Senator Jim Webb Wins Andrew Jackson Presidential Award

Webb Honored with “Andrew Jackson Presidential Award” for Commitment to Economic Fairness, Sound Principles of Governance

April 21, 2010

Washington, DC—Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) has been awarded the “Andrew Jackson Presidential Award for Citizenship and Leadership.” Presented by the Ladies Hermitage Association, the award honors leaders who have “promoted the history and life of Andrew Jackson” and “who have demonstrated in their civic lives a dedication to the furtherance of our American democracy and to sound governance principles.”

Senator Webb ran for the U.S. Senate in 2006 on a platform of “Jacksonian Democracy”—that we should measure the health of our society not at its apex, but at its base—committing to restore a basic level of economic fairness to the American people. For more than three years, his leadership in the Congress has upheld and embodied that commitment.

“I am struck by the multiple similarities when I think of President Jackson and Senator Webb,” said John Seigenthaler, award-winning reporter, editor, publisher and CEO for The Tennessean and founding editorial director of USA TODAY, when presenting the award. “They both were lawyers as well as warriors… Both of them served in Washington during times of intense partisanship. Neither of them will ever be remembered for giving sufferance to fools. Both were, and Jim Webb still is, committed to making sure that our government is true to those who come home from war in need of assistance.”

Senator Webb clearly articulated these priorities in a Wall Street Journal op-ed (“American workers have a chance to be heard,” November 15, 2006) and in his response to President George Bush’s 2007 State of the Union Address.

His first act in Congress was the introduction on his first day in office of a new GI Bill to provide service members and veterans of the post-9/11 era with comprehensive educational benefits similar to those provided to veterans of WWII. Since the bill became law in 2008, over 480,000 veterans have applied for their benefits to attend college or other post secondary programs. In order to further expand employment opportunities, Webb introduced the Adult Education and Economic Growth Act last year to improve adult education, job training, and other workforce programs. After American taxpayers bailed out the Wall Street firms who created the financial crisis, Senator Webb introduced the Taxpayer Fairness Act to place a one-time 50% tax on excessive bonuses paid by Wall Street banks and other firms that benefited from billions of taxpayer dollars in 2009.

In his acceptance speech, Senator Webb described how Jackson has inspired his approach to leadership today:

“When I think about Andrew Jackson, I am struck by the unique impact that he had on this country. His presidency was the first that did not come out of the landed English aristocracy in the South or the English American elite in New England. He was the first Scots-Irish president, the first “bottom up” president, and he had enormous challenges inside the existing political structure. Thomas Jefferson called him ‘dangerous’ and ‘unfit for office,’ and John Quincy Adams called him a ‘barbarian,’ and refused to attend his inauguration.

“This was an individual who sincerely and fiercely believed in protecting the working people—the people who carried the load of society. He faced down the forces that threatened the very fabric of our society. Scholars agree that the most important presidential veto in American history occurred when legislation creating the Second National Bank came before President Jackson. This legislation would have allowed a permanent aristocracy in America. Two-thirds of Congress agreed that this legislation should go through. Andrew Jackson knew that if he vetoed this legislation, they were going to try to veto him. But he did.

“In his 1832 veto message, Jackson said:
‘Equality of talents, of education, or of wealth cannot be produced by human institutions. In the full enjoyment of the gifts of Heaven and the fruits of superior industry, economy, and virtue, every person is equally entitled to protection by law; but when the laws undertake to add to these natural and just advantages artificial distinctions, to make the rich richer and the potent more powerful, the humble members of society-the farmers, mechanics, and laborers--who have neither the time nor the means of securing favors to themselves--have a right to complain of the injustice of their Government. There are no necessary evils in government. Its evils exist only in its abuses.’

“This to me, is the most important articulation of the responsibilities of government leaders that I’ve ever read. The truth of that statement resounds today in numerous pieces of legislation we face in the United States Congress. The courage that it took to confront the forces of entrenched interests in order to challenge the conscience of all Americans also exists today. That is my duty. I continue in that tradition. That is the reason I so respect this great leader and also the reason I am so grateful to receive this award.”

Howard Kittell, President and CEO of the Hermitage, concluded, “The parallels between Andrew Jackson and Senator Jim Webb – their sound military judgment, no-nonsense, public-good approach to government, and commitment to democratic ideals—make Senator Webb the ideal choice for the 2010 Andrew Jackson Presidential Award.”

