Torture... Where is the Outrage?

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

.

Geithner pushes his financial reforms on Capitol Hill

The Treasury secretary’s plan aims to rein in the industry’s boom-bust cycle and soothe Europe ahead of the G-20 summit. The push to remake the financial industry’s rules of the road in hopes of softening future boom-and-bust cycles gathered momentum this week with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner urging Congress Thursday to create new systems to monitor and control risks.
So far in the financial crisis, Washington has acted mainly to contain the immediate damage to the economy. But any deeper fixes could also yield results quickly.
By signaling a receptivity to increased regulation – a key European demand – the announcement might strengthen President Obama’s ability to nudge Germany and other nations on a US priority at next week’s meeting of the Group of 20 leaders: expanding government spending as an economic stimulus.

Federal agencies would also have new authority to intervene at large, troubled financial institutions like AIG if parts of Mr. Geithner’s plan are enacted into law.
Longer term, clarifying potential reforms could lift economic confidence. “It is important, because, let’s face it, we got into this because of regulatory issues,” says David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor’s in New York. “It’s not going to be easy.”

Among the controversial points that Congress will wrestle with: What body should be empowered to be the watchdog of major risks to the financial system?
One leading candidate for the job is the Federal Reserve. But the Fed already has the major mission of setting monetary policy – and being a so-called lender of last resort in financial crises. Also, the Fed is coming in for its share of criticism in Congress lately for some of its actions during the crisis.
An alternative is to set up a new entity to do the job. Either way, this new role would come on top of – not as a replacement for – other agencies overseeing parts of the financial industry.

Geithner’s goals
Appearing before the House Financial Services Committee on Thursday, Mr. Geithner outlined key goals for regulatory reform. “The system proved too unstable and fragile, subject to significant crises every few years, periodic booms in real-estate markets and in credit, followed by busts,” Geithner said. “These failures have caused a great loss of confidence in … a system that over time has been a tremendous asset for the American economy.”
He outlined four broad areas reforms will cover. They include protecting consumers and investors, eliminating gaps in the regulatory structure, and enhancing the coordination of rules in a more global economy.

Systemic risk
The fourth area of reform, addressing “systemic risk,” was his focus Thursday. He proposed:

•Naming a single entity to track systemic stability across all sectors of financial activity.
•Creating a resolution mechanism for important nonbank firms, so that they can be assisted or shut down, if needed, outside of traditional bankruptcy.
•Tightening the capital requirements for large financial firms so that they would rein in cyclical tendencies. During a boom, firms would have to set aside more reserves, as a way to curb excesses and provide a cushion for bad times.
•Requiring large hedge funds and other private-investment funds to register with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and be more transparent to regulators regarding their leverage – or borrowing – and risk.
•Establishing oversight and protections for investments known as derivatives, such as the credit-default swaps that fueled AIG’s collapse.
•Crafting SEC rules to make money-market funds safer, reducing the risk that account holders would panic or face losses in a crisis.

Geithner is the point man in a larger effort by the Obama administration to clarify these goals. Other officials, including Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, have urged similar steps this month. Mr. Bernanke said the AIG failure could have been handled in a less costly way had the government had the authority to deal with troubled nonbank firms the way the the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) deals with failed banks. If other firms falter, such authority might prove useful to regulators before this recession is over.

Regulatory reform can be viewed as the final piece of an overall plan that, Geithner says, will succeed over time in ending the credit crisis. When a congressman asked him earlier this week about the whether a Plan B was needed, Geithner responded confidently. “This plan will work,” he said. “We just need to keep at it.”

Where this fits in
There are other parts of the plan, which have been announced in recent weeks. They include reviving the housing market by preventing foreclosures and keeping interest rates low, investing in weak banks so they have enough capital to cope with loan losses, and developing a public-private partnership to buy troubled bank assets that have been a cause of investor uncertainty.

After months of worsening economic news, some recent data have made economists optimistic that the economy may hit bottom later this year. Housing-market news has been less grim, and buyers may be encouraged not only by a first-time buyer’s tax credit, but also by mortgage rates that this week fell to historic lows below 5 percent on 30-year fixed-rate loans.
Meanwhile, the stock market has risen strongly this month, and consumer spending has shown signs of stabilizing after a winter plunge. But it remains unclear whether the Geithner plan will work, and whether banks will be healthy enough to help fuel a strong economic recovery. Mr. Wyss of S&P, for one, doesn’t share Geithner’s level of confidence that current policies will be effective. But “I’m feeling a little more confident today than I was a month ago,” he says.
Financial experts say that moves to improve the regulatory structure should help the functioning of an industry that plays a vital role in the economy – and that has proved subject to abuses. One key step, they say, is to make sure that rules do better at covering broad types of activity across a range of firms. The worst excesses in mortgage lending, for example, arose among less-regulated mortgage brokers with mainstream banks playing a supporting or follow-on role. Another key could be to reform how bankers are paid and given incentives. Geithner made brief reference to compensation, but this is a tricky issue for Congress to address. The goal might be to set guidelines so that pay depends on managing and reducing risks as well as achieving profit goals.

