"Romney urges GOP to back minimum wage hike" by Matt Viser | Globe Staff May 09, 2014
WASHINGTON — Mitt Romney on Friday inserted himself back into a vigorous debate over the direction of the party he led in 2012, urging Republicans to drop their opposition to raising the minimum wage, a topic expected to be a major focus of this November’s midterm elections.
We get this every two years and then it's back to bu$ine$$ as u$ual.
Related: What to Expect for the 2014 Elections
I hope the flashback helps you $ee why I'm $our on all this.
While Romney may not have immediately changed minds within his party, his remarks quickly went viral among Democrats and Republicans, indicating they could help ignite a discussion within the GOP about how far Republicans need to go to win over working-class voters.
He was on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Friday. Glad I never watch.
****************
Last week, only one Republican in the Senate — Bob Corker of Tennessee — voted to advance a bill that would have raised the minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10. The bill failed to cross the 60-vote threshold needed to avoid a filibuster.
Public opinion polls show that a minimum wage hike has broad support. Two-thirds of Americans support raising the minimum wage to $10.10, according to a CBS News/New York Times poll conducted in February. The poll found that 62 percent of independents and 86 percent of Democrats supported such an increase, while 54 percent of Republicans surveyed said they opposed it.
Over the past year, in the wake of his two unsuccessful bids for the presidency, Romney has tried to emerge as an elder statesman in his party, endorsing some establishment candidates, hosting a policy retreat in Park City, and appearing more regularly in the media. Although he declared himself in 2012 to be “severely conservative,” much of his recent activity has gone toward trying to moderate the Republican Party.
Related:
Mitt Romney's Political Legacy
Romney Still Running Republican Party
Romney to Again Run For President
Oh, I'm sorry, that comes later.
****************
His reemergence comes as the GOP has struggled internally over its direction for the past several years, leading some analysts to wonder whether it will have increasing trouble attracting support in presidential elections amid a diverse electorate.
“Long term, the Republican Party can’t just be the party of Benghazi and Obamacare,” said David B. Cohen, a political science professor at the University of Akron. “People like Mitt Romney and other members of the Republican establishment realize this and understand this. The problem is they have a very active and vocal Republican base made up of Tea Partiers and social conservatives that may not be too keen on the Republican Party shifting in a more moderate direction.”
Yeah, those damn citizens and voters!
Related: Boehner to Appoint Benghazi Panel
Also see:
House Republicans push through new Benghazi inquiry
John Boehner names 7 to Benghazi panel
Boston Globe - 4 days ago
For some reason(?) that keeps coming up error!
Democrats open door to Benghazi probe
Had to open it for you.
Democrats are making the minimum wage a centerpiece of their 2014 midterm strategy, urging an increase they say would help the working class.
As Obama woos corporate titans and Chuck Schumer thanked Romney after calling "then-presidential candidate Romney’s economic plan an elitist “dirty trick” that would benefit the wealthy."
Along with Romney, a few prominent Republicans — including former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty and former US senator Rick Santorum — have urged their party to raise the minimum wage. But most of the leading contenders in the 2016 GOP presidential field have opposed a minimum wage increase.
“Raising the minimum wage causes more unemployment,” Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, told CNN in January.
Yeah, Rand just doesn't get it on some things.
Senator Marco Rubio of Florida has also spoken against raising the minimum wage. So has Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, Romney’s vice presidential running mate.
Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey last month said he could support a minimum wage increase as long as it is done in a “common-sense way and phased-in over a period of time.”
Fancy way of saying but, but ever notice tax breaks pretty much sail through?
Christie last year vetoed a bill that would have raised New Jersey’s minimum wage.
That's called hypocrisy.
***********
Jeb Bush, former governor of Florida, has not said anything recently about his views on the minimum wage increase, and several aides and advisers did not return messages.
They didn't even ask Scott Walker?
Romney, who reiterated Friday he has no plans to seek the presidency again.
Unless he is asked.
I heard it was going to be a Bush-Clinton rematch.
Romney’s 2012 loss also came in part because a video surfaced of him saying 47 percent of Americans were too dependent on government to vote for him. Some within the party said Friday that Romney — who made a fortune in the private equity business — is not the right messenger to address the minimum amount Americans should earn.
“There’s no movement organized around him. After he lost, we all just went back to life as usual,” said Rick Tyler, a Washington-based Republican consultant.
But he does have $$$. That's all the organization you need.
In the past several State of the Union addresses, President Obama has proposed a significant increase in the federal minimum wage, and has even cited Romney’s position.