The Hermitage, the home of President Andrew Jackson, is one of the largest and most visited presidential homes in the United States.

"Right to Rent" bill helps families facing foreclosure

WASHINGTON - "Right to Rent" is one of the most efficient and simple ways to help millions of families facing foreclosure remain in their homes, said national housing experts across the political spectrum in Congressional testimony earlier this week. The following day, a new "Right to Rent" bill was introduced in the House of Representatives. The Right to Rent concept was originated by Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. It would increase the bargaining power and security of homeowners by temporarily changing the rules on foreclosure and allowing homeowners to remain in their homes as renters for a substantial period or time. During this time, homeowners would pay the market rent for the home as determined by an independent assessment.

"Right to Rent immediately gives the homeowner security in their home. They will be allowed to stay there for a substantial period of time, allowing their children to stay in their schools and families to prepare for and plan their future moves," said Baker in his testimony on Wednesday. "Right to Rent also would make foreclosure much less attractive to investors. This gives investors more incentive to modify loans on their own, without the involvement of the government."

The following day, "The Right to Rent Act of 2010" was introduced by Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva (D-AZ) and Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), which would allow homeowners whose homes have been foreclosed to stay in their homes at a fair market rent for up to five years. "The latest statistics on foreclosures and mortgage delinquency rates are an indication of the profound, historic crisis we face and the need for creative solutions like Right to Rent," said Rep. Grijalva.

In addition to progressive economists such as Baker and newspapers such as the New York Times, Right to Rent is endorsed by conservative economists such as Arnold Kling and Andrew Samwick. Kling, adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, added his voice in support "Right to Rent" during the question period of Wednesday's Congressional hearing.

Florida Republican legislators sacrifice the unborn

Republicans control the Florida House of Representatives making up roughly two-thirds of the lower chamber's membership. Nearly all Republican legislators in the state profess to be pro-life and many received endorsements from the Florida Right to Life Committee. Most of these same legislators voted on Thursday to eliminate prenatal care for expectant mothers and their unborn children. About 300 children will die each year because of this action. And the timing of these hypocrites - on the eve of Good Friday - couldn't have been better to showcase their moral depravity. Of course, silence from the Republican sock puppets at Florida Right to Life Committee and Life News.

WJHG-TV reports:

The Florida House of Representatives budget cuts $4 million for the Florida Association of Healthy Start Coalitions.

The organization oversees 31 statewide coalitions that help at-risk pregnant mothers receive proper medical care.

Supporters of the budget measure say county health departments will pick up the slack.

But, officials with the Bay-Gulf-Franklin chapter of Healthy Start say that's not the case. They say they use the state funds to raise about $32 million for their cause, and health departments can't solicit donations like that.

"We're talking about actually losing babies if this happens," said Trey Hutt, president of the Healthy Start Board of Directors. "I know that sounds dramatic, but about 300 infants, or fetuses, will die every year in the state of Florida if they cut this funding. "

Legislators will now meet in conference committee to iron out differences between the House and Senate versions. Hutt, and some legislators, hope they can eliminate the cut to Healthy Start during the reconciliation process.

http://www.wjhg.com/home/headlines/89733827.html

Senator Byron Dorgan praises Obama support for offshore oil and natural gas drilling

WASHINGTON, D.C.) – U.S. Senator Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) appluded a decision by President Obama to expand offshore production of oil and natural gas, saying, “The increased energy production will boost the country’s economic and national security, and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.”

Dorgan, who is Chairman of the energy and water appropriations panel and the second-ranking Democrat on the Energy Committee, has led the charge to expand offshore energy development in a responsible way. He successfully included a provision in the bipartisan legislation approved by the Senate Energy Committee to open the Eastern Gulf of Mexico Planning Area – an area that holds billions of barrels of untapped oil and trillions of cubic feet of natural gas – to leasing.

“Our country desperately needs to take steps to increase our energy independence to improve our national security and our economic well-being,” said Dorgan. “We need a comprehensive approach to our energy development that includes investing in renewable energy, as well as expanding our development of traditional energy sources such as oil and natural gas.”

