Life and Death

By  ThinkProgress War Room

Why Governors Should Expand Medicaid

One of the ways that Obamacare seeks to extend health coverage to the more than 30 MILLION uninsured Americans is through a significant expansion of the Medicaid program, which is jointly funded and administered by the federal government and state governments. Under the law, the federal government will pick up 100 percent of the tab for the expansion for the first three years and no less than 90 percent in all subsequent years. Nearly 17 MILLION people were expected to gain coverage this way.

This is apparently such a good deal for the states that the Supreme Court ruled last year that it was “coercive” for the federal government to require states to accept the money to expand Medicaid or risk losing all of their Medicaid funding, so the expansion then became voluntary. Eight Republican governors including grassroots favorites like Govs. Jan Brewer (AZ) and Chris Christie (NJ) are bucking pressure from within their own party and want to take the deal, but others like Govs. Rick Perry (TX) and Nikki Haley (SC) are steadfastly refusing to do so.

This dispute isn’t just a matter of politics, it’s actually a matter of life and death for low-income Americans. A new analysis of a 2012 study underscores the stakes:

Click HERE for a much deeper, wonkier look at this and other data.

BOTTOM LINE: Instead of playing politics with peoples’ lives, it’s time for all governors to agree to Obamacare’s expansion of the Medicaid program.

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You Might’ve Missed

Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) becomes the latest senator to come out for marriage equality.

The white supremacist group that may be targeting law enforcement for revenge.

Top Catholic cardinal says gays are only “entitled to friendship.”

Marijuana decriminalization goes into effect in Rhode Island.

A deal on comprehensive immigration reform is close at hand.

Tennessee’s mean-spirited plan to link welfare to children’s grades.

GOP state chair says marriage equality will cause straight people to enter into sham gay marriages.

Montana governor vetoes unconstitutional bill to block new gun violence prevention rules.

As Obama administration considers Keystone XL pipeline, two U.S. tar sands pipelines spilled thousands of barrels of dirty crude just in the past week

Liberal Media

By ThinkProgress War Room

The National Media’s Misbegotten Sequester Coverage

First, Republicans accused the president of over-hyping the impact of the sequester and many reporters dutifully began asking the White House if they regretted the alleged over-hyping. Soon, however, both Congressional Republicans and the media found one impact of the sequester that represented an all-out crisis: the cancellation of White House tours.

(The Secret Service is subject to sequester cuts — $84 MILLION worth — and suspending the tours will save $74,000 a week. This will allow them to avoid furloughing additional workers.)

One-quarter of Americans say that they’ve already been negatively affected by the painful sequester cuts; those making less than $50,000 were twice as likely to have been impacted as those making more than $100,000. The worst impacts of the cuts are still to come and will only get worse over time, yet cable news has hardly covered the impact on some of the most vulnerable among us. Instead there has been absolutely breathless coverage of the apparent national crisis caused by the cancellation of White House tours.

The Washington Post‘s Ezra Klein hits the nail on the head in his piece lamenting the “gross obsession with White House tours.” You should read the whole thing, but here’s the key paragraph:

There’s bargaining power for Republicans in upholding the convenient fiction that we can make these cuts and no one will really hurt, because government spending is just wasteful and unnecessary. But the effort here isn’t to make sure no one hurts. It’s to make sure no one with the political capital to do something about it hurts. As such, the minor inconveniences of the politically powerful have become a national crisis, even as some of the politically powerless are losing not just a White House tour, but the very roof over their heads.

The Beltway media should follow the lead of local media outlets covering the impact of the sequester. Instead of hyperventilating about White House tours, local outlets have been covering cuts to things like Head Start, medical research, public housing, schools, and the military (including active duty soldiers).

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You Might’ve Missed

NRA president defends lobbyist’s shocking Newton comments.

Sen. Marco Rubio: Denying civil rights to gay people “does not make me a bigot.”

Senators, including Dianne Feinstein, destroy Ted Cruz’s argument against an Assault Weapons Ban, which passed a Senate committee today.