“Here’s an idea that Governor Romney and I actually agreed on last year: Let’s tie the minimum wage to the cost of living, so that it finally becomes a wage you can live on,” Obama said in his 2013 address.
Increasing the minimum wage to $10.10 would raise earnings for 16.5 million Americans but would cause businesses to cut about 500,000 jobs, according to a report done earlier this year by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
The minimum wage in Massachusetts is among the nation’s highest at $8, but that could increase to $11 over three years under legislation passed by the state Senate. The Massachusetts House passed legislation increasing the minimum wage to $10.50 over two years, but the chambers need to work out a compromise before the bill heads to the governor’s desk. Ever since Romney ran against then-Senator Edward M. Kennedy in 1994, he has advocated tying the minimum wage to an index such as inflation. As governor, Romney vetoed a minimum wage bill in 2006 because he said the increase was too steep and should have been tied to inflation.
The rate was flat all those years, but never mind that or all the hot air coming from an exclusive member of the 1%. He's your NEW HERO, poor people. After all, he made so many of you while enriching himself and his friends.
In 2012, Romney initially stuck by that position, saying that as president he would increase the minimum wage by tying it to inflation. But under criticism from conservatives, Romney backed off in March 2012, telling CNBC there were other factors to consider and that “right now, there’s probably not a need to raise the minimum wage.”
So this is all election year $hit, as u$ual.
--more--"
Now to minimize Paul like his father:
"GOP moves to reassert hold on campaigns; Committee aims to put an end to free-for-alls" by Philip Elliott and Steve Peoples | Associated Press May 10, 2014
MEMPHIS, Tenn. — Lunging for control of the GOP ahead of high-stakes elections, the Republican National Committee on Friday took steps to end free-for-all presidential debates and vowed to punish potential contenders who participate in rogue forums.
At the same time, an independent organization with deep ties to the conservative Koch brothers has elected to spend $125 million on the battle for control of the Senate this fall, giving the 168-member central party meeting a stark reminder that outside groups will have significant sway over Republican political fortunes through the 2016 presidential race.
And what you have is the e$tabli$hment limiting the choices with the Koch brothers funding the fake Tea Party front and controlled opposition.
And you wonder why I'm sick of all this?
One of those potential presidential contenders, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, publicly broke with the GOP over voting rights, saying in an interview that officials should stop passing state laws that tighten controls on voting. The New York Times published the article on Friday, the same day Paul spoke at a luncheon during the RNC meeting.
As he opened the party’s meeting, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus said the national committee can’t control everything in politics. ‘‘But we have an important mission,’’ he said, ‘‘and we’re going to get the job done.’’
You will have to do it without my vote.
As he spoke, reports circulated that Americans for Prosperity plans to escalate its television advertising across the nation, improve voter data collection, and strengthen its 31-state ground operation. It was a bracing reality check for the RNC: Despite the committee’s efforts, the GOP establishment won’t be the only one setting Republican priorities.
Oh, yeah, the Koch brothers are my friend!
A senior official with direct knowledge of Americans for Prosperity’s plans confirmed the election blueprint, outlined in a memo distributed to Republican donors this spring. The official confirmed the memo’s authenticity but wasn’t authorized to publicly discuss its contents.
Industrialist billionaires Charles and David Koch have already funneled millions of dollars to conservative causes. Democrats including Senate majority leader Harry Reid have roundly criticized the billionaires and claim Republican policies are being dictated by an agenda to grow the Kochs’ wealth. In a nod to the Kochs’ heft, the RNC passed a resolution condemning Reid for what it called ‘‘hyperbolic attacks . . . on private citizens.’’
Time to retire Reid to the Bundy ranch!
The struggle to mend a party split between populist and establishment factions has hung over the meeting in Memphis, with RNC officials looking for ways to make it harder for weak but vocal candidates to prolong nomination fights, roil debates, and jeopardize the party’s chances — again — of winning the Senate majority and the presidency.
What a FAKE FOOLEY! The Koch's are POPULI$T$!!
The New York Times reported that Paul, the Kentucky Republican and darling of the antiestablishment segment of the GOP, said in an interview on the sidelines of the RNC meeting that the push on voting laws was alienating black people.
Well, he's not a "darling" to me, but he does seem to be the least distasteful of the bunch.
Republicans have been strong advocates for such laws. In many cases the laws make casting a ballot more difficult for older voters and minority voters, who tend to support Democratic candidates.
‘‘Everybody’s gone completely crazy on this voter ID thing,’’ Paul told the Times. ‘‘I think it’s wrong for Republicans to go too crazy on this issue because it’s offending people.’’