Fox news examines atheism with Bill O'Reilly

Part One:




Part Two:



.

Dear A.I.G., I Quit!

The following is a letter sent on Tuesday by Jake DeSantis, an executive vice president of the American International Group’s financial products unit, to Edward M. Liddy, the chief executive of A.I.G.

DEAR Mr. Liddy,

It is with deep regret that I submit my notice of resignation from A.I.G. Financial Products. I hope you take the time to read this entire letter. Before describing the details of my decision, I want to offer some context:

I am proud of everything I have done for the commodity and equity divisions of A.I.G.-F.P. I was in no way involved in — or responsible for — the credit default swap transactions that have hamstrung A.I.G. Nor were more than a handful of the 400 current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. Most of those responsible have left the company and have conspicuously escaped the public outrage.

After 12 months of hard work dismantling the company — during which A.I.G. reassured us many times we would be rewarded in March 2009 — we in the financial products unit have been betrayed by A.I.G. and are being unfairly persecuted by elected officials. In response to this, I will now leave the company and donate my entire post-tax retention payment to those suffering from the global economic downturn. My intent is to keep none of the money myself.

I take this action after 11 years of dedicated, honorable service to A.I.G. I can no longer effectively perform my duties in this dysfunctional environment, nor am I being paid to do so. Like you, I was asked to work for an annual salary of $1, and I agreed out of a sense of duty to the company and to the public officials who have come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can no longer justify spending 10, 12, 14 hours a day away from my family for the benefit of those who have let me down.

You and I have never met or spoken to each other, so I’d like to tell you about myself. I was raised by schoolteachers working multiple jobs in a world of closing steel mills. My hard work earned me acceptance to M.I.T., and the institute’s generous financial aid enabled me to attend. I had fulfilled my American dream.

I started at this company in 1998 as an equity trader, became the head of equity and commodity trading and, a couple of years before A.I.G.’s meltdown last September, was named the head of business development for commodities. Over this period the equity and commodity units were consistently profitable — in most years generating net profits of well over $100 million. Most recently, during the dismantling of A.I.G.-F.P., I was an integral player in the pending sale of its well-regarded commodity index business to UBS. As you know, business unit sales like this are crucial to A.I.G.’s effort to repay the American taxpayer.

The profitability of the businesses with which I was associated clearly supported my compensation. I never received any pay resulting from the credit default swaps that are now losing so much money. I did, however, like many others here, lose a significant portion of my life savings in the form of deferred compensation invested in the capital of A.I.G.-F.P. because of those losses. In this way I have personally suffered from this controversial activity — directly as well as indirectly with the rest of the taxpayers.

I have the utmost respect for the civic duty that you are now performing at A.I.G. You are as blameless for these credit default swap losses as I am. You answered your country’s call and you are taking a tremendous beating for it.

But you also are aware that most of the employees of your financial products unit had nothing to do with the large losses. And I am disappointed and frustrated over your lack of support for us. I and many others in the unit feel betrayed that you failed to stand up for us in the face of untrue and unfair accusations from certain members of Congress last Wednesday and from the press over our retention payments, and that you didn’t defend us against the baseless and reckless comments made by the attorneys general of New York and Connecticut.

My guess is that in October, when you learned of these retention contracts, you realized that the employees of the financial products unit needed some incentive to stay and that the contracts, being both ethical and useful, should be left to stand. That’s probably why A.I.G. management assured us on three occasions during that month that the company would “live up to its commitment” to honor the contract guarantees.

That may be why you decided to accelerate by three months more than a quarter of the amounts due under the contracts. That action signified to us your support, and was hardly something that one would do if he truly found the contracts “distasteful.”

That may also be why you authorized the balance of the payments on March 13.

At no time during the past six months that you have been leading A.I.G. did you ask us to revise, renegotiate or break these contracts — until several hours before your appearance last week before Congress.

I think your initial decision to honor the contracts was both ethical and financially astute, but it seems to have been politically unwise. It’s now apparent that you either misunderstood the agreements that you had made — tacit or otherwise — with the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, various members of Congress and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo of New York, or were not strong enough to withstand the shifting political winds.

You’ve now asked the current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. to repay these earnings. As you can imagine, there has been a tremendous amount of serious thought and heated discussion about how we should respond to this breach of trust.

As most of us have done nothing wrong, guilt is not a motivation to surrender our earnings. We have worked 12 long months under these contracts and now deserve to be paid as promised. None of us should be cheated of our payments any more than a plumber should be cheated after he has fixed the pipes but a careless electrician causes a fire that burns down the house.