GOP rebranding: Rick Perry booed at conservative conference for calling for Latino outreach.

14 GOP congressmen who think the government shouldn’t borrow have big debts of their own.

Family Research Council: Unmarried people should be denied birth control and punished for having sex.

The latest Republican whopper about the Democratic budget.

The man behind the 47% tape revealed.

Longtime crank with no actual accomplishments is rock star of conservative conference.

the Progress Report: 12 Things about Paul Ryan

12 Things You Must Know About Paul Ryan

By         ThinkProgress War Room              on Aug 13, 2012 at 5:04 pm

Meet Mitt Romney’s Radical VP Choice

On Saturday, Mitt Romney showed once again that he’s unable or unwilling to stand up to the most extreme voices in his party. He picked Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), architect of “the most extreme budget plan passed by a house of Congress in modern times,” as his running mate.

It’s now clearer than ever that as president, Mitt Romney would end Medicare as we know it and raise taxes on middle class families by more than $2,000 in order to pay for massive new tax cuts for the very wealthiest Americans.

It’s also clearer than ever that this election will now be a choice between two wildly different visions for America: an economy that works for everyone or a rigged game where the rich get rich at the expense of everyone else.

Here’s the rundown on Romney’s extreme VP pick.

1. Ryan embraces the extreme philosophy of Ayn Rand. Ryan heaped praise on Ayn Rand, a 20th-century libertarian novelist best known for her philosophy that centered on the idea that selfishness is “virtue.” Rand described altruism as “evil,” condemned Christianity for advocating compassion for the poor, viewed the feminist movement as “phony,” and called Arabs “almost totally primitive savages. Though he publicly rejected “her philosophy” in 2012, Ryan had professed himself a strong devotee. “The reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand,” he said at a D.C. gathering honoring the author of “Atlas Shrugged” and “The Fountainhead.” “I give out ‘Atlas Shrugged’ as Christmas presents, and I make all my interns read it. Well… I try to make my interns read it.” Learn more about Ryan’s muse:

2. Ryan wants to raises taxes on the middle class, cut them for millionaires. Paul Ryan’s infamous budget — which Romney embraced — replaces “the current tax structure with two brackets — 25 percent and 10 percent — and cut the top rate from 35 percent.” Federal tax collections would fall “by about $4.5 trillion over the next decade” as a result and to avoid increasing the national debt, the budget proposes massive cuts in social programs and “special-interest loopholes and tax shelters that litter the code.” But 62 percent of the savings would come from programs that benefit the lower- and middle-classes, who would also experience a tax increase. That’s because while Ryan “would extend the Bush tax cuts, which are due to expire at the end of this year, he would not extend President Obama’s tax cuts for those with the lowest incomes, which will expire at the same time.” Households “earning more than $1 million a year, meanwhile, could see a net tax cut of about $300,000 annually.”

Audiences have booed Ryan for the unfair distribution:

3. Ryan wants to end Medicare, replace it with a voucher system. Ryan’s latest budget transforms the existing version of Medicare, in which government provides seniors with a guaranteed benefit, into a “premium support” system. All future retirees would receive a government contribution to purchase insurance from an exchange of private plans or traditional fee-for-service Medicare. But since the premium support voucher does not keep up with increasing health care costs, the Congressional Budget Offices estimates that new beneficiaries could pay up to $1,200 more by 2030 and more than $5,900 more by 2050. A recent study also found that had the plan been implemented in 2009, 24 million beneficiaries enrolled in the program would have paid higher premiums to maintain their choice of plan and doctors. Ryan would also raise Medicare’s age of eligibility to 67.

4. Ryan thinks Social Security is a “Ponzi scheme.” In September of 2011, Ryan agreed with Rick Perry’s characterization of Social Security as a “Ponzi scheme” and since 2005 has advocated for privatizing the retirement benefit and investing it in stocks and bonds. Conservatives claim that this would “outperform the current formula based on wages earned and overall wage appreciation,” but the economic crisis of 2008 should serve as a wake-up call for policymakers who seek to hinge Americans’ retirement on the stock market. In fact, “a person with a private Social Security account similar to what President George W. Bush proposed in 2005″ would have lost much of their retirement savings.