And besides, the machines are rigged.
During his address to RNC members, Paul said Republicans should reconsider policies on penalties for illegal drugs and about antiterrorism tactics. His remarks were politely received but unlikely to win him supporters among establishment-minded Republicans.
Will they let him in the building to speak? That's the question because they din't let his father.
Paul’s comments — and his loyal followers — were just the latest reminders that despite Republicans’ efforts, taking greater control over the 2016 contest could prove difficult.
On Thursday, the RNC rules panel endorsed the creation of a 13-person committee that would limit how many presidential debates can take place and who can ask the questions.
Heavy-handed cen$or$hip!
The full committee on Friday went along with that plan to ban candidates who participate in scofflaw debates from future RNC-backed sessions, by a 152-to-7 vote.
Oh, a "scofflaw" if you don't toe the party line. I'm proud to be one.
Several committee members said they were worried that activists might see their ability to prod candidates reduced under the new rule.
‘‘You’re going to squelch the ability of candidates to get to know their voter base, and the voter base to get to know their candidates,’’ said Diana Orrock, a national committeewoman from Nevada. ‘‘As a voter . . . I want to see the good, the bad, and the ugly.’’
The RNC measure affects only debates as candidates vie for the GOP nomination; the bipartisan Commission on Presidential Debates will still have final say on the elections between the Republican and Democratic nominees during the general election campaign.
Who cares? I won't be watching.
But the RNC recommendation did take a step at reining the haphazard debate style that characterized the 2012 selection progress.
Meaning they had a hell of a time suppressing Ron Paul's support. That's why they are losing at that level.
--more--"
I'm going to minimize my rage as much as I can during this next piece:
"Obama fund-raises, issues a warning; Tells Democrats midterm losses could be ruinous" by Zachary A. Goldfarb | Washington Post May 10, 2014
SAN JOSE, Calif. — On the West Coast to raise millions of dollars for his party, President Obama spent the second half of this week preaching to rich supporters about why Democrats are better than Republicans. It sounded like a conventional stump speech in the windup to the midterm battle, including an apology to the first lady for running another campaign.
Listen closely, however, and you could hear the president making a much more dramatic statement about the importance of this year’s elections.
As he toured a series of mansions, Obama made the case that should Democrats fail to keep their hold on the Senate and win back the House, both his second-term priorities and the country’s future could be imperiled.
(Blog editor exhales a snort and then shakes his head. It already is imperiled, thanks to the both of you)
After speaking about energy at a Walmart in Mountain View, Calif., on Friday, President Obama greeted his audience /(Susan Walsh/Associated Press).
Don't let the $mile $poil the $eriou$ne$$ of the $hit-$how political fooley.
He described the public’s dissatisfaction with Washington as nearly at a tipping point, where working-class Americans see leaders as unresponsive to their most basic concerns. If that were to continue, he said, more middle-class Americans could dismiss the political process completely.
The tipping point is a Republican senate.
Related:
"A recent social science study (by Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page) concludes that a very small clique of economically privileged Americans regularly overwhelm the will of the general public, and a much discussed recent book (“Capital in the 21st Century” by Thomas Piketty) argues that, as a result of multigenerational patterns of savage income inequality, a social mutation has occurred, wholly severing the tie between the extremely wealthy and the vast population."
We already are an oligarchy now, the wealth inequality is getting worse, and their lead front man is shoveling $hit on the campaign trail.
That's why I'm not really into doing this anymore. Chronicling and documenting it through the eyes of the $tatu$ quo corporate media of elite wealth has run its cour$e.
‘‘You’ve got a self-fulfilling prophecy,’’ he said Wednesday evening in Los Angeles at the home of Disney chief executive Alan Horn and his wife, Cindy. ‘‘People who have the most at stake in a government that works opt out of the system. Those who don’t believe that government can do anything are empowered. Gridlock reigns, and we get this downward spiral of even more cynicism and more dysfunction.’’
In this appearance and others, he warned that such apathy would show up primarily among young, minority, and working-class voters — precisely the groups that Democrats need to head to the polls to win the midterms.
Well, if you and yours hadn't been such a disappointment and been bought and controlled by the same intere$ts.... you had your chance with a filibuster-proof majority, and did we get minimum wage increases?
Nope! All we got was crappy corporate healthcare and a f***ed up website that cost hundreds of millions.
And if Democrats fail to win, he said, America could be at risk of losing the luster that has defined it for so many years.