“Today’s proposal by the President shows the administration’s commitment to responsibly developing all our energy resources in a common-sense, balanced way,” added Dorgan. “The proposal will reduce our dependence on foreign oil and create new jobs in our domestic energy industry. I look forward to working with the President and my colleagues in Congress to move forward on new energy development. This announcement today, combined with the utilization of biofuels, implementation of new fuel economy standards, and moving towards the electrification of our transportation fleet, can significantly reduce our dependence on imported oil.”

Dorgan has long been a proponent of developing domestic sources of energy both offshore and onshore. Dorgan was instrumental in the re-assessment of the Bakken shale in North Dakota and Montana, which has attracted investment in the area’s oil resources. The Senator has also been a leader in support of maximizing the production of renewable energy such as wind, solar, and biomass.

Senator Harry Reid defends the right to keep and bear arms

There is a widespread misinformation campaign to distort the record of Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) on gun rights. Nevadans, don't believe the lies of the tea party movement. There is no question that Senator Reid is a strong supporter of the right to keep and bear arms.

Harry Reid supports repeal of the gun ban in the District of Columbia and recently helped to pass legislation allowing law-abiding citizens to carry firearms for self-defense in our national parks and wildlife refuges. Senator Reid has fought to protect gun manufacturers and sellers from junk lawsuits. In 2006, Reid supported an amendment to prevent gun confiscations during emergencies and went on record in favor of allowing commercial airline pilots to carry guns to protect their passengers and flight crews.

Check out the following link to a supportive statement from the National Rifle Association concerning Senator Reid's pro-gun voting record.
http://media.lasvegassun.com/media/pdfs/blogs/documents/2009/07/15/Reid_-_NRA_Letter.pdf

Nevada Outdoor Democrats provides an additonal documentation of Senator Reid's defense of the right to keep and bear arms.

Why is Harry Reid the most important lawmaker in the U.S. Senate for Sportsmen? And why did Reid received campaign contributions from both the Safari Club International and the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund in 2004?

Answer: Because only Harry Reid has the stature and the independence to oppose lawmakers who would attack the rights held by law-abiding Nevada citizens. He has done it and he will keep on doing it. The man from Searchlight keeps his promises.

For Nevada Gun Owners, let's set the record straight on the AWB: In 1993 Senator Reid was a relative novice in the US Senate. Bill Clinton was a new Democratic President in the White House and Democrats were enjoying much success in their legislative agenda. As any new Senator might, Reid had hopes to move up through the Democratic ranks and establish his ability to represent Nevada through legislative leadership in the majority Democratic Senate. (Reid is now the Senate Minority Leader and the most powerful Nevada representative to ever serve in the U.S. Congress.) But in 1993 when an amendment to the Crime Bill was offered and cosponsored by leading Senate Democrats, Harry Reid voted NO. That amendment was the Assault Weapons Ban that was added to the Crime Bill by a vote of 56 to 43 (and 1 not voting).

Eight Democratic Senators voted NO against the AWB Amendment in 1993, and that NO vote included BOTH of Nevada's Democratic Senators - Reid and Bryan. Ten Republican Senators voted YES on the Feinstein Assault Weapons Ban Amendment in 1993 and attached it to the hugely popular Crime Bill that was passed into law in 1994 by a Senate vote of 95/4/1 that included 40 Republican Senators voting YES. This AWB ban terminated on September 13, 2004.

So before the lessons of the 1994 elections, before the AWB issue was proven a loser for Democrats across the nation, before the outrage that has now become a keystone of partisan politics for sportsmen, in 1993 Harry Reid voted NO to banning guns and YES for sportsmen's rights. Go here to see the Congressional record on that Amendment vote: Feinstein Amdt. No. 1152.

On March 22, 2004 a similar vote attached a renewal of the AWB to the most important legislation for the gun industry this decade: the gun liability bill S.1805. Senator Reid had given his support to this bill and had led Democrats to get enough votes to make the bill filibuster-proof in the Senate. This legislation would have prevented third party nuisance lawsuits when firearms were used illegally. U.S. gun manufacturers and distributors have to defend their lawful business actions against claims that they should be responsible for the illegal behavior of criminals who use firearms. That's like suing General Motors if a criminal robs a bank and drives off in a Chevy. It's not only a nuisance, it's nonsense, and it costs the industry millions that must eventually be passed on to sportsmen.