5. Ryan’s budget would result in 4.1 million lost jobs in 2 years. Ryan’s budget calls for massive reductions in government spending. He has proposed cutting discretionary programs by about $120 billion over the next two years and mandatory programs by $284 billion, which, the Economic Policy Institute estimates, would suck demand out of the economy and “reduce employment by 1.3 million jobs in fiscal 2013 and 2.8 million jobs in fiscal 2014, relative to current budget policies.”

6. Ryan wants to eliminate Pell Grants for more more than 1 million students. Ryan’s budget claims both that rising financial aid is driving college tuition costs upward, and that Pell Grants, which help cover tuition costs for low-income Americans, don’t go to the “truly needy.” So he cuts the Pell Grant program by $200 billion, which could “ultimately knock more than one million students off” the program over the next 10 years.

7. Ryan supports $40 billion in subsides for big oil. In 2011, Ryan joined all House Republicans and 13 Democrats in his vote to keep Big Oil tax loopholes as part of the FY 2011 spending bill. His budget would retain a decade’s worth of oil tax breaks worth $40 billion, while cutting “billions of dollars from investments to develop alternative fuels and clean energy technologies that would serve as substitutes for oil.” For instance, it “calls for a $3 billion cut in energy programs in FY 2013 alone” and would spend only $150 million over five years — or 20 percent of what was invested in 2012 — on energy programs.

8. Ryan has ownership stakes in companies that benefit from oil subsidies . Ryan “and his wife, Janna, own stakes in four family companies that lease land in Texas and Oklahoma to the very energy companies that benefit from the tax subsidies in Ryan’s budget plan,” the Daily Beast reported in June of 2011. “Ryan’s father-in-law, Daniel Little, who runs the companies, told Newsweek and The Daily Beast that the family companies are currently leasing the land for mining and drilling to energy giants such as Chesapeake Energy, Devon, and XTO Energy, a recently acquired subsidiary of ExxonMobil.”

9. Ryan claimed Romneycare has led to “rationing and benefit cuts.” “I’m not a fan of [Romney's health care reform] system,” Ryan told C-SPAN in 2010. He argued that government is rationing care in the state and claimed that people are “seeing the system bursting by the seams, they’re seeing premium increases, rationing and benefit cuts.” He called the system “a fatal conceit” and “unsustainable.” Watch it:

10. Ryan believes that Romneycare is “not that dissimilar to Obamacare.” Though Romney has gone to great lengths to distinguish his Massachusetts health care law from Obamacare, Ryan doesn’t see the difference. “It’s not that dissimilar to Obamacare, and you probably know I’m not a big fan of Obamacare,” Ryan said at a breakfast meeting sponsored by the American Spectator in March of 2011. “I just don’t think the mandates work … all the regulation they’ve put on it…I think it’s beginning to death spiral. They’re beginning to have to look at rationing decisions.”

11. Ryan accused generals of lying about their support for Obama’s military budget. In March, Ryan couldn’t believe that Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey supports Obama’s Pentagon budget, which incorporates $487 billion in cuts over 10 years. “We don’t think the generals are giving us their true advice,” Ryan said at a policy summit hosted by the National Journal. “We don’t think the generals believe that their budget is really the right budget.” He later apologized for the implication. Watch it:

12. Ryan co-sponsored a “personhood” amendment, an extreme anti-abortion measure. Ryan joined 62 other Republicans in co-sponsoring the Sanctity of Human Life Act, which declares that a fertilized egg “shall have all the legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood.” This would outlaw abortion, some forms of contraception and invitro fertilization.

Paul Ryan Brief: Important Stories That You May Have Missed

Republican House and Senate candidates are already running away from Paul Ryan.

Five reasons Paul Ryan is bad for women’s health.

Paul Ryan’s voting record perfectly matches Mitt Romney’s anti-LGBT positions.

Conservatives are trying to pretend that Ryan’s radical budget is moderate.