Many of the employees have, in the past six months, turned down job offers from more stable employers, based on A.I.G.’s assurances that the contracts would be honored. They are now angry about having been misled by A.I.G.’s promises and are not inclined to return the money as a favor to you.

The only real motivation that anyone at A.I.G.-F.P. now has is fear. Mr. Cuomo has threatened to “name and shame,” and his counterpart in Connecticut, Richard Blumenthal, has made similar threats — even though attorneys general are supposed to stand for due process, to conduct trials in courts and not the press.

So what am I to do? There’s no easy answer. I know that because of hard work I have benefited more than most during the economic boom and have saved enough that my family is unlikely to suffer devastating losses during the current bust. Some might argue that members of my profession have been overpaid, and I wouldn’t disagree.

That is why I have decided to donate 100 percent of the effective after-tax proceeds of my retention payment directly to organizations that are helping people who are suffering from the global downturn. This is not a tax-deduction gimmick; I simply believe that I at least deserve to dictate how my earnings are spent, and do not want to see them disappear back into the obscurity of A.I.G.’s or the federal government’s budget. Our earnings have caused such a distraction for so many from the more pressing issues our country faces, and I would like to see my share of it benefit those truly in need.

On March 16 I received a payment from A.I.G. amounting to $742,006.40, after taxes. In light of the uncertainty over the ultimate taxation and legal status of this payment, the actual amount I donate may be less — in fact, it may end up being far less if the recent House bill raising the tax on the retention payments to 90 percent stands. Once all the money is donated, you will immediately receive a list of all recipients.

This choice is right for me. I wish others at A.I.G.-F.P. luck finding peace with their difficult decision, and only hope their judgment is not clouded by fear.

Mr. Liddy, I wish you success in your commitment to return the money extended by the American government, and luck with the continued unwinding of the company’s diverse businesses — especially those remaining credit default swaps. I’ll continue over the short term to help make sure no balls are dropped, but after what’s happened this past week I can’t remain much longer — there is too much bad blood. I’m not sure how you will greet my resignation, but at least Attorney General Blumenthal should be relieved that I’ll leave under my own power and will not need to be “shoved out the door.”

Sincerely,

Jake DeSantis

Crazy Michele Bachmann Calls for Armed Revolution

Michele Marie Bachmann (born on April 6, 1956)is the Republican Representative of Minnesota's 6th congressional district. She is the third woman and first Republican woman to represent Minnesota in Congress. She defeated her Democratic challenger, Elwyn Tinklenberg, in the 2008 election in a race that had gained national attention following her controversial televised call for the media to investigate members of Congress for perceived anti-American bias, including Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

It's obviously just rhetoric from overly-excited far-right lawmakers. It's no doubt intended to fire up the activists (and donors) who help Republicans succeed.

But when Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) casually refers to elected Democratic officials as the "enemy," and nonchalantly refers to keeping her supporters "armed and dangerous," it's probably a good time to remind Republican lawmakers to turn the temperature a bit. (via the University of Minnesota and the Dump Bachmann blog.)

Bachmann appeared over the weekend on the First Team radio show with John Hinderaker and Brian Ward, speaking about the horrible stuff that the Democrats are doing: "I'm a foreign correspondent on enemy lines and I try to let everyone back here in Minnesota know exactly the nefarious activities that are taking place in Washington."

Bachmann also spoke out against the cap-and-trade proposals currently making their way through Washington, and how she'll be distributing information against it at an upcoming event in the district. "I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax, because we need to fight back," said Bachmann. "Thomas Jefferson told us, having a revolution every now and then is a good thing. And the people -- we the people -- are going to have to fight back hard if we're not going to lose our country."

On the one hand, it seems clear that Bachmann was speaking figuratively. On the other hand, is it appropriate for a member of Congress to speak in any context about being armed for revolution?

No, probably not. But this seems to fit in with a larger trend. We have one GOP lawmaker saying the party should emulate the insurgency tactics of the Taliban. We have another arguing the party should position itself as "freedom fighters" taking on the "slide toward socialism."

And now Bachmann is throwing fuel on the fire of right-wing rage.

Obviously, Bachmann and other unhinged conservatives have the right to say what they please. But at a minimum, I think it's fair to describe this kind of talk from elected leaders in positions of authority as irresponsible.

The Target of Congress

The public outrage over the AIG bonuses has undermined support for Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner at a pivotal moment. In an interview broadcast last night on "60 Minutes," Obama expressed strong support for Geithner, who has been criticized in Congress and elsewhere for what some call his halting response to the financial crisis and for not doing more to block the AIG bonuses. AIG paid the bonuses to members in its troubled Financial Services division after receiving more than $170 billion in federal bailout aid.

Still, Geithner is central to the Obama administration's plans for dealing with the global economic crisis, key portions of which are to be rolled out this week.

