US Politics: The 'In His Own Words' Edition

[Seli]

5 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

...

So repeal and replace isn't going anywhere if relying solely on Republican votes, and Repeal only has even less chance of getting up for a vote.

The risk seems to be that the repeal and replace faction votes for repeal, in the hope that they can rely on Democratic votes to get any replacement in place. Of course that only works if they don't think the Democratic party has enough backbone to hijack the replace process.

[ThinkerX]

Based on the shenanigans so far, the straight 'repeal' effort will fail even more miserably than the 'repeal and replace' did.  It screws over far more people.

[Fez]

3 hours ago, dmc515 said:

Sounds like that's what they're going to try now.  Or at least, that's what McConnell is going to try:

As the kidnapper said to Liam Neeson:  Good luck.

And the thing is, it's still not a clean repeal (because you can't do that in reconciliation). The 2015 bill repealed all ACA funding, but left every single insurance regulation in place. And back when the CBO scored it, it was estimated to cause 32 million newly uninsured folks.

My bet is that vote never happens though, because there's not enough senators to vote to take up debate of the House bill in the first place. This whole statement sounds like McConnell trying to punish his caucus, which is not a great place for a leader to be in. For the first time, I'm thinking McConnell may be the one in the most danger of getting the boot, not Ryan.

[OldGimletEye]

Back in 2012, Jamie Dimon said he was “barely a Democrat”.

At this time, if Jamie Dimon still is a Democrat, I think he should be invited to leave the Democratic Party and go join the Republican Party. It would seem that his elitist dumb bullshit would be better suited to the Republican Party.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/14/jpms-jamie-dimon-blows-up-at-washington-on-earnings-call.html

Quote

JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon expressed frustration at the U.S. federal government during the company's earnings conference call Friday.

"It's almost an embarrassment being an American citizen traveling around the world and listening to the stupid s--- we have to deal with in this country," Dimon said in response to an analyst question.

One: It seems to me that Dimon simply takes no account of the slow recoveries that typically follow financial crises, in absence of aggressive action, as documented by Rogoff and Reinhart and many others. Two: Dimon’s claims about lending growth seem rather dubious. Three: Dimon’s claim of everyone is doing awesome, except the US seems rather dubious. Four: if I recall correctly Dimon was a deficit scold, back when there was no reason to be. Five: I believe Dimon called for tighter monetary policy a few years back. Yet here we are in 2017 the labor market still shows signs of slack, it would seem. Six Dimon along with Blankfein, were calling for lower equity capital requirements. Dimon and Blankfein should be flicked the bird.

Related to Dimon:

Quote

Dear Mr. Quarles,

Congratulations on your nomination as the first Vice Chairman for Supervision on the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. We are pleased that President Trump has chosen someone so qualified, and we are equally pleased that you are willing to serve.

:

Quote

In our view, there is a misconception that higher levels of bank capital impede lending. In fact, quite the opposite: well capitalized banks lend more and they lend better.

 

Quote

Of course, as every banker will tell you, for them, equity financing is expensive. From their parochial perspective, they are right. However, the presence of the government backstop (with an estimated 62 percent of the financial sector covered by the official safety net) provides the incentive for U.S. banks and other financial intermediaries to take on too much leverage. Even without this backstop, banks do not take full account of the impact of their behavior on others. This classic economic externality makes it in shareholders’ self-interest to render their banks undercapitalized relative to what is best for our economy.

 

Quote

Not to belabor the point, but we see little evidence that post-crisis financial regulation has impeded bank lending. Nor, as far as we can tell, is there any sense in which the substantial upgrading of bank capital over the past decade has inhibited economic growth. In fact, as we wrote last month in discussing the U.S. Treasury’s report on regulatory reform, bank lending has risen faster than GDP in recent years. More broadly, bank intermediation has risen as a share of overall U.S. intermediation since the implementation of Dodd-Frank (see chart).

................

Moving On:

http://democracyjournal.org/magazine/45/making-monetary-policy-great-again/

Quote

But while Roosevelt’s New Deal programs left an indelible mark on the American economy and society, it was his decisive monetary action that saved America from continuing depression. On just his third day in office, Roosevelt declared a bank holiday and effectively suspended the country’s participation in the international gold standard, freeing his Administration to pursue a policy of reflation. The economic response was immediate. Industrial production soared in the months following this action, beginning a four-year stretch of rapid growth (though America would not make up all of the ground lost in the Depression until the early 1940s).

FDR was kind of  like the the Barbara Mandrell of forward guidance. He was forward guidance when forward guidance wasn’t cool. He talked quite a bit about getting back to the pre-1929 price level and then took actions to give those words credibility.

Quote

As they weigh up policies like a significantly higher minimum wage and a job guarantee, Democrats should also be thinking about how they would like monetary policy to work.

I’d say:

1. Keep the full employment plank in the Democratic Party and make zero apologies for it. 

2. Think about endorsing NGDP targeting. Sure it came out of more conservative leaning policy circles (from the few conservative people that were somewhat sane, unlike most of the Republican Party). The advantage is, in my mind, is that it treats inflation targets as an average to be hit, rather than a ceiling. I don’t consider it a first best solution, but given political realities it might be a realistic second best solution.

3. Be ready to use the big fiscal guns when necessary and make zero apologies for it when dealing with conservative sorts of people.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

So much for the narrative that McConnell  is some master legislator. All he's ever done is say no when saying no was easy. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Let's play a game. Can anyone spot the key word?

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/887279050263285761

[Red Tiger]

3 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Let's play a game. Can anyone spot the key word?

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/887279050263285761

Spoiler

Terrific?