S.Amdt. 2637 would have renewed the AWB. Harry Reid and four other Democrats voted NO on the AWB renewal, but the amendment passed when eight Republican Senators, guided by President Bush's promise to sign the firearms ban if it was placed on his desk, voted yes to ten more years of gun banning. You can check the Congressional Record on the votes. Because the amendment to extend the AWB was successful, the tort reform that would have protected the lawful commerce of American gun manufactures and distributors lost. Reid once again voted for sportsmen's rights by voting NO on the amended bill.

Our rights as sportsmen and women are too important to give them over to any one political party. We can't win half the time and secure those rights.

Nevada Outdoor Democrats www.nodc.us

Let's defend the right to keep and bear arms by re-electing Harry Reid to the U.S. Senate.

Bart Stupak's vote for Health Care Reform: A Profile in Political Courage

Bart Stupak's support for health care reform is pro-life. Thousands of people die every year because of lack of health care coverage. Countries with national health care programs have greater longevity and lower abortion rates than the United States. So-called pro-life politicians such as former Governor Jeb Bush of Florida slashed funding for prenatal care while in office proving that these compassionate folks care only about the unborn with health insurance benefits.

Michigan Democratic Congressman Bart Stupak has gotten considerable flak from both the pro-life establishment (controlled by the Republican Party) and hard-line pro-choice types. Stupak isn't one of those pro-lifers who care only about the unborn with insurance. While Stupak has firm convictions on the matter of abortion, he is not a small-minded single issue type but rather cares deeply about social and economic justice for all people.

Bart Stupak makes a convincing argument that an executive order on stem cell research
signed by George Bush was just fine for the pro-life leadership but it isn't okay
with Obama issuing a E.O. on federal funding for abortion. Of course, it is
hardly a surprise that the pro-life establishment fails to give a Democrat
credit when it is due. Former Jimmy Carter never gets any recognition from the pro-life movement for signing the Hyde Amendment into law.

The following is a press release from Representative Stupak's office which gives additional background on the executive order signed by President Obama and refutes pro-life objections to it.

WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Michigan) attended the executive order signing at the White House Wednesday afternoon as a guest of President Obama.

The president’s executive order maintains the Hyde language that states that no taxpayer dollars will be used to pay for abortion under the new health care reform legislation.

“President Obama made a commitment in September that the health care reform legislation would maintain current law of no public funding of abortion,” Stupak said. “Today the president signed an executive order and gave his ironclad commitment that Hyde language will be enforced in the health care reform bill. I was honored to attend today’s executive order signing, and am proud to have voted in favor of health care legislation that will provide 32 million uninsured Americans with access to affordable health care.”

The president’s executive order has full force of law and makes clear that current law of no public funding for abortion applies to H.R. 3590, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

The executive order states: “The act [the new health care reform legislation] maintains current Hyde amendment restrictions governing abortion policy and extends those restrictions to the newly-created health insurance exchanges.”

Without this executive order, a loophole in H.R. 3590 would have left the door open to federally funded abortion services in community health clinics.

Throughout history, executive orders have been an important means of implementing public policy.

In 2007, George W. Bush signed executive order 13435 restricting embryonic stem cell research – a pro-life policy that was applauded and welcomed by the pro-life community.

These same groups have been opposed to President Obama’s pro-life executive order.

Some have also criticized the general provisions section of Executive Order saying the language would prevent the Executive Order from having force of law in the courts.

Yet the language critics point to is standard language with any executive order, including President Bush’s ban on embryonic stem cell research.

Again, these same pro-life groups did not express concern over the language under President Bush, yet claim it is unacceptable under President Obama.

“This executive order protects the sanctity of life,” Stupak said. “It is disingenuous for pro-life groups who cheered President Bush’s embryonic stem cell Executive Order to now claim President Obama’s executive order maintaining the Hyde language in the health care reform bill is not worth the paper it is printed on.”

In addition to the executive order, Stupak engaged in a colloquy on the House floor with Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman to further enter into the record Congress’ intent that the Hyde provisions of no public funding for abortion will apply to the health care reform legislation.

“Together, the executive order and the colloquy, provide strong assurances that there will be no taxpayer dollars going toward abortion in the health care reform legislation,” Stupak said. “Today’s signing was the culmination of many months of hard work to pass legislation that provided our nation with much-needed health care reform while protecting the sanctity of life. I was proud to stand up for this principle today with my Democratic pro-life colleagues and President Obama as he signed this executive order.”

