Tag Archives: republicans

Big-name Republicans are taking a carbon-tax plan to the White House.

The Seattle City Council voted unanimously Tuesday to withdraw $3 billion from the bank, in part because it is funding the Dakota Access Pipeline, and the city’s mayor said he would sign the measure.

The vote delivered a win for pipeline foes, albeit on a bleak day for the #NoDAPL movement. Earlier in the day, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers announced that it will allow construction of the pipeline’s final leg and forgo an environmental impact statement.

Before the vote, many Native speakers took the floor in support of divestment, including members of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, Tsimshian First Nation, and Muckleshoot Indian Tribe.

Seattle will withdraw its $3 billion when the city’s current contract with Wells Fargo expires in 2018. Meanwhile, council members will seek out a more socially responsible bank. Unfortunately, the pickings are somewhat slim, as Bank of America, Chase, CitiBank, ING, and a dozen other banks have all invested in the pipeline.

While $3 billion is just a small sliver of Wells Fargo’s annual deposit collection of $1.3 trillion, the council hopes its vote will send a message to other banks. Activism like this has worked before — in November, Norway’s largest bank sold all of its assets connected to Dakota Access. With any luck, more will follow.

View this article – 

Big-name Republicans are taking a carbon-tax plan to the White House.

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, Green Light, ONA, Ringer, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Big-name Republicans are taking a carbon-tax plan to the White House.

Why is California building fossil-fuel power plants it doesn’t need?

The state’s Republican governor, Larry Hogan, had vetoed a bill that would require utilities to buy 25 percent of their electricity from wind, hydroelectric dams, and other renewable sources by 2020, but legislators voted to override his veto.

Now this new, stronger renewable energy standard replaces the previous one, which had called for utilities to be getting 20 percent of their power from clean sources by 2020.

Democrats argued the bill would create jobs, mitigate climate change, and clean up air pollution. Republicans said it would cost too much. According to the Baltimore Sun, “Nonpartisan legislative analysts estimated it might raise residential electricity bills by 48 cents to $1.45 per month.”

It’s easy to focus on the U.S. presidency — that’s the center of the national reality show. But much of the substantive policy in this country is made on the state and local levels, where people are often more practical than ideological — or, you could say, more likely to be tailored for reality, rather than for reality TV.

Originally posted here: 

Why is California building fossil-fuel power plants it doesn’t need?

Posted in alo, Anchor, Everyone, FF, For Dummies, G & F, GE, green energy, LAI, ONA, PUR, Ringer, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why is California building fossil-fuel power plants it doesn’t need?

Retirement Advisors Now Free to Rip You Off Again

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Nine months ago President Obama signed an executive order that required retirement advisers to act in the best interest of their client. That seems like a good idea, doesn’t it? Maybe to you it does, but as it turns out, Republicans hate it. It’s just more nanny state-ism. They think everyone should have the freedom to pick financial advisors who get secret kickbacks for steering you into lousy investments.

Donald Trump doesn’t actually seem to care one way or another, but whatever. If Republicans want to repeal it, what the hell:

So that’s that. A few seconds after he signed the EO, a reporter tried to ask him a question about Iran. “They’re not behaving,” Trump said, and the pool was escorted out.

Link:  

Retirement Advisors Now Free to Rip You Off Again

Posted in Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Retirement Advisors Now Free to Rip You Off Again

Did Mike Flynn Accept Illegal Payments From the Russian Government?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

House Democrats have asked Secretary of Defense James Mattis to investigate potentially illegal payments from Russia’s government to retired General Mike Flynn, currently serving as President Trump’s National Security Advisor:

Defense Department rules make it clear that this restriction also applies to payments from entities owned by foreign governments, including state-owned press operations like RT. Nonetheless, Jason Chaffetz and other House Republicans have no interest in pursuing this. IOKIYAR.

Russ Choma has more here.

More – 

Did Mike Flynn Accept Illegal Payments From the Russian Government?

Posted in FF, GE, Jason, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Did Mike Flynn Accept Illegal Payments From the Russian Government?

Yet Again, Republicans Demonstrate the Mean-Spiritedness at the Dark Heart of Their Party

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In situations where most people get angry, I mostly get depressed. Today I feel like hiding under a rock.