Tomorrow, Paul Ryan will meet with the Sheldon Adelson, the GOP’s largest donor and a casino magnate whose empire is under investigation in at least two countries.

Poll: Paul Ryan gets low marks as VP choice.

Mitt Romney picked Paul Ryan over the advice of his top advisers.

Mitt Romney picked Paul Ryan because he was losing.

Some eyebrow-raising Paul Ryan donors.

Mitt Romney’s tax rate under Paul Ryan’s plan: less than 1 percent.

Other recent Progress Reports

Aug 10, 2012: A Golden Title

Why Title IX Is So Important In honor of the U.S. women’s soccer team’s amazing gold medal performance at the Olympics, we thought it would be important to revisit one of the policies that helped make it possible: Title IX. ThinkProgress’ Travis Waldron, who writes a weekly sports column on Alyssa Rosenberg’s culture blog, offers [...]

Aug 9, 2012: Meet Some Right-Wing Attack Groups

To Better the Know Right-Wing Groups Trying to Buy the Election A small number of right-wing billionaires are trying to buy this election. And they’re doing it using a variety of right-wing attack groups that have unleashed avalanche of negative ads attacking the president and Democratic Senate and House candidate. These groups may spend as [...]

Aug 8, 2012: Don’t Mess With the Nuns

Sisters Speak Out For the past two days Mitt Romney and his campaign have busied themselves with their latest false attack against the president — the allegation that President Obama “gutted” the 1996 welfare reform by giving states additional flexibility in how they run their programs. In Romney’s telling, welfare recipients now can just sit [...]

Aug 7, 2012: Colorado or China?

The West’s Vast Clean Energy Potential During recent trips to the West, Mitt Romney said both that he doesn’t understand “what the purpose” of our public lands is and that clean energy jobs don’t exist. This perhaps explains in part why Mitt Romney is willing to cede the clean energy industry — and its jobs [...]

The Top 10 GOP Attacks on Bain Capital

When Republicans Thought Bain Capital Was Fair Game

Just as it did earlier this year during the Republican primary, Mitt Romney’s record of amassing a quarter-billion dollar fortune by bankrupting companies, shipping jobs overseas, and laying off thousands of American workers is dominating the headlines.

The Romney campaign is claiming that the attacks amount to unfair “character assassination” (even as one of Romney’s top surrogates today declared discussion of Romney’s experience at Bain “fair game”). President Obama himself addressed the issue yesterday:

And the reason this is relevant to the campaign is because my opponent, Governor Romney, his main calling card for why he thinks he should be President is his business expertise.  He is not going out there touting his experience in Massachusetts.  He is saying, I’m a business guy and I know how to fix it, and this is his business.

And when you’re President, as opposed to the head of a private equity firm, then your job is not simply to maximize profits.  Your job is to figure out how everybody in the country has a fair shot.  Your job is to think about those workers who got laid off and how are we paying for their retraining.  Your job is to think about how those communities can start creating new clusters so that they can attract new businesses.  Your job as President is to think about how do we set up a equitable tax system so that everybody is paying their fair share that allows us then to invest in science and technology and infrastructure, all of which are going to help us grow.

And so, if your main argument for how to grow the economy is I knew how to make a lot of money for investors, then you’re missing what this job is about. It doesn’t mean you weren’t good at private equity, but that’s not what my job is as President.  My job is to take into account everybody, not just some.  My job is to make sure that the country is growing not just now, but 10 years from now and 20 years from now.