 

[TheKitttenGuard]

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Let's play a game. Can anyone spot the key word?

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/887279050263285761

Spoiler

Loyal

 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

9 hours ago, S John said:

What is amusing to me is that congressional Republicans put a straight repeal bill on Obama's desk but don't have the stones to put one on Trump's out of fear that he will actually sign it.  

That's exactly what they're talking about doing at this point...

/We can't come up with a plan, but surely in 2 years time someone will come up with something, right?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

40 minutes ago, Red Tiger said:

  Reveal hidden contents

Terrific?

 

Close, see below.

33 minutes ago, TheKitttenGuard said:

  Hide contents

Loyal

 

Correct. I think that tweet was rather telling on how he thinks the process should go. 

[Fez]

23 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

That's exactly what they're talking about doing at this point...

/We can't come up with a plan, but surely in 2 years time someone will come up with something, right?

Not anymore. Capito and Murkowski have both said they won't vote on the motion to proceed if there's no agreed replacement plan in place, joining Collins who's been there all along (and was the only one to vote against straight repeal back in 2015, besides no-longer senator Kirk, so she's been consistent).

Maybe McConnell forces the initial vote anyway, just to show the body, but repeal is done for now. Doesn't mean he won't try to continue to negotiate in private, but the public effort is dead (and there's so much else that needs to get done that I don't think his staff has the ability to keep focusing on health care even in private).

[S John]

7 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

That's exactly what they're talking about doing at this point...

/We can't come up with a plan, but surely in 2 years time someone will come up with something, right?

Though it is typical of that generation to want to kick the can down the road and it does buy them time, straight repeal is politically very risky, imo.  What the last few months have shown is that a Republican congress cannot agree on a replacement plan and I don't think there is good reason to believe that two more years to think about it will cure the problem - they've already had 7 years to come up with something they could all vote for.  If they can all vote on a repeal, that gives them something to hang their hats on for now, but they are taking a huge risk that replace doesn't get done in the intervening two years.  The two year delay gives the moderate Republicans cover w/ their constituents to say that they planned on a better replacement getting done and that's why they repealed, but everyone has to be wondering if the ultra-conservative wing of the party will ever be brought to the table on something viable.  

If they succeed in coming up with a replacement, recent events indicate that it'll probably be a turd of a bill.  If they don't succeed they will have to either extend OCare to buy yet more time, or they let Obamacare die with no replacement ready and millions of people lose health insurance.    I don't see any of those outcomes as good ones for the Republicans in 2018 or 2020.  

[Maithanet]

1 hour ago, S John said:

If they can all vote on a repeal, that gives them something to hang their hats on for now, but they are taking a huge risk that replace doesn't get done in the intervening two years.  The two year delay gives the moderate Republicans cover w/ their constituents to say that they planned on a better replacement getting done and that's why they repealed, but everyone has to be wondering if the ultra-conservative wing of the party will ever be brought to the table on something viable.

It's academic since the straight repeal is never going to pass, but the two year delay does nothing of the sort.  Insurance companies are not inert, they will react to an Obamacare repeal by pulling out of the individual markets on a huge scale.  Even if a "straight repeal" didn't have a single provision going into place until 2019, effects would be felt immediately. 

[IheartIheartTesla]

I wish there were better options than feckless Democrats and incompetent Republicans in this country. For now, I am stuck with the feckless group, because, consider the alternative.

[Kalbear]

5 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

So much for the narrative that McConnell  is some master legislator. All he's ever done is say no when saying no was easy. 

Dunno about  it 'when it was easy'. McConnell successfully gave Republicans a SCOTUS slot while ensuring that there was zero chance of any kind of bipartisan work for the last 6 years, and he got Reid to go nuclear on appointments. That's a pretty impressive road.

He sucks at governing, and he did suck at doing the one thing he really wanted (getting Obama out of office in 2012) but he's been wildly successful in getting political power as an opposition leader. 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

An 8th Russian Has Hit Trump Towers...

 http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/342533-eighth-person-in-trump-jr-meeting-ided-as-russian-real-estate?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark

[Fragile Bird]

How did all of you get to post? Ever time I tried the Board was down!

I was worried about people going through painful withdrawal...  

[denstorebog]

This is getting fucking ridiculous ...

Trump held undisclosed meeting with Putin at G-20

[DMC]

How bout Trump's defense on the healthcare failure?

Quote

“The vote would have been pretty close to, if you look at it, 48 to 4. That’s a pretty impressive vote by any standard”

Classic Trump.  Not only is this a lie - if there was a vote, there undoubtedly would have been many more defections - but the premise is shamelessly ridiculous on its face.

Looks like Drudge is venting about the failure, even posting a link to an article detailing how this Congress is historically unproductive.  From the link:

Quote

The result, regardless, is that this Congress is going to be historically unproductive. How can I be so sure of this? One measure of what Congress is likely to do the rest of the year is to look at bills that have already passed the House but are awaiting action in the Senate. There are 238 of them. Amazingly, GovTrack gives only 13 a better than 50 percent chance of actually arriving on President Trump's desk in their current form. If that holds up, Trump will have signed just 56 laws by the beginning of the 2018 congressional session. If this tortoise-like pace continues, he will preside over the least productive Congress since Millard Fillmore signed just 74 bills sent to him by the brink-of-war 32nd Congress between 1851 and 1853.

The dam is starting to crack...

[Mexal]

5 minutes ago, denstorebog said:

This is getting fucking ridiculous ...

Trump held undisclosed meeting with Putin at G-20

Yup. Also insane that the only other person in the meeting was Putin's translator.