‘‘There’s no other country that looks like us. It’s a huge gift,’’ he said Thursday night in San Jose at an event hosted by Marissa Mayer, chief executive of Yahoo, and Sam Altman, president of YCombinator. ‘‘The problem is that we’ll waste that gift if we don’t make the right choices.’’
Related: Yahoo For Alibaba
The president rejected the idea that America was in decline, but he said it could happen if the right steps weren’t taken to invest in the economy.
I can't read anymore of this man's self-delusions or lies. Either way, not good. Not good.
Obama has long described stark differences between the Democratic and Republican visions of the economy. But what was striking about his comments this week was that he described the stakes for the midterm elections in almost catastrophic terms.
Because even he is realizing Democrats are going to be routed because of him.
Obama’s remarks suggest that, despite the progress made since the financial crisis and recession from 2008 to 2009, he sees the country as deeply vulnerable if gridlock endures.
At the house of Irwin Jacobs, founder of telecom giant Qualcomm, and his wife, Joan, Obama said the middle class had been hurt by decades of stagnation in their quality of life and now have a vanishing faith in government to help.
He put the blame for failing to make progress squarely on the Republicans — ‘‘a party that has been captive to an ideology, to a theory of economics, that says those folks, they’re on their own and government doesn’t have an appropriate role to play.’’
In the upcoming election, he said, Democrats must ‘‘break that grip.’’ Unless his party takes control of Congress, Obama said, he is not going to be able to implement the most important features of his agenda and set the country on what he considers the right path — ‘‘regardless of how hard I push, regardless of how many administrative actions I take.’’
Not getting the House unless their is massive vote fraud, you failed dictator.
--more--"
The flip side of the wage increase:
"House votes to make research tax credit permanent" by Stephen Ohlemacher | Associated Press May 10, 2014
WASHINGTON — The House voted Friday to make permanent a tax credit that rewards businesses for investing in research and development, pushing Congress toward an election-year showdown over a series of expired tax breaks that are popular back home but add billions to the budget deficit.
Related: $86ing This Post
Looks like readers dug it, so I dug up the link.
Of course, they have no money for already-sequestrated cuts in food stamps and unemployment.
The research tax credit expired at the beginning of the year, along with more than 50 other temporary tax breaks that Congress routinely extends.
The reason it is that way is so the Congre$$ critters can assure campaign contributions.
Better fork over that campaign loot or we will take away your tax $ub$idy!
House Republicans said Friday’s vote was the beginning of a broader effort to add more certainty to the tax code. In the coming weeks, they hope to vote on bills to make more temporary tax breaks permanent, though they have yet to decide on which ones.
That is what they always say when they want to give away more money to the wealthy.
‘‘Beyond having the dubious distinction of the highest corporate rate in the world, the United States is also the only country that allows important pieces of its tax code, like the research and development tax credit, to expire on a regular basis,’’ said Representative Dave Camp, Republican of Michigan, chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee. ‘‘Businesses cannot grow and invest when the tax code is riddled with instability and uncertainty.’’
I'm not saying they should be raised, either. It's government that is the problem here; they take way to much tax money for the few things they fund.
Camp noted that the research credit has been around since 1981 and has been renewed many times with broad bipartisan support. Friday’s bill passed by a vote of 274 to 131, with 62 Democrats joining nearly every Republican in support.
Some House Democrats called Friday’s vote a corporate giveaway that would add $156 billion to the budget deficit over the next decade. They goaded Republicans for calling themselves fiscal conservatives while adding so much to the nation’s long-term debt.
The numbers are staggering, and Tea Party went along, too!
‘‘It’s not only fiscally irresponsible, it’s also hypocritical,’’ said Representative Sander Levin of Michigan, the senior Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee.
Welcome to Washington!
President Obama supports making the research and development tax credit permanent. But the White House threatened to veto the House bill because it isn’t offset by other tax increases. The veto message noted that if all the 50-plus temporary tax breaks were made permanent, it would ‘‘add $500 billion or more’’ to the deficit.
That is ONE HELL of a HUGE TAX CUT!
‘‘The administration wants to work with Congress to make progress on measures that strengthen the economy and help middle-class families, including pro-growth business tax reform,’’ the White House said in a statement. ‘‘However, making traditional tax extenders permanent without offsets represents the wrong approach.’’
Almost every year, Congress allows a package of more than 50 temporary tax breaks for businesses and individuals to expire, only to renew most of them in time for taxpayers to claim them on their returns.
The research and development tax credit is among the most popular. A wide variety of industries claim the credit, including manufacturers, aerospace companies, drug makers, and software developers, said Christina Crooks, director of tax policy for the National Association of Manufacturers.
--more--"