Congressman Stupak wrote an op-ed piece appearing in today's Washington Post which explains how the so-called "pro-lifers" simply wanted to use him to defeat the healthcare bill.

Stupak writes:

The true motives of many blogs and organizations claiming to be pro-life have become clear in recent days: to politicize life issues as a means to defeat health care reform. One group even sent an e-mail to supporters saying they are "working feverishly to stop this legislation from going forward."

The pro-life groups rallied behind me -- many without my knowledge or consent -- not necessarily because they shared my goals of ensuring protections for life and passing health-care reform but because they viewed me as their best chance to kill health-care legislation.

Responding to those who contend that an executive order on federal funding for abortion is meaningless, Stupak stated:

"Throughout history, executive orders have carried the full force and effect of law and have served as an important means of implementing public policy. Perhaps the most famous executive order was the Emancipation Proclamation signed by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863. More recently, in 2007, President George W. Bush signed Executive Order 13435, restricting embryonic stem-cell research. This executive order protected the sanctity of life and was "applauded" and "welcomed" by pro-life advocates. That these same people would now claim that President Obama's executive order maintaining the sanctity of life is not worth the paper it is written on is disingenuous at best."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/26/AR2010032602921.html

Wake up, followers of the National Right to Life Committee and other Republican front groups professing to represent pro-life concerns. You are being manipulated by the Republican Party and powerful corporate interests under the guise of protecting life. Your masters are the same people undermining family life in America by destroying our standard of living and shipping U.S. jobs overseas. The best way to combat abortion is to support a stronger safety net that will provide incentives for a woman facing an unexpected pregnancy to choose life.

I applaud Bart Stupak for having the courage of his convictions to stand up to extremists on both sides of the ideological spectrum.

All 50 states have lost jobs to China

From TradeReform.Org

All 50 states have lost jobs to China
Written by Sara Haimowitz
Friday, 26 March 2010
The following was published in the March 27, 2010 edition of the EPI News:

As concern over the U.S.-China trade imbalance grows, a new paper by EPI's Senior International Economist Robert Scott finds that 2.4 million American jobs have been lost to China between 2001 and 2008, and that every state along with the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico has felt the impact.

Scott's paper, Unfair China Trade Costs Local Jobs, provides the first detailed analysis of the jobs that have been lost since China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001. It finds that, in addition to impacting every U.S. state, the job loss has touched every Congressional district in the country.

New Hampshire, California, Texas all suffer big losses
Scott's paper features a color-coded U.S. map illustrating where job loss has been the most severe, as well as several detailed charts that measure job loss by industry and by state. New Hampshire, which lost 16,300 jobs during the seven-year period covered by the study, suffered the largest job loss as a share of total employment. In terms of total jobs displaced, California was first, with 370,000 jobs lost, followed by Texas, New York, Illinois, and Florida, which all lost more than 100,000 jobs.

In addition to the loss of jobs, the paper finds that U.S. workers who have kept their jobs have suffered depressed wages as a result of competition with lower-wage workers overseas. "The impact," the paper says, "has affected essentially all production workers with less than a four-year college degree - roughly 70% of the private-sector workforce, or about 100 million workers."

The paper received widespread media coverage throughout the United States, from the Sacramento Bee, to the Boston Herald, and The Toledo Blade. A Wall Street Journal story on the paper quoted Senator Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.) saying, "We've known for years that U.S. manufacturing's paying a heavy price for China's activities, but these figures exceeded even our worst expectations."

Scott's paper comes at a time of growing concern over Chinese currency manipulation, which has kept the cost of Chinese exports artificially low, making it increasingly difficult for U.S. manufacturers to compete. Unlike most other major currencies, the Chinese yuan does not fluctuate freely against the dollar. While the value of its currency should have increased as China exported more goods, it has instead stayed low, and China has aggressively acquired dollars to further depress the yuan's value.

Earlier this month, EPI hosted a panel on Currency Manipulation, where speakers including Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman, stressed that a change of policy was needed to address an extremely depressed Chinese yuan, which was fueling massive trade deficits in the United States and Europe and threatening hopes of an economic recovery.

http://www.tradereform.org/content/view/2489/52/