Geithner did not approve the bonuses of AIG and he did not know about it until, five days before payday, his aids informed him. The contracts were closed in March 2008, while the Board knew that AIG was at the edge of break down. Without the bailout aid AIG should not have reached the payday. Paulson/Bernanke and Congress did not provide a measure to stop paying bonuses in the bailout bill, and while Geithner wasn't in the former Congress nor in the Bush43 administration he is now under fire of the people who are really responsible for the debacle. They want the innocent to burn down for their own sins. But is that all of the motives?
On Thursday, Geithner is scheduled to testify before the House Financial Services Committee about overhauling financial regulation. He is likely to call for giving the Federal Reserve new powers to regulate the financial system as a whole, including power to oversee any institution that is big enough or intertwined enough to pose risks to the financial system.

Conservatives want to block new regulations, Republican and also Democratic conservatives, but they can't block the immense popular Obama doing what almost 85% of the public feels to be right: making an end to the kleptomania in the financial system. If they can get rid of Geithner the Obama administration will be severely beaten in its policies to solve the problems and regenerate the economy at the costs of the conservative bandits and their longtime servants in Congress.

Let's have a look at the real evil genius:

Republican Senator William Philip Gramm
Republican Senator William Philip Gramm was one of five co-sponsors of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. One provision of the bill is often referred to as the "Enron loophole" because some critics blame the provision for permitting the Enron scandal to occur. Gramm's wife, Wendy Lee Gramm, was on the board of directors of Enron when it collapsed, and she was named in many of the Enron shareholder lawsuits.

Between 1995 and 2000, Gramm was the chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. During that time he spearheaded efforts to pass banking deregulation laws, including the landmark Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999, which removed Depression-era laws separating banking, insurance and brokerage activities. As a senator, Gramm often called for reductions in taxes and fraud in government spending.

2007 mortgage and 2008 financial & economic crises
Some economists state that the 1999 legislation spearheaded by Gramm and signed into law by President Clinton "the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act" was partly to blame for the 2007 subprime mortgage crisis and 2008 global economic crisis. The Act is most widely known for repealing portions of the Glass-Steagall Act, which had regulated the financial services industry. Gramm responded to criticism of the act by stating that he saw "no evidence whatsoever" that the sub-prime mortgage crisis was caused in any way "by allowing banks and securities companies and insurance companies to compete against each other." The Act, it should be noted, passed the House by an overwhelming majority and passed by unanimous consent in the Senate, though it was introduced on the last day before Christmas holiday and never debated by either congressional body.
The Washington Post in 2008 named Gramm one of seven "key players" responsible for winning a 1998-1999 fight against regulation of derivatives trading. Gramm's support was later critical in the passage of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, which kept derivatives transactions, including those involving credit default swaps, free of government regulation.
2008 Nobel Laureate in Economics Paul Krugman, a supporter of Barack Obama, described Gramm during the 2008 presidential race as "the high priest of deregulation," and has listed him as the number two person responsible for the economic crisis of 2008 behind only Alan Greenspan. On October 14, 2008, CNN ranked Gramm number seven in its list of the 10 individuals most responsible for the current economic crisis. In January 2009 Guardian City editor Julia Finch identified him as one of twenty-five people who were at the heart of the financial meltdown. An Internet poll currently ranks Gramm #1 among 25 people selected by Time as candidates to blame for the economic crisis.

John McCain 2008 presidential campaign
Gramm was co-chair of John McCain's presidential campaign and his most senior economic adviser from the summer of 2007 until July 18, 2008. In a July 9, 2008 interview on McCain's economic plans, Gramm explained the nation was not in a recession, stating, "You've heard of mental depression; this is a mental recession." He added, "We have sort of become a nation of whiners, you just hear this constant whining, complaining about a loss of competitiveness, America in decline." Gramm's comments immediately became a campaign issue. McCain's opponent, Senator Barack Obama, stated, "America already has one Dr. Phil. We don't need another one when it comes to the economy. ... This economic downturn is not in your head." McCain strongly denounced Gramm's comments. On July 18, 2008 Gramm stepped down from his position with the McCain campaign. Explaining his remarks, Gramm stated that he had used the word "whiners" to describe the nation's politicians rather than the public, stating "the whiners are the leaders." In the same interview, Gramm said, "I'm not going to retract any of it. Every word I said was true."

EU pressure
Obama administration this week is expected to announce new proposals for financial regulation, executive pay, accounting standards, the structure of the International Monetary Fund and other issues ahead of a summit of 20 major nations in London on April 2.

At the summit, leaders will seek to reach a consensus on those and other coordinated steps meant to combat the global economic crisis and prevent a repeat. In particular, France and Germany are seeking to win assurances at the summit that Washington is committed to tighter financial regulations.

Diplomatic sources say the Europeans have largely backed the 24 recommendations contained in a report of an advisory group to the Group of 20 industrialized and developing nations calling for broad reforms, including tighter regulations of hedge funds and rating agencies as well as higher capital requirements for banks.