Yesterday President Trump made good on his campaign promise to halt immigration of Muslims into the United States “until we know what’s going on.” An explicit ban on Muslims would be illegal, of course, even considering the president’s broad authority over immigration, so instead he picked seven Muslim countries and banned their citizens from entering the US for 90 days—by which time, presumably, Trump will have figured out what’s going on. He also banned refugees from everywhere for 120 days. The result has been rampant chaos and pointless suffering.

A friend writes: “I’m amazed at how badly Trump, et al. have been handling the executive orders they’ve been churning out. Don’t they know the orders are legal documents, not corporate memos?” That’s a good question. As near as I can tell, Trump is treating his executive orders the same way he treats his tweets: they’re designed as communiques to his fans, and that’s about it. The actual consequences hardly matter.

What else can you make of this latest bumbling fiasco? Consider:

Not a single Muslim extremist from any of the seven designated countries has ever committed an act of terrorism on American soil.

But residents of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, and other US “allies” are exempt, even though their citizens have committed acts of terrorism here. By coincidence, these are also countries where Trump has commercial interests.

The executive order mis-cites the relevant immigration statute. Ed Whelan wonders if this means the Office of Legal Counsel is out of the loop:

The refugee ban is heartbreaking, especially for folks who have sold everything and were literally in the airport waiting to board a plane when they were turned back. But the order also applies to green card holders. These are legal residents. If they were overseas at the time the ban went into effect, they can’t return home.

There’s no excuse for this. The EO could have exempted green card holders. At the very least, it could have gone into effect for them after a warning period. But nobody in the White House gave a damn. So now airports are jammed with legal residents who are trying to return home to their families but are being denied entry.

The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security are allowed to issue exemptions on a case-by-case basis. Does this mean either of them can, or that both have to sign off? Because there is no Secretary of State right now.

Republicans are mostly too callous, or too craven, to speak up about this debacle. I don’t need to bother checking to see what Breitbart and Ann Coulter think. I’m sure they’re thrilled. But even mainstream conservatives are largely unwilling to speak up about this. The Wall Street Journal editorial page has been unable to rouse itself so far to express an opinion. Ditto for the Weekly Standard. I thought the same was true of National Review, but no: they roused themselves to mostly approve of what Trump is doing. Paul Ryan, who once thought this kind of thing was terrible, is also on board. So is Mitch McConnell. And Mike Lee. And most of the rest of the GOP caucus. This is how we got Trump in the first place. Is it really worth it just for another tax cut?

Airports are now flooded with stranded travelers. People who have lived in the US for years are unable to return to their homes. Nobody knows if any exceptions will be forthcoming from our Secretaries of State or Homeland Security. It’s chaos everywhere.

And for no reason. Refugees are already extremely tightly vetted. Visas are tightly vetted too from the countries on Trump’s list. The green-card chaos could have easily been avoided if anyone had cared enough to think through the executive order before issuing it. Or if Trump had thought that any high-ranking Republicans would make him pay a price for being so ham-handed.

But they didn’t. As always, Republicans are ruled by a mean-spiritedness that’s just plain nauseating. They’re perfectly willing to go along with a plan that will cause tremendous hardship for other people even though they know perfectly well it will do nothing for national security. Its only real purpose is to send a message to a GOP base eager for a show of bravado against the rest of the world. Is that worth a bit of senseless cruelty aimed at defenseless foreigners? Of course it is. Hell, that’s the whole point. And the suffering this causes? As usual, they just don’t give a damn.

Source: 

Yet Again, Republicans Demonstrate the Mean-Spiritedness at the Dark Heart of Their Party

Posted in alo, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Yet Again, Republicans Demonstrate the Mean-Spiritedness at the Dark Heart of Their Party

Here Are Our Top 20 Imports From Mexico

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

How much would a 20 percent tariff on Mexican imports cost us? I think it’s pointless to delve very deeply into this until President Trump and congressional Republicans produce a serious plan of some kind. Relying on random tweets and leaks from GOP gatherings will just drive us all crazy, as we try to analyze every dumb idea that gets run up the flagpole. Hell, even Paul Krugman says he’s a little confused about some of this stuff, and his Nobel Prize was for international trade.

However, there is one bit of raw data that you might as well get familiar with, since it’s not going to change. Here are our top 20 imports from Mexico:

I’ve highlighted a few of the categories that get the most attention: cars, televisions, crude oil, and produce. Generally speaking, if we tax these things at X percent, their price in the US is going to increase X percent. It won’t be quite that much, since trade will adjust based on the taxes, and in the long run the dollar will rise. Probably. And this all assumes there’s no retaliation from Mexico, which there probably would be.