Just a few short months ago, Romney’s Republican rivals for the GOP nomination thought Romney’s tenure at Bain Capital was very relevant. As ThinkProgress’ Judd Legum notes, the Republican attacks “make Obama’s remarks sound tame by comparison.” He rounded up the top 10 GOP attacks on Bain. Here they are:

1. “The idea that you’ve got private equity companies that come in and take companies apart so they can make profits and have people lose their jobs, that’s not what the Republican Party’s about.” — Rick Perry [New York Times, 1/12/12]

2. “The Bain model is to go in at a very low price, borrow an immense amount of money, pay Bain an immense amount of money and leave. I’ll let you decide if that’s really good capitalism. I think that’s exploitation.” — Newt Gingrich [New York Times, 1/17/12]

3. “Instead of trying to work with them to try to find a way to keep the jobs and to get them back on their feet, it’s all about how much money can we make, how quick can we make it, and then get out of town and find the next carcass to feed upon” — Rick Perry [National Journal, 1/10/12]

4. “We find it pretty hard to justify rich people figuring out clever legal ways to loot a company, leaving behind 1,700 families without a job.” — Newt Gingrich [Globe and Mail, 1/9/12]

5. “Now, I have no doubt Mitt Romney was worried about pink slips — whether he was going to have enough of them to hand out because his company, Bain Capital, of all the jobs that they killed” — Rick Perry [New York Times, 1/9/12]

6) “He claims he created 100,000 jobs. The Washington Post, two days ago, reported in their fact check column that he gets three Pinocchios. Now, a Pinocchio is what you get from The Post if you’re not telling the truth.” — Newt Gingrich [1/13/12, NBC News]

7. “There is something inherently wrong when getting rich off failure and sticking it to someone else is how you do your business, and I happen to think that’s indefensible” — Rick Perry [National Journal, 1/10/12]

8. “If Governor Romney would like to give back all the money he’s earned from bankrupting companies and laying off employees over his years, then I would be glad to then listen to him” — Newt Gingrich [Mediaite, 12/14/11]

9. “If you’re a victim of Bain Capital’s downsizing, it’s the ultimate insult for Mitt Romney to come to South Carolina and tell you he feels your pain, because he caused it.” — Rick Perry [New York Times, 1/8/12]

10. “They’re vultures that sitting out there on the tree limb waiting for the company to get sick and then they swoop in, they eat the carcass. They leave with that and they leave the skeleton” — Rick Perry [National Journal, 1/10/12]

Tomorrow, we’ll run through how Mitt Romney’s time at Bain Capital fits in to the debate about building an economy that works for everyone, not just the wealthy few or doubling down on an economy that’s rigged to benefit the wealthy at the expense of the middle class.

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You May Have Missed

Can Ryan Murphy write another show about gay characters without making them trite and shallow?

A top Romney aide attacked workers fired by Bain Capital who have been telling their stories of devastation as “performance art gibberish.”

Sheriff Joe Arpaio doesn’t care that he used taxpayer funds to pursue his investigation of President Obama’s birth certificate.

The new GOP’s women caucus actually has a record of voting against equality for women.

Economists are starting to be cautiously optimistic about the housing market’s recovery.

These charts help bust the oft-repeated GOP myth that Obama’s spending is out of control.

Texas launches another war on history.

It’s official: Watching Fox makes you stupider.

Ohio’s prioritizes tax cuts for banks over funding for health care and education.