The details of how to enact such changes are likely to be left to each nation, though the Europeans are pressing for countries including the United States to agree to a rough outline of principles. For instance, they are requesting that the G-20 adopt language that would call for hedge funds to register and report regularly on their size, investment style, borrowing levels and performance. Currently, hedge funds are not subject to rigorous reporting requirements.

The report calls for G-20 nations to take new steps to monitor and prevent excessive levels of executive compensation, although administration officials said that was not a central thrust of the proposals. That would be done partly by having regulators take executive compensation packages into consideration when assessing the overall risk levels at major financial institutions.

Troubled Waters Hard To Bridge

ISTANBUL (IPS) - The fifth World Water Forum (WWF) held in Istanbul ended Sunday with wide- ranging differences among governments and groups with an interest in water.

The forum adopted a declaration calling for "new and adequate resources" for the water sector. It also stressed the need for increased vigilance against corruption and for preparedness for climate change.

But the final declaration by close to 100 ministers made no mention of the hotly contested issue whether water is a human right or a commodity to be traded like oil, gas or gold. It only described access to safe drinking water and sanitation as "a basic human need."

This led to a counter declaration by delegations from Bolivia, Uruguay, Spain, Guatemala, Ecuador, Cuba and Chile, drawing support also from Bangladesh, Benin, Chad, Ethiopia, Honduras, Morocco, Namibia, Niger, Panama, Venezuela, Sri Lanka, Switzerland and South Africa. "We recognise that access to water and sanitation is a human right and we are committed to all necessary actions for the progressive implementation of this right," the dissident statement said.

The European Parliament also supported water as a "fundamental and universal right," according to a statement read by Cristina Gutierrez- Cortinez, Member of the European Parliament from Spain. About 250 parliamentarians and close to 100 mayors too said they recognised water as a basic human right.

The dissenting views received support from the president of the UN General Assembly Miguel D'Escoto Brockmann, who said in a message to the forum on the eve of its closure that "water is a public trust, a common heritage of people and nature, and a fundamental human right. I am convinced that we must challenge the notion that water is a commodity to be bought and sold on the open market."

Also dividing the forum was the issue who should call such meetings. So far it has been the World Water Council (WWC), an international organisation based in Marseille, France, which is not a part of the United Nations. The WWC has some 300 members from 60 countries representing governments and their agencies, international organisations including some UN agencies, water professionals, business interests and NGOs.

The council considers itself a "multi-stakeholder" open to all those interested in the water sector. But its legitimacy was questioned by a coalition of labour and civil society groups from 70 countries at an alternative forum.

The coalition described the WWC as a creation of business interests seeking to privatise water for profit. It asked instead that "polices about water be decided in an open, transparent and democratic forum rather than a trade show for the world's largest water corporations." The WWC counts 40 business groups among its 300 members.

Maude Barlow, advisor to the UN General Assembly president, characterised WWC members as "water lords" without a legitimate mandate, and demanded that future forums be held under the auspices of the UN.

Benin, Bolivia, Chile, Cuba, Ecuador, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay and Venezuela called on "states to develop a global water forum within the framework of the United Nations, based on the principles of democracy, full participation, equity, transparency and social inclusion."

But business had its say. Jack Moss of the group Business Action for Water told the closing session: "Without water, there is no business. Without business, there is no water."

Despite divergences, both the forum and its opponents agreed on the severity of the water crisis and that this was likely to deteriorate once climate change hits water and leads to shortages where water is needed most and flooding where the need is least.

UN figures show that some 1 billion people lack access to clean drinking water. In 2025, roughly 40 percent of the world population will be living in water-scarce regions.

The President of all Media

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

President Obama's Message to Iran

Foreign affairs secretary of the EU Javier Solana said Friday on the last day of the Euro-top in Brussels: "I think that this is a constructive message and I hope that this will open a new chapter in the relations with Iran."

.

How to get the money back

A plan to recoup millions of dollars of American International Group bonuses by taxing them into oblivion has put top Republicans on opposite sides of a riddle: When is a tax hike not a tax hike?

House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) said that he hasn’t made up his mind about the plan — first proposed Tuesday by senior members of the Senate Finance Committee and given a full-throated endorsement by Democratic House leaders Wednesday evening — but that he’s sure that raising taxes on AIG’s bonus recipients isn’t, you know, a tax hike.

“I don’t know [that] anybody would look at that as a tax increase,” Boehner told POLITICO Wednesday.

But Jeb Hensarling would.

The Texas Republican — who until recently was the chairman of the Republican Study Committee — said a tax hike is a tax hike, even if the taxes being hiked are on somebody you don’t like.