Still, in the short and medium term, a 20 percent tax will increase the price of Mexican goods by 20 percent. That means a Ford Focus will cost 20 percent more, flat-screen televisions will cost 20 percent more, and avocados will cost 20 percent more. The problem, of course, is that Ford can’t increase the price of a Focus by 20 percent. Nobody would buy them. So they’ll just have to keep prices low and take it in the shorts.

Bottom line: in some cases, prices will go up, which will be bad for US consumers. In other cases, importers who are stuck with Mexican factories will have to accept lower profits, which is bad for US companies. In yet other cases, imports will just cease and plants will be shut down, which will be bad for Mexico.

So who will this be good for? That’s a very good question. In the case of cars and TVs, probably Japan and South Korea. In the case of produce, maybe Chile. In the case of crude oil, maybe Iran.

Of course, if we decide to put a tax on all imports from everywhere—not just Mexico—then consumer prices of just about everything will go up with no release valve. This would violate every trade treaty we’re part of, which means that the entire world would probably retaliate. In the end, prices would go up and American factories would either keep production unchanged or even cut back some. This would be pretty disastrous for the working class folks who voted for Trump.

But that’s what everyone is talking about.

Read more – 

Here Are Our Top 20 Imports From Mexico

Posted in Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here Are Our Top 20 Imports From Mexico

Who installs more solar power? Republicans and Democrats are pretty much tied.

On Thursday, TransCanada, the corporation behind the infamous project, resubmitted an application to the State Department for permission to build the pipeline across the U.S.-Canada border.

Just two days earlier, President Donald Trump had signed a presidential memorandum formally inviting the company to give the pipeline another go. Apparently, TransCanada got right down to work.

“This privately funded infrastructure project will help meet America’s growing energy needs,” said TransCanada CEO Russ Girling, “as well as create tens of thousands of well-paying jobs.” A 2013 State Department report found the pipeline would create 28,000 jobs, but just 35 would be permanent.

Barack Obama rejected the pipeline plan in 2015, after indigenous groups and environmentalists fought it for nearly a decade. Now that a new application has been submitted, the project needs to be OK’d by both the State Department and Trump to proceed. Nebraska also needs to review and approve the project, which it’s expected to do.

Last June, TransCanada took advantage of the North American Free Trade Agreement — a deal Trump disdains — to file a $15 billion claim against the U.S. government for rejecting its Keystone proposal. Oh, what a tangled web we weave.

Originally posted here – 

Who installs more solar power? Republicans and Democrats are pretty much tied.

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, Ringer, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized, Wiley, wind power | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Who installs more solar power? Republicans and Democrats are pretty much tied.

Foreclosure Victims Say They Were Mistreated by Trump’s Treasury Pick

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

After Donald Trump nominated longtime Goldman Sachs executive Steven Mnuchin to be secretary of the treasury, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the Democrats’ leading anti-Wall Street crusader, asked to include “victims of Mnuchin’s foreclosure machine” at his Senate confirmation hearing. According to Warren, Senate Republicans rebuffed her request. So on Wednesday, one day before Mnuchin goes before the Senate, Warren convened a panel of women who testified that OneWest Bank, under Mnuchin’s leadership, ruthlessly tried to take away their homes.

“If Steve Mnuchin become secretary of treasury, if he runs our country the way he ran OneWest Bank—cutthroat—this country is in trouble,” said Sylvia Oliver, a New Jersey woman whose home was scheduled to be foreclosed on by OneWest on Wednesday. According to Oliver, OneWest has refused to modify her mortgage, but she managed to stave off foreclosure with the assistance of Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), who was at Wednesday’s forum.

In early 2009, Mnuchin led a team of investors in purchasing failed home lender IndyMac from the federal government—after extracting a promise that the government would help pick up the tab for any losses—and took over as CEO of the bank, which changed its name to OneWest. During his tenure, which covered the time when the four women who testified ran into trouble with the bank, OneWest was known for its aggressive tactics in dealing with foreclosure. In 2015, Mnuchin sold OneWest to another California bank, CIT, for more than twice what he and his fellow investors had paid. Mnuchin, who had previously donated to Democratic candidates, joined Trump’s campaign fundraising team in May 2016, when Trump was still toxic to many Republicans, and he became one of Trump’s first announced Cabinet picks.