Obama Didn’t Call Americans Lazy — But Right-Wing Media Rout​inely Do

http://mediamatters.org/research/201111210008 Right-wing media recently pushed the discredited attack that President Obamacalled Americans “lazy.” But right-wing media figures themselves have a history of suggesting that Americans — particularly the poor, the unemployed, and union workers, among others — are lazy or lack work ethic. Right-Wing Media Claimed Obama Called Americans “Lazy” Fox’s Todd Starnes: Obama “Took The Nation To Task … For Being Lazy.” In a blog post that was posted on Fox Nation, Todd Starnes wrote: President Obama took the nation to task today for being lazy. The comments came during a meeting between the president and CEOs attending the annual Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meetings. The United States is hosting this year’s gathering in Hawaii. [...] It’s not the first time the president has accused Americans of being lazy. [Fox News Radio via Fox Nation, 11/14/11, via Media Matters] Fox’s Kilmeade Suggests Comment Shows Obama Is “Determined To Bring Us Down.” Whileco-hosting Fox News’ The Five, Brian Kilmeade said: “I will say this. The fact that the president of the United States has called us soft, we’ve lost our competitive edge, and now we’re called lazy. … He’s trying desperately to flatten out our country, and defuse us, and get us off our high horse. Why is he so determined to bring us down?” [Fox News, The Five, 11/14/11, via Media Matters] Hannity: “This Is Not The First Time” Obama Has “Kind Of Attacked The American People.” During an interview on his Fox News program with Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), Sean Hannity asked: HANNITY: What do you make of the President? This is not the first time that he’s kind of attacked the American people, that you know, the people are a little bit lazy, he spoken a while back about them getting soft, we lost our ambition, our imagination. What do you make of that? Are the American people not smart enough to accept his goodness and greatness? [Fox News, Hannity, 11/15/11, via Nexis] For more right-wing media claims that Obama called Americans “lazy,” SEE HERE. In Fact, Obama Didn’t Call Americans Lazy … AP: Ad Saying Obama “Thinks” That “Americans Are Lazy” Actually “Takes Obama’s Comment Out Of Context.” Beth Fouhy, political reporter for The Associated Press, reported that a campaign ad by Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry that uses Obama’s comments takes them “out of context”: Republican presidential hopeful Perry takes Obama’s comment out of context. Obama was speaking to a group of CEOs about the challenges of attracting foreign investment in the U.S., not about individuals or their economic challenges. [...] Perry is using the comment to portray Obama as out of touch, even contemptuous, of ordinary Americans. [The Associated Press, 11/16/11] ABC’s Devin Dwyer: Attacks On Obama “Distort” His Comments. ABC News White House producer Devin Dwyer wrote that the ad by Perry featuring Obama’s comments “distorts” what Obama said: “Can you believe that? That’s what our president thinks is wrong with America? That Americans are lazy? That’s pathetic,” Perry says in the spot that’s airing in Iowa and New Hampshire. The only problem: the full context of Obama’s remarks made Saturday during a meeting of CEOs in Honolulu indicates he wasn’t suggesting that at all. Boeing CEO James McNerney asked Obama about his thinking on the perception by some countries of “impediments to investment” in the U.S. Obama replied that “we’ve been a little bit lazy” about actively trying to attract private foreign investors to U.S. soil — referring broadly to American government and business sectors, not the American people themselves. [ABCNews.com, Political Punch, 11/16/11] … But Right-Wing Media Routinely Attack Americans As “Lazy” Or “Having Poor Work Habits” LOW-INCOME AMERICANS Limbaugh: “Do You Know Any Low-Income People Who Want To Get A Better Job? … Do They Even Want To Work?” On the April 21 edition of his radio show, host Rush Limbaugh said, “Do you know any low-income people who want to get a better job? … Do they even want to work?” [Premiere Radio Networks, The Rush Limbaugh Show, 4/21/11, via Media Matters] Fox Business Scolded Poor People For Not Being Ashamed Of Their Poverty. During the May 19 edition of Fox Business’ Varney& Co., host Stuart Varney attacked anti-poverty programs as evidence that the U.S. now has an “entitlement mentality.” Fox commentator Charles Payne then scolded people in poverty for not being “embarrassed” about needing public assistance: PAYNE: Krystal [Ball], there’s no doubt that these are good programs. I think the real narrative here, though, is that people aren’t embarrassed by it. People aren’t ashamed by it. In other words, the there was a time when people were embarrassed to be on food stamps; there was a time when people were embarrassed to be on unemployment for six months, let alone demanding to be on it for more than two years. I think that’s what Stu is trying to say, is that, when the president says Wall Street is at fault, so, you are entitled to get anything that you want from the government, because it’s not really your fault. No longer is the man being told to look in the mirror and cast down a judgment on himself; it’s someone else’s fault. So food stamps, unemployment, all of this stuff, is something that they probably earned in some indirect way. [Fox Business, Varney & Co., 5/19/11, via Media Matters] Fox’s Stuart Varney On Low-Income Americans: “Many Of Them Have Things — What They Lack Is The Richness Of Spirit.” During the August 25 edition of Fox Business’ Varney & Co. at Night, host Stuart Varney hyped a Heritage Foundation study showing that many Americans in poverty own appliances, saying: “The image we have of poor people as starving and living in squalor really is not