“You know, this is the wrong instrument to go around and say [about] people that do things that are reprehensible, ‘I’m just going to tax them,’” Hensarling said. “Who’s up tomorrow? You know, a lot of my colleagues vote on reprehensible legislation — when I’m in power, should I vote to increase their taxes 100 percent?”

Leaders of the Senate Finance Committee are putting together a bill that would impose a 35 percent excise tax on AIG on bonuses greater than $50,000, force the company to be responsible for paying taxes for foreign employees who received the bonuses, and tax by 20 percent any deferred compensation that exceeds $1 million. House leaders are moving forward with similar legislation, which could hit the floor this week.
more...

Tedisco downplays GOP ties

Republican Jim Tedisco is trying to shed his partisan affiliation and connect himself to President Obama in his latest ad – his first TV spot since announcing that he would be running a more positive campaign last week.

“Like the president said, in these difficult times, we’re not Republicans or Democrats, we’re Americans.” Tedisco says in his latest ad. “And that’s the team I’m on.”
We'll see if the bipartisan theme sticks: In the state Assembly, Tedisco is not just a Republican but the leader of his party. When he announced his campaign, he highlighted his record of taking on former Gov. Eliot Spitzer, and blocking some of his proposals -- particularly, his plan to give drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants.
The advertisement comes just after he announced that he would have opposed the president’s stimulus package after spending weeks refusing to take a position on the legislation.
The district, vacated by now-Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, is the most Republican district in New York based on registration figures, but gave President Obama 51 percent of the vote last year.

Tedisco is running against Democrat Scott Murphy for the special election to fill the seat, which will be held on March 31.

Museum finds "secret" message in Lincoln's watch

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A gold watch owned by Abraham Lincoln bears a message marking the start of the U.S. Civil War, but the president never knew of the "secret" inscription uncovered on Tuesday at the National Museum of American History.

The engraving, by watchmaker Jonathan Dillon, is dated April 13, 1861, and reads in part: "Fort Sumpter was attacked by the rebels" and "thank God we have a government."

The museum said it agreed to open the watch to find out if the message really was there after it was contacted by the watchmaker's great-great-grandson, Doug Stiles of Waukegan, Illinois.

The American Civil War began when Confederate troops opened fire on Fort Sumter in Charleston, South Carolina, on April 12, 1861.

Forty-five years later, Dillon the watchmaker told The New York Times that he was repairing Lincoln's watch when he heard that the first shots of the Civil War had been fired.

Dillon said he unscrewed the dial of the watch and used a sharp instrument to mark the historic day on the president's watch. He told the newspaper that, as far as he knew, no one had ever seen the inscription.

"Lincoln never knew of the message he carried in his pocket," Brent Glass, director of the National Museum of American History said in a statement. "It's a personal side of history about an ordinary watchman being inspired to record something for posterity."

Lincoln was elected the 16th president of the United States in November 1860. In the leadup to the Civil War, South Carolina and six other states seceded from the Union before Lincoln's inauguration in March 1861.

End the Use of Chimps in Research

Watch Our Video, Then Take Action

A nine-month-long undercover investigation by The HSUS has exposed the mistreatment of nearly 300 chimpanzees and other primates at the New Iberia Research Center (NIRC) in Louisiana. These chimps, living lives of deprivation and misery, are among the more than 1,000 chimps languishing in laboratories across the United States. Chimps, our closet genetic relative, are complex, social, and long-lived creatures. Many chimps currently warehoused in research facilities have lived for decades behind bars. Especially heartbreaking are stories of the 26 elder chimps at NIRC, who were taken from their mothers in the wild.

More:

Hypocrisy Alert: 32 House Republicans Take Credit for the Economic Bills They Opposed

DCCC press:
The House Republicans' Hypocrisy Hall of Fame is getting jam-packed as even more Republicans - 32 and counting - are celebrating the benefits of President Obama's economic recovery bill and the 2009 Omnibus Appropriations bill in their districts even though they voted against it in Washington.

"While President Obama and Democrats are investing in success, more and more House Republicans are banking on failure. Republicans who say one thing in Washington and another in their districts will be held accountable," said Jennifer Crider, Communications Director for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. "Americans are tired of cynical Republicans playing partisan games on the economy, they want action. No wonder recent polls show that Americans overwhelmingly disapprove of the way Republicans in Congress are handling the economy."

