Wall Street Journal — Use of Cash From TARP Hits Hurdle
The White House had hoped that the in today’s speech on the economy by President Obama at the Brookings Institution, the president would be able to announce that since the bank bailouts were less expensive than expected, the administration could tap a $200 billion, pre-approved line of credit.
Writer Jonathan Weisman explains that the high hopes for a second, TARP-based stimulus have unraveled in the face of a potential legal challenge from deficit hawks who want to see the credit line closed if the money is not needed for its intended purpose.
The TARP slush will now only likely be used for another small-business loan fund.
“Much of the president’s presentation will be general and will focus on Washington’s obligation to help Main Street as well as Wall Street. The president is expected to outline ideas for job creation such as aiding cash-strapped state governments, using tax credits to spur home energy-efficiency improvements — the so-called cash-for-caulkers proposal — and offering employers a tax credit for new hiring.”
New York Times — Officials Try to Unite on Afghan Plan
The feud between Gen. Stanley McChrystal and Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry is notorious and dates back to when both men were in the military.
Today, both men will be seated side by side as members of Congress look for cracks in the administration’s newly unified front. McChrystal favored a large counterinsurgency effort with even more troops that the president has requested. Eikenberry favored a minimal footprint strategy that focused on killing, not rebuilding.
One issue sure to arise is the news that the Obama administration has threatened the Pakistani government with increased U.S. military operations in their country if the Islamabad government doesn’t step up the fight against the Taliban.
Writers Mark Landler and Helene Cooper look at the uneasy relationship between the top general and top diplomat in Afghanistan who were just forced to spend three hours in a joint-preparation session at the Pentagon.
“Rumors that they dislike each other are exaggerated, this official said, but aides to General McChrystal said he was surprised and angered by Ambassador Eikenberry’s cables, especially since he had not voiced his reservations in their frequent meetings.
For his part, the ambassador has been rankled since General McChrystal handed in his strategic assessment of Afghanistan to the White House without sharing it with him first, another official said. That report formed the basis of the general’s request for 40,000 troops.”
Washington Post — Taliban shadow officials offer concrete alternative
Writer Griff White has a riveting look at the way the Taliban operates a shadow government in Afghanistan on the local and provincial levels. As Jay Leno joked about the 18-month Obama surge: “In a related story, the Taliban announced they are on a 19-month timetable.”
White shows the ways in which the former rulers of Afghanistan are preparing for their eventual return, including operating courts, punishing corruption, and enforcing Islamic law.
As NATO forces work towards bringing Talibani into the fold, these are the folks they are looking to flip.
“Shadow government officials collect taxes, forcing farmers at gunpoint to turn over 10 percent of their crops, according to accounts of officials and residents. Taliban district chiefs conscript young men into the radical Islamist movement’s army of insurgents, threatening death for those unwilling to serve. And the Taliban’s judges issue rulings marked by a ruthless efficiency: With no jails in which to hold prisoners, execution by hanging or automatic rifle is the swiftly delivered punishment for convicted murderers and rapists, or for anyone found guilty of working with the government.
‘Whether people like them or not, they have to support them,’ said Fatima Aziz, a parliament member from Kunduz, a province where she said the shadow government has emerged only in the past year.”
Wall Street Journal — Senate Turns to Medicare, Medicaid
The proposal of the moment in the Senate right now would replace a government-run insurance program with a version of the same benefits package offered to federal employees made available to all Americans.
It sounds good, but the challenge is that while fiscal conservatives might be happy to see such a plan if participants paid their own way, liberals would only be on board if generous subsidies made the plan affordable to the poor.
So it’s the same argument that’s been going on since the beginning of the health debate – how much subsidy is enough – in a new form.
Moderate Dems, looking for a way to mollify liberals are talking about expanding Medicare and Medicaid beyond even the expanded limits set in the first draft of the Senate bill. The added benefit: state’s get stuck with half the cost.
Writers Greg Hitt and Janet Adamy have the details:
“Negotiators Monday were considering a proposal that would open Medicare to people ages 55 to 64 if they couldn’t find coverage elsewhere. The proposal would allow them to buy insurance coverage at subsidized rates under Medicare, though the subsidies wouldn’t be as great as those for people 65 and over, said congressional aides and lawmakers.
A companion proposal would expand Medicaid beyond what is already called for in the bill. Under one scenario, people with incomes up to 150% of the federal poverty level would qualify for the program. The poverty level is currently about $22,000 for a family of four.”
Los Angeles Times — EPA clears a path for emission limits
The brinksmanship on carbon dioxide by the Obama administration is barreling toward a conclusion.
In an effort to make the Senate pass the president’s “cap and trade” plan and to have something to show next week at the U.N. climate summit in Copenhagen, the President has given the EPA the green light to find that Carbon dioxide, the fourth most common element in Earth’s atmosphere, and methane are dangerous to human health because they will cause global warming that will kill off humans.
The play is pass the cap or see industries ruined by Climate Czar Carol Browner et al.
But while industries were once very anxious about the EPA findings, the data on which the ruling rests are based in part on now disreputable research from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia. The legal challenges to the administration’s most extreme option on carbon will go on long after the president’s term ends.
In the meantime, the chilling effect (sorry) of the move will be felt immediately. Rather than expand or modernize, business owners may wait to see what shakes out of Washington before committing resources. Since the EPA’s ruling could affect businesses with even the tiniest of carbon footprints, the economic impact will be broad.
Poor form by writers Christi Parsons and Jim Tankersley in not even mentioning the scandal at the CRU, even though EPA boss Lisa Jackson felt obligated to defend the science of her decision in her announcement. That’s a pretty thorough greenwash job.
“Jeff Holmstead, EPA air administrator in the George W. Bush administration, expressed concern that new paperwork requirements would bring new construction ‘to a standstill.’
‘If the agency’s eventual regulatory approach is mishandled, it could result in profound consequences for the economy with little environmental benefit to show for it,’ Holmstead said.”
–To get Morning Must Reads in your inbox every weekday click here.