accurate. Many of them have things — what they lack is the richness of spirit. That’s my opinion.” [Fox Business, Varney& Co. at Night, 8/25/11, via Media Matters] Fox Business Pitted The “Takers” Of “Government Handouts” Against The “Makers.” After a National Bureau of Economic Research study concluded that social safety net programs, including Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, were highly effective at keeping people out of poverty, Fox Business launched a week-long series pitting the “takers” of “government handouts” against the “makers” in the economy. [Media Matters, 5/24/11] UNEMPLOYED AMERICANS Kilmeade: “Maybe The Unemployment Benefits [Expiration] Will Get People To Sober Up” And Take A Job. On the July 15, 2010, edition of Fox News’ Fox & Friends, co-host Brian Kilmeade said that “[m]aybe the [expiration of] unemployment benefits will get people to sober up” and take a job. [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 7/15/10, via Media Matters] Ben Stein Attacked Unemployed Americans As Having “Poor Work Habits.” In a July 19, 2010, post at The American Spectator, conservative pundit and frequent Fox News guest Ben Stein wrote: The people who have been laid off and cannot find work are generally people with poor work habits and poor personalities. I say “generally” because there are exceptions. But in general, as I survey the ranks of those who are unemployed, I see people who have overbearing and unpleasant personalities and/or who do not know how to do a day’s work. They are people who create either little utility or negative utility on the job. In an August 27, 2010, American Spectatorpost, Stein repeated his attack, writing: “[A]s I noted before, in my small circle of friends, anyone who has good work skills and a decent personality can get a job. I am not talking about the national scene. Just my little world. The chronic complainers and the malcontents and the unrealistic are the ones who cannot find work they want. The people who really want to work can get work. It might not be great work, but it’s work.” [The American Spectator, 7/19/10, 8/27/10, via Media Matters] Stein Claimed That “A Lot Of” Unemployed People “Would Not Prefer To Go To Work.” On the April 30, 2011, broadcast of Fox News’ Cavuto on Business, Stein said that “a lot of” unemployed Americans “would not prefer to go to work.” [Fox Business, Cavuto on Business, 4/30/11, via Media Matters] UNION WORKERS Limbaugh Attacked Union Workers As “Freeloaders” As Compared To “Real Working Non-Unionized People.” On the February 17 edition of his radio show, Limbaugh called union workers “freeloaders” and contrasted them with “real working non-unionized people.” [Premiere Radio Networks, The Rush Limbaugh Show, 2/17/11, via Media Matters] Limbaugh: Union Protests In WI Were Due To Union Members Not Wanting To “Pay A Dime Towards Their Own Health Care Or Retirement.” On the August 18 broadcast of his show, Limbaugh said that the protests in Wisconsin took place because public union members didn’t want to “pay a dime towards their own health care or retirement.” [Premiere Radio Networks, The Rush Limbaugh Show, 8/18/11, via Media Matters] Coulter: Teamsters President Hoffa Represents “Useless” Workers Like “Kindergarten Teachers” Instead Of “Men Who Have Actual Jobs.” During the September 7 edition of Fox & Friends, conservative pundit Ann Coulter said that Teamsters president James Hoffa represented “useless” workers like “kindergarten teachers” instead of “men who have actual jobs.” [Fox News, Fox& Friends, 9/7/11, via Media Matters] OCCUPY WALL STREET PROTESTERS Limbaugh: Occupy Wall Street Protesters Are “Perpetually Lazy, Spoiled Rotten, 99 Percent White Kids.” During the October 6 edition of his radio show, Limbaugh attacked Occupy Wall Street protesters as “perpetually lazy, spoiled rotten, 99 percent white kids.” [Premiere Radio Networks, The Rush Limbaugh Show, 10/6/11, via Media Matters] Fox Nation And Wash. Times On Occupy Wall Street And Its Demands: “Don’t Feed The Lazy.” A November 18 op-ed in The Washington Times, titled, “Don’t feed the lazy,” claimed that “Occupy Wall Street’s demands undermine real compassion.” The op-ed stated: It is interesting to note that according to the Bible, one of the criteria for receiving aid was a willingness to work. Entitlement was not an option. The Apostle Paul wrote, “For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.” Paul is not being cruel or heartless in this passage. He is expressing a truth that those who are able but unwilling to work should be disqualified from receiving charitable help, thereby allowing their natural need for food to drive their effort to work. This is a profound and often overlooked financial principle. [...] Attitudes toward poverty, debt and entitlement make reaching common ground with those in the Occupy Wall Street movement difficult. Compared to many around the world, they live in relative comfort, with access to food, shelter and liberty. But rather than embracing equal opportunity, they seem to clamor for equal outcomes. [...] Perhaps it is time for the Occupy Wall Street movement to reflect on the words of Paul: “If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.” Fox Nation also linked to the op-ed. [The Washington Times, 11/18/11; Fox Nation, 11/21/11] NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION EMPLOYEES Limbaugh: Employees At Nonprofit Organizations Are “Lazy Idiots” And “Rapists In Terms Of Finance And Economy.” During the August 12, 2010, edition of his radio show, Limbaugh attacked the employees of nonprofit organizations as “lazy idiots” and went on to say that they are “rapists in terms of finance and economy.” [Premiere Radio Networks, The Rush Limbaugh Show, 8/12/10, via Media Matters] Contact: Rush Limbaugh ElRushbo@eibnet.com http://twitter.com/Limbaugh Contact: Brian Kilmeade http://twitter.com/Kilmeade