House Republicans Hypocrisy Hall of Fame

House Republicans Voted Against the Economic Recovery Bill in DC, Praise It at Home:

• Representative Elton Gallegly (CA-24) - "Rep. Elton Gallegly, R-Simi Valley, announced Thursday that Thousand Oaks will get $182,881 in community development block grants through the stimulus package... In addition to the stimulus money, Gallegly's office said money for other local projects has been included in a separate funding bill the House passed Wednesday." [Ventura County Star; 2/27/09]

• Representative Howard "Buck" McKeon (CA-25) - "Rep. Howard P. ‘Buck' McKeon (R-Santa Clarita) called the bill ‘not the example of fiscal restraint that we need right now.' Yet it includes McKeon earmarks such as $333,000 to assist Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital in designing and building a helipad and $167,000 for the Autry National Center of the American West to help pay for a new Southwest museum facility." [Los Angeles Times; 3/5/09]

• Representative Jerry Lewis (CA-41) - "Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands) declared: ‘I'm embarrassed by this omnibus spending bill.' Yet the top Republican on the House Appropriations Committee secured more than $18 million in earmarks." [Los Angeles Times; 3/5/09]

• Representative George Radanovich (CA-19) - "Rep. George Radanovich (R-Mariposa) issued a statement on Feb. 4 declaring that he would forego earmarks... Three weeks later, Radanovich submitted a statement to the congressional record listing nearly $6.3 million in earmarks in the omnibus spending bill." [Los Angeles Times; 3/5/09]

• Representative Tom Latham (IA-04) - After voting against the 2009 Omnibus Appropriations bill, Representative Latham issued three press releases congratulating himself for securing funds for projects at home. [Representative Latham's Press Release; 3/2/09, 2/27/09, 2/27/09]

• Representative Tom Petri (WI-06) - Representative Petri is a "strong supporter of the allocation" of $754,000 to restore and maintain navigable channels in the Two Rivers harbor, as "maintaining navigable waters in the area is essential for the local economy." [Manitowoc Herald Times; 2/27/09] Representative Petri voted against the 2009 Omnibus Appropriations bill.

• Representative Steven LaTourette (OH-14) - According to a press release from Representative LaTourette's office, LaTourette said, "I know our local departments are facing rough financial times, and there have been some department layoffs and hiring freezes across the state." It then continues to say that he "is pleased that some departments will benefit from this new COPS program." [Representative LaTourette's Press Release; 2/27/09]

• Representative Dean Heller (NV-02) - "We can ill afford to lose any jobs in Nevada, or anywhere else for that matter." [Elko Daily Free Press; 2/27/09]

• Representative Aaron Schock (IL-18) - "The biodiesel plant is ready to go. I want to call for a meeting with the state to guarantee $20 million in loans for the building of the plant. This could produce real jobs and a real stimulus in the next 30 days." [Peoria Journal Star; 2/17/09]

• Representative Mary Bono Mack (CA-45) - "This funding will provide much-needed assistance to local residents who are at risk of losing their homes or experiencing homelessness... I am pleased that our community will benefit from this funding." [Representative Bono Mack's Press Release; 2/25/09]

• Representative Dave Reichert (WA-08) - "Reichert acknowledges that the stimulus bill will deliver tangible good news to his constituents... ‘I feel a responsibility at this point to make this still work.'" [Boston Globe; 2/24/09]

• Representative Mike Coffman (CO-06) - "I see myself in two roles as a congressman. I think the first role as a policymaker in Washington and the second as an advocate for people inside this district and there are elements we'll probably be discussing - the mortgage proposal - there are probably elements that I disagree with that but if there's somebody in my district eligible for that, I'll fight to make sure they get them." [KUSA-TV; Your Show; 2/22/09]

• Representative Michael McCaul (TX-10) - "I didn't support final passage but at the same time I wanted to make sure if we are spending that kind of money that much of that gets directed to Texas." [KVUE News; 2/22/09]

• Representative Glenn Thompson (PA-05) - Thompson "said he hoped the residents within the county would benefit from the plan's massive spending and tax cuts." [Daily Collegian; 2/19/09]

• Representative Denny Rehberg (MT-AL) - "I'll do anything I can to make this work." [KULR-8; 2/17/09]

• Representative Frank Lucas (OK-03) - "We all need to work very aggressively to make sure that every community that qualifies should be a recipient of whatever we can find in that bill." [Edmond Sun; 2/18/09]

• Representative Chris Lee (NY-26) - "Rep. Chris Lee was opposed to a &787 billion stimulus package signed by President Barack Obama on Tuesday but said he would now fight for funds included in the bill for his district... ‘Now that the bill is passed, I obviously want to ensure I do fight for projects in western New York,' Lee said." [Democrat and Chronicle; 2/18/09]

• Representative Adam Putnam (FL-12) - "Nine GOP House members from Florida, all stimulus no's, joined nine of their Democratic colleagues, all yesses, in asking the feds to grant a waiver giving them access to, you guessed it, hundreds of millions in state stabilization stimulus cash." [Politico; 2/19/09]

• Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL-18) - "Nine GOP House members from Florida, all stimulus no's, joined nine of their Democratic colleagues, all yesses, in asking the feds to grant a waiver giving them access to, you guessed it, hundreds of millions in state stabilization stimulus cash." [Politico; 2/19/09]