“The OneWest model was terrible for homeowners, but it was great for Mr. Mnuchin,” Warren said on Wednesday, claiming that Mnuchin pocketed more than $200 million from the sale to CIT. “At Thursday’s hearing, he will have the opportunity to explain why his years of grinding families into the dirt at OneWest Bank does not disqualify him from becoming the nation’s top economic official.” (A spokesman for Senate Finance Committee chairman Orrin Hatch did not respond to a request for confirmation that Warren had asked to include the foreclosure victims in Thursday’s hearing.)

Cristina Clifford, a California acupuncturist, told the panel that her business began to falter in 2009 and she struggled to make her mortgage payments to IndyMac. Clifford said the bank told her that she didn’t qualify for a mortgage adjustment because she had always made her payments on time. She said she stopped doing so, on the bank’s recommendation. But by the time she was approved for a mortgage modification and submitted the paperwork, the bank was under Mnuchin’s control. It cashed the check she sent with the paperwork, she said, but insisted it never received her application. This happened twice, Clifford said, and eventually the house was sold by the bank, even as she says her lawyer was attempting to work with OneWest to avoid a foreclosure.

“It was OneWest that saw a chance to make money,” Clifford told Mother Jones. “They could’ve kept me in the house and worked with me, or they could’ve sold the house and made a couple extra thousand dollars.”

Senate Democrats are expected to grill Mnuchin on OneWest’s business tactics tomorrow. The Hill obtained an advance copy of Mnuchin’s prepared statements and reported that he will defend OneWest as “an American success story.”

“My group had nothing to do with the creation of risky loans in the IndyMac loan portfolios,” Mnuchin reportedly plans to say. “We did this because we believed in our ability to rebuild and create a successful regional bank. We believed in recovery for the American economy.”

This article is from: 

Foreclosure Victims Say They Were Mistreated by Trump’s Treasury Pick

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Foreclosure Victims Say They Were Mistreated by Trump’s Treasury Pick

CBO: If Obamacare Is Repealed, Premiums Will Skyrocket and Millions Will Lose Coverage

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

A few days ago Newt Gingrich wrote a jeremiad against the Congressional Budget Office, which acts as the official scorekeeper for the effect of legislation. It was obsolete, corrupt, left-wing, etc. etc. and simply didn’t know how to account for a dynamic, entrepreneurial, red-tape-cutter like Donald Trump.

Gingrich’s real problem, of course, is that the CBO is required to stick close to reality, which means that it often produces projections and estimates that are inconvenient for Republicans. Take today, for example. Senate Democrats asked for an estimate of what would happen if Obamacare were repealed. Here’s the CBO’s answer:

18 million people would lose insurance. By 2026, that would increase to 32 million.
Premiums in the individual market would skyrocket, increasing 20-25 percent in the first year and about 50 percent by 2026.
Insurers would exit the individual market en masse. About half the nation’s population would live in areas with no individual insurers at all, rising to three-quarters by 2026.

That is inconvenient, isn’t it? This is what happens if you eliminate Obamacare but keep in place the ban on pre-existing conditions—which Republicans all say they support and which they can’t repeal anyway. Premiums would skyrocket, 32 million people would lose coverage, and insurers would abandon about three-quarters of the country.

This is what Republicans need to address with their “replace” plan. But they can’t do it and they know it.

Source article – 

CBO: If Obamacare Is Repealed, Premiums Will Skyrocket and Millions Will Lose Coverage

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on CBO: If Obamacare Is Repealed, Premiums Will Skyrocket and Millions Will Lose Coverage

Even Lots of Republicans Think the Feds Should Guarantee Health Care For All

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Via Pew Research, here’s another reason that Republicans might have more trouble than they think repealing Obamacare:

Republicans have been chanting “repeal and replace” for so long that people have started to believe the “replace” part. Even among Republicans, half of those with working-class incomes and a third of those with middle-class incomes believe the federal government ought to guarantee health coverage for everyone. It’s only rich Republicans who are dead set against it.

So what is Donald Trump going to do about that? Unfortunately, the answer is pretty obvious: he’s going to propose a replacement plan that does hardly anything for anyone and then he’s going to lie about it—loudly and relentlessly. Congressional Republicans will all join in, and the press will then report that the effect of the replacement plan is “controversial.” Because, really, who can say what it does? All those numbers are pretty confusing, after all.

Source article:

Even Lots of Republicans Think the Feds Should Guarantee Health Care For All

Posted in Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Even Lots of Republicans Think the Feds Should Guarantee Health Care For All