the Progress Report

The 99% Will March On

By ThinkProgress War Room

You Can’t Evict an Idea Whose Time Has Come

In a surprise raid early this morning, the New York Police Department forcibly removed the Occupy Wall Street encampment from Zuccotti Park in Lower Manhattan.

(For complete coverage, visit ThinkProgress’ special section on the 99 Percent Movement and watch the ThinkProgress twitter feed for live updates.)

But make no mistake, this isn’t the end of the 99 Percent Movement or the fight for an economy that works for everyone.

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka sums it up pretty well:

But the 99% is undaunted. Occupy Wall Street’s message already has created a new day. This movement has created a seismic shift in our national debate—from austerity and cuts to jobs, inequality and our broken economic system.

None of these facts changed overnight and the 99 Percent Movement will continue to demand an economy that works for everyone:

• The top 1 percet of Americans still own 40 percent of our country’s wealth while the bottom 80 percent owns only 7 percent.
• The richest 1 percent earned one out of every four dollars in 2007. Thirty years earlier, the richest only made one out of every 11 dollars.
• One in four millionaires pays a lower tax rate than 10 million middle-income Americans.
• Fourteen million Americans are unemployed.
• Corporations are sitting on $2 trillion in cash – more cash than at any time in nearly a half century – instead of hiring more employees.

What’s next?

An international day of action for the 99 Percent is planned for this Thursday, Nov. 17.

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You May Have Missed

Generation Y Bother.

What the Keystone delay means for the green movement.

Fighting for clean air is good politics.

Herman Cain claims that “a majority of Muslims share the extremist views.”

An obscure regulatory battle in Florida “could upend efforts to implement health-care reform nationwide.”

Bachmann is still claiming that the HPV vaccine poses health risks.

Mississippi woman receives three-year prison sentence for feeding her family.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry accepted $57 million from the Affordable Care Act — even though he claims the law is unconstitutional.

Men aren’t funnier than women, but they are given more credit for being funny.

• http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.html#_=1321456468870&count=vertical&counturl=http%3A%2F%2Fthinkprogress.org%2Fprogress-report%2Fthe-99-will-march-on%2F&dnt=&id=twitter_tweet_button_0&lang=en&original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fthinkprogress.org%2Fprogress-report%2F&related=thinkprogress&text=The%2099%25%20Will%20March%20On&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthinkprogress.org%2Fprogress-report%2Fthe-99-will-march-on%2F&via=thinkprogress
• http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?