necessarily directed at President Obama.
Only 27 percent say they blame him for not being able to find solutions to the country’s problems. By contrast, 48 percent blame Republicans in Congress and 41 percent blame congressional Democrats.
“The president has problems,” Hart adds, “but the Congress has much bigger problems.”
Obama’s numbers, in fact, are virtually unchanged from last week’s poll, which was released on the day of the Massachusetts election.
The president’s approval rating inched up two points to 50 percent, while the number believing his health care plan is a good idea declined two points to 31 percent.
“This data set reminds us that the Scott Brown election has been a huge event in Washington, D.C.,” said McInturff, the Republican pollster. “But around the country, I think this polling would suggest that it had a modest effect.”
Focus more on the economy, less on health care
However, the poll also suggests the public wants Obama to refocus his priorities: 44 percent say he has given too much attention to health care, 16 percent say he’s given it too little attention and 38 percent say he’s given it the right amount.
On the other hand, 51 percent maintain he’s given the economy too little attention, compared with only 5 percent who say he’s given it too much attention and 42 percent who say he’s given it the right amount of attention.
Still, a majority of Americans continue to have high hopes for Obama. A combined 54 percent either say that he’s facing a short-term setback from which he’ll rebound or that he’s not facing a setback at all.
That’s compared with 42 percent who say he’s facing a long-term setback from which he’ll unlikely recover.
GOP’s enthusiasm edge
Looking ahead to this year’s midterm elections, 44 percent of registered voters say they prefer a Democratic-controlled Congress, versus 42 percent who want a GOP-controlled one. Last week’s survey showed a 41-41 percent tie on this question.
But Republicans continue to enjoy a significant enthusiasm advantage. Voters who are most interested in November’s midterms prefer a Republican-controlled Congress by a 49-41 percent margin.
Yet the poll also provides evidence that Obama might be more of an asset than a liability in November. Thirty-seven percent say their vote will be a signal of support for the president, while 27 percent say it will be a signal of opposition; 35 percent said it won’t signal anything about Obama.
The poll was conducted of 800 adults from Jan. 23-25, and it has a margin of error of plus-or-minus 3.5 percentage points.
Mark Murray covers politics for NBC News.

Democrats Slam Brakes on Health Care Overhau

I do not know what to believe anymore, I do not understand why all of a sudden the Dems are talking slow down, wait we have time. No we do not Not us ordinary citizens who do not have health coverage or for those who have coverage and do not get coverage for their ailments.  I am so tired of the Dems they are suppose to back up the President and they have just lied down and let the republications walk all over them. And as for the Republications, I hope that their party dies when the so called tea beggars are all elected and they bomb worse than the ones right now in office. The tea beggars are a bunch of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.  They do not believe the President is really the President, they do want health care, no more spending, except for their pork barrell projects, and now that the Corporations have a say so in our Elections we do not have a Democracy. Mark my words. The Republican Party will cease to exist as it is,  if they get ther way, the political environment will change drastically.  And for those Congress persobs who did not know that Corporations have forgien Corporations among them, we know have the possibility of other governments having a say so in our Government.  OMG what has the Supreme Court done,,, they have basically taken away our civil and federal rights as Citizens of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Our forefathers are turning in their graves, this is what thry fought for, OUR FREEDOM, and now ..........