• Representative Lincoln Diaz-Balart (FL-21) - "Nine GOP House members from Florida, all stimulus no's, joined nine of their Democratic colleagues, all yesses, in asking the feds to grant a waiver giving them access to, you guessed it, hundreds of millions in state stabilization stimulus cash." [Politico; 2/19/09]

• Representative Tom Rooney (FL-16) - "Nine GOP House members from Florida, all stimulus no's, joined nine of their Democratic colleagues, all yesses, in asking the feds to grant a waiver giving them access to, you guessed it, hundreds of millions in state stabilization stimulus cash." [Politico; 2/19/09] "'The money's coming, Rooney said. ‘So I can sit on the sidelines or I can advocate for my constituents. I think it would be irresponsible of me not to fight for what I think is important in that money.'" [Palm Beach Post; 2/22/09]

• Representative Mario Diaz-Balart (FL-25) - "Nine GOP House members from Florida, all stimulus no's, joined nine of their Democratic colleagues, all yesses, in asking the feds to grant a waiver giving them access to, you guessed it, hundreds of millions in state stabilization stimulus cash." [Politico; 2/19/09]

• Representative Ginny Brown-Waite (FL-05) - "Nine GOP House members from Florida, all stimulus no's, joined nine of their Democratic colleagues, all yesses, in asking the feds to grant a waiver giving them access to, you guessed it, hundreds of millions in state stabilization stimulus cash." [Politico; 2/19/09]

• Representative Cliff Stearns (FL-06) - "Nine GOP House members from Florida, all stimulus no's, joined nine of their Democratic colleagues, all yesses, in asking the feds to grant a waiver giving them access to, you guessed it, hundreds of millions in state stabilization stimulus cash." [Politico; 2/19/09]

• Representative Bill Posey (FL-15) - "Nine GOP House members from Florida, all stimulus no's, joined nine of their Democratic colleagues, all yesses, in asking the feds to grant a waiver giving them access to, you guessed it, hundreds of millions in state stabilization stimulus cash." [Politico; 2/19/09]

• Representative Pete Hoekstra (MI-02) - "If you know of someone thinking of buying first home, now may be the time. Stimulus incentive is very generous! Up to 8k! Check it out." [Representative Pete Hoekstra's Twitter page; 2/18/09]

• Representative Leonard Lance (NJ-07) - "Officials are hoping more federal money will soon be flowing to the Green Brook Flood Control Project. Under the terms of the stimulus plan signed into law Tuesday by President Barack Obama, infrastructure projects that are "shovel-ready" could be the first to be funded with economic recovery money. That's the hope of Rep. Leonard Lance, R-Clinton Township...'This is a classic example of a ‘shovel-ready' project,' Lance said after the tour." [mycentraljersey.com; 2/17/09]

• Representative Greg Walden (OR-02) - "I figure my job is to try and do whatever I can to clear the hurdles and get the projects going and the people back to work using these funds." [Mail Tribune; 2/19/09]

• Representative Blaine Luetkemeyer (MO-09) - "Luetkemeyer said the project is considered ‘shovel ready' and that's what the economy needs. President Darrell Krueger and Luetkemeyer discussed the educational benefits of the economic stimulus package." [KTVO-TV, 2/16/09]

• Representative Don Young (AK-AL) - "Alaskan Congressman Don Young won a victory for the Alaska Native contracting program and other Alaska small business owners last night in H.R. 1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. [Congressman Don Young's Press Release; 2/13/09]

• Representative Ken Calvert (CA-44) - "All of us in the Inland Empire will do what we can to direct as much money as we can." [The Press Enterprise; 2/13/09]

• Representative John Mica (FL-07) - "I applaud President Obama's recognition that high-speed rail should be part of America's future." [Congressman John Mica Press Release; 2/13/09] Mica was also one of "Nine GOP House members from Florida, all stimulus no's, joined nine of their Democratic colleagues, all yesses, in asking the feds to grant a waiver giving them access to, you guessed it, hundreds of millions in state stabilization stimulus cash." [Politico; 2/19/09]

Background

In the past three weeks, House Republicans unanimously voted no on the very economic recovery investments that they are boasting about. [H.R.1, #46, 1/28/09], [H.R. 1, #70, 2/13/09]

AP-GfK Poll - February 12 - February 17, 2009

• A majority of respondents said they strongly or somewhat favor the economic recovery package. [AP-GfK poll, 2/12-2/17/09]

• 59 percent of respondents said they disapprove of the way Republicans in Congress are handling the economy. [AP-GfK poll, 2/12-2/17/09]

While on the FOX News program, Glenn Beck, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele said, "...I'm not going to soft pedal this with you. I'm not going to try to blow smoke either. The reality of it is, you are absolutely right. You have absolutely no reason, none, to trust our word or our actions at this point. So, yeah, it's going to be an uphill climb." [FOX News, 2/13/09]

Claire Marchand, Flute!

.