January 27, 2010

WASHINGTON — With no clear path forward on major health care legislation, Democratic leaders in Congress effectively slammed the brakes on President Obama’s top domestic priority on Tuesday, saying that they no longer felt pressure to move quickly on a health bill after eight months of setting deadlines and missing them.
The Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, deflected questions about health care. “We’re not on health care now,” he said. “We’ve talked a lot about it in the past.” He added, “There is no rush,” and noted that Congress still had most of this year to work on the health bills passed in 2009 by the Senate and the House.
Mr. Reid said that he and the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi of California, were working to map out a way to complete a health care overhaul in coming months. “There are a number of options being discussed,” Mr. Reid said, emphasizing “procedural aspects” of the issue.
At the same time, two centrist Democratic senators who are up for re-election this year, Blanche L. Lincoln of Arkansas and Evan Bayh of Indiana, said that they would resist efforts to muscle through a health care bill using a parliamentary tactic called budget reconciliation, which seemed to be the simplest way to advance the measure.
The White House has said in recent days that it would support that approach.
Some Democrats said that they did not expect any action on health care legislation until late February at earliest, perhaps after Congress returns from a weeklong recess. But the Democrats stand to lose momentum, and every day closer to the November election that the issue remains unresolved may reduce the chances of passing a far-reaching bill.
The gear-shift by Democrats underscored how the health care effort had been derailed by the Republican victory in the Massachusetts special election last week, which effectively denied Democrats the 60th vote they need to be sure of overcoming a Republican filibuster in the Senate. Originally, Mr. Reid wanted to finish a bill early last August.
The comments by lawmakers also served to lower expectations for the president’s State of the Union speech on Wednesday. Lawmakers said they did not expect Mr. Obama to lay out a specific strategy.
“I would be surprised if he says specifically exactly how he hopes to get health care done,” the House majority leader, Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, said.
None of the options available to lawmakers, including the use of budget reconciliation, seems viable at the moment. Some lawmakers said they expected Congress to try to adopt a greatly pared down bill once it returns to the issue.
“Frankly, we’re trying to figure out what is possible,” Mr. Hoyer said. “Senator Reid needs to determine what is possible on his side of the aisle, you know, what kind of support he can get. And we’re trying to figure out as well what we can pass.”
Speaker Pelosi has said that House Democrats would not simply vote to approve the version of the health care bill adopted by the Senate on Dec. 24 and send it directly to Mr. Obama for his signature. But a plan to win over House members by adopting changes to the Senate bill through the budget reconciliation process, which is not vulnerable to filibuster, ran into substantial resistance on Tuesday.
Mrs. Lincoln, who faces one of the toughest re-election bids among Democrats, said, “I am opposed to and will fight against any attempts to push through changes to the Senate health insurance reform legislation by using budget reconciliation tactics that would allow the Senate to pass a package of changes to our original bill with 51 votes.”
Mr. Bayh said, “It would destroy the opportunity, if there is one, for any bipartisan cooperation the rest of this year on anything else.”
And even if Democrats could agree on using reconciliation to adjust the health care bill, the House and Senate have yet to resolve what the adjustments would be. Major policy differences remain between the House and Senate measures, including a dispute over a proposed tax on high-cost insurance policies, and provisions related to insurance coverage of abortions.
Senator Sherrod Brown, Democrat of Ohio, said he favored a two-step process, under which the House would pass the Senate bill and Congress would then revise it using the fast-track budget procedures. Republicans adamantly oppose that approach.
Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, urged caution. “The White House and Democratic leaders should reach out one more time to Republicans to see if they can find a common ground,” Mr. Lieberman said.
Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, said Democratic leaders were assessing their options on health care.
“It’s a timeout,” Mrs. Feinstein said. “The leadership is re-evaluating. They asked us to keep our powder dry.” Mrs. Feinstein said Congressional leaders should simplify the gigantic health care bill and try to pass parts of it that would be understandable to the public. But she also acknowledged that the odds were long for a far-reaching measure.
“I think big, comprehensive bills are very difficult to do in this environment,” she said.
The Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said White House comments on health care suggested that President Obama was not listening to the American people.
In Elyria, Ohio, on Friday, Mr. Obama said he was not going to “walk away” from the fight for major health legislation. If the bill becomes law, White House officials said, Americans will see its benefits and will embrace it.
But Mr. McConnell said, “This a clear sign that the administration has not gotten the message, that it’s become too attached to its own pet goals, that it’s stuck in neutral when the American people are asking it to change direction.”
The Republican leader said Mr. Obama should “put the 2,700-page Democrat health care plan on the shelf” and “move toward the kind of step-by-step approach Americans really want.” Republicans, however, have not come forward with any new proposals, and Mr. McConnell has said he hopes the health care bill is now dead.

Geithner Must Go--and the Future of the Fed

Comment

By William Greider


January 23, 2010


The first casualty of the president's political debacle will likely be Timothy Geithner, the severely over-confident treasury secretary well known as a lapdog of Wall Street. Geithner was effectively repudiated by the president last week when Barack Obama abruptly announced a new, more aggressive approach to financial reform. But the immediate threat to Geithner is the scandal of collusion and possibly illegal behavior gathering around the Federal Reserve Bank of New York for its megabillion-dollar takeover of insurance giant AIG.
Tim Geithner is standing in the middle of the muck because he was still president of the New York Fed in the fall of 2008 when it rescued AIG with tons of public money (now totaling $180 billion). The facts of the deal are catching up with him now and none are good, since they raise doubts about his competence and his public integrity. This scandal has smoldered for several weeks in newspaper business sections, but is about to grab front-page attention. The House Oversight Committee, chaired by Edolphus Towns, has turned up damning evidence and called Geithner to testify the week of January 27. Committee investigators are poring through some 250,000 e-mails and subpoenaed documents and finding smoking revelations. House Republicans smell blood. House Democrats, given the present climate of popular discontent, are unlikely to rally around tainted goods.
Perhaps the most explosive revelation is that Geithner's subordinates at the New York Fed instructed AIG executives to evade securities law and conceal from the public the $62 billion the insurance company paid out on contracts with the largest investment houses and banks. AIG was already bankrupt and 80 percent owned by the government, kept afloat solely with the billions being injected by the central bank. Yet the Fed told the company to pay off the bankers at full value--100 percent on the dollar--without negotiating a better deal for the public. The bankers would not have collected a dime if the government hadn't come to the rescue.
The Fed, in other words, gave the largest, most prestigious banks a very sweet deal--much sweeter than anything the banks or the federal government will offer to homeowners facing mortgage foreclosure. The central bank, in effect, was operating a backdoor bank bailout that nobody could see. The public billions devoted to AIG went in one door at the insurance company and came out another door to the private banks. Goldman Sachs alone collected $13 billion.
Failure to disclose is a big no-no in corporate finance. People can go to jail if they willfully withhold material information from shareholders and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), or they may be sued for investor fraud. Yet that is what the New York Fed told AIG to do. The company officers wanted to report fully to the SEC. Their Fed overseers told them to take out the disclosure out of their report to the SEC (the facts were ultimately not disclosed until five months later). The Fed, remember, is the government's principal banking regulator. It is supposed to enforce the laws, not tell regulated firms to break them.
What was the Fed anxious to hide? Clearly, it was the clandestine and illegitimate conduit it had devised at AIG to funnel billions to the banks, unseen by the public. Keeping this bailout secret would avoid arousing even greater anger about the bailouts. It might also help prop up stock prices at endangered banks, though savvy financial players swiftly figured out what was going on. Only the people needed to be kept in the dark, along with their elected representatives in Congress.
The Federal Reserve was trying to cover its own butt. And Timothy Geithner's. Disclosing precisely what Geithner had done to arrange backdoor bailouts on the New York end would have definitely damaged his chance of becoming Obama's treasury secretary. When the facts were eventually acknowledged, members of Congress repeatedly demanded to know which firms got the Fed's money. The Federal Reserve Chairman and his top deputies said it would be "inappropriate" to say.
Somebody seems to be lying in this matter. When the Fed's irregular action to block AIG's full disclosure was first reported, Treasury officials said Geithner was not involved because he had "recused" himself from the AIG dealings. Yet, according to the latest revelations reported by the New York Times, the general counsel of the New York Fed, Thomas Baxter, has told House investigators that Geithner verbally approved AIG's generous payouts to the banks.
So which is it? Was Geithner involved or wasn't he? It seems highly improbable Geithner could have managed to remain ignorant of this very controversial decision not to disclose. In fact, it would have been derelict for him not to have known. Committee members will want to probe the question further--what did Tim Geithner know and when did he know it? Let's hope he is under oath. Martha Stewart, remember, went to prison not for trading stocks on insider information but because she lied to federal investigators.
The treasury secretary's precarious situation may well spill over to damage the fate of Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke, seeking Senate confirmation for a second term. Until now, the Board of Governors in Washington has claimed to be aloof from the AIG mess at the New York Fed. This may also be untrue, according to the latest revelations. Some of the Fed governors in Washington, it turns out, were quite upset by the deals being made by Geithner's staff at the New York Fed. Lying is easier when a government agency is given privileged secrecy.
"What does any of this buy us?" some governors asked, according to one newly disclosed e-mail message. Good question. For that matter, what did the public get for its $180 billion? Senators might want an answer before they vote to give Bernanke another four years. Bernanke's distress was revealed last week when he suddenly announced that he wants a GAO audit of the entire AIG deal-making. That was jarring because Bernanke has repeatedly claimed the Congressional demands for a GAO audit of the Federal Reserve would destroy this sanctified institution.
The smell of scandal poses a more fundamental question about the future of the Federal Reserve. The president's financial reform proposals would authorize the Federal Reserve to become the super-regulator of the entire financial system--empowered in privileged secrecy to decide the most fateful matters of who should fail, who should be saved. The largest banking institutions are comfortable with this "reform," since they proposed the idea. Anyone else who looks closely at the Fed and the AIG fiasco should see immediately the alarming implications.

Blocking Bernanke is Smart Economics, Smart Politics for Dems

posted by John Nichols on 01/26/2010 @ 11:08am



If the Democratic Party wants to lose – or, to be more precise, wants to lose badly in 2010 and 2012, it need only maintain its current loyalty to the most powerful interests on Wall Street.
The United States already has a party of Wall Street. It does not need two.
Yet, despite an occasional populist turn (like his current bank bashing), President Obama has with his absurd nominations and even more absurd policies given every indication that he intends to position the Democratic Party closer to corporate interests than all but the most reprehensible Republicans.
Forget about Obama's rhetorical flourishes. As a candidate and as a president, he has too frequently chosen to side with multinational corporations rather than working Americans.
After he secured the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination, Obama told Fortune magazine that business executives did not need to worry about his talk of reforming U.S. free trade policies; despite some nice rhetorical flourishes on the primary campaign trail in hard-hit industrial states, Obama said, he had no intention of embracing or implementing a fair trade agenda.
Once he was elected, Obama selected as his chief of staff the Democratic party's most ardent advocate for free trade and the broader corporate program, Rahm Emanuel. Then, the new president peopled his administration with Wall Street insiders like Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and economic adviser Larry Summers.
When it came time to push for stimulus legislation, Obama accepted a plan that squeezed necessary spending for job creation in order to pay for tax cuts for wealthier Americans. Now, instead of the promised unemployment rate of 8 percent or below, we're in double digits.
When it came time to fund an automobile-industry bailout, Obama implemented a plan that shifted tens of billions of money from then U.S. Treasury into the accounts of firms that then announced they would close more than two dozen U.S. auto plants and use the federal money to fund the opening of new factories in China and Mexico. At the same time, those companies forced thousands of auto dealerships to shut their doors and layoff more than 100,000 workers.
In the fight over financial-services regulation, Obama and his aides have repeatedly rejected serious moves to hold banks and brokers to account – creating a circumstance where Democrats in the House and Senate must battle not just Wall Street and the Republican Party but the White House if they hope to achieve meaningful reforms. Even now, as Obama tries to surf some of the anger at big banks, polling tells us that Americans are skeptical – and rightly so, as the president's party continues to collect campaign contributions from, you guessed it, the big banks.
If John McCain had compiled Obama's record, he would be condemned by even the most moderate Democrats as a tool of the corporate elites.
Because Obama is a Democrat, many in his own party continue to cut him slack.
In doing so, they are giving the party of Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman just enough rope to hang itself in 2010.
Unless there is a radical shift in direction, Democrats will find themselves running in this fall's congressional and state elections as the party of an economic status quo that most Americans believe is corrupt in its character and damaging in its practices.
How can the Democrats save themselves?
By saying "no" to Obama and to Wall Street when it comes to the direction of the Federal Reserve. Hopefully, that "no" will be heard by the president and his aides in time for the White House to set a sounder course.
But regardless of how Obama responds, congressional Democrats can and should raise the necessary objection – and act upon it when Bernanke's confirmation vote is taken later this week.
The president has nominated Ben Bernanke for a second four-year term as Federal Reserve chairman. No move sums up the failure of Obama and his aides to break with the corporatist policies of the Bush administration more explicitly than the attempt to keep George Bush's Fed chair on the job.
Because the secretive and manipulative Federal Reserve plays such a definitional role in setting and implementing economic policies, Obama's decision to retain those responsible for the current mess is wrongheaded in every sense: economically, socially and politically.
Smart Democrats and independents are refusing to go along with the president's program.
In announcing his decision to vote against Bernanke's reconfirmation, U.S. Senator Russ Feingold, D-Wisconsin, summed things up well:

"A chief responsibility of the Chairman of the Federal Reserve is to ensure a sound financial system. Under the watch of Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve permitted grossly irresponsible financial activities that led to the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Under Chairman Bernanke's watch predatory mortgage lending flourished, and ‘too big to fail' financial giants were permitted to engage in activities that put our nation's economy at risk. And as it responds to the crisis it helped to usher in, the Federal Reserve under Chairman Bernanke's leadership continues to resist appropriate efforts to review that response, how taxpayers' money was being used, and whether it acted appropriately."
Feingold joins a growing chorus of progressive opposition to the Fed chair's reconfirmation, an opposition that has been led by Senator Bernie Sanders.
The Vermont independent notes that, as chairman of President George W. Bush Council of Economic Advisors and Fed chair: "Mr. Bernanke, who was recently endorsed for reappointment by Alan Greenspan, played a major role in the deregulatory efforts that enabled major financial institutions to engage in reckless and illegal behavior. The American people gave us the responsibility to bring about change, not the maintenance of the status quo. Why, at this difficult moment in American history, should we reappoint Wall Street's candidate as chairman of the Fed?"
Sanders recently offered his colleagues a list of "Four Reasons Why Democrats Should Oppose the Bernanke Reappointment", which concludes: "Instead of confirming one of the key architects of George Bush's economic agenda, a new nominee could transform the Fed into a central bank committed to the needs of the middle class of this country rather than powerful Wall Street executives responsible for the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression."
No one with any sense of the mood of the American people regarding the economy could miss the logic of this argument.
Unfortunately, President Obama seems to be missing the point – even with the recent wake-up call from Massachusetts voters who filled the late Ted Kennedy's Senate seat with a conservative Republican.
Senate Democrats have an opportunity to do more for Obama than the president is willing to do for himself.
"The defeat of Ben Bernanke would give President Obama a golden opportunity to nominate someone who will move the Fed in a new direction and put an end to the Fed's relationship with big banks and Wall Street," says Sanders.
That's the smart and necessary play.
The Senate should block Bernanke as the first step in forcing the President Obama and his administration to recognize the reality that, according to recent polls, more than sixty percent of voters see: When it comes to economics, the United States is headed in the wrong direction.
Instead of steering toward Wall Street, Obama should be veering toward Main Street.
If the president refuses to make the left turn that is needed, then Democratic senators should take the wheel and correct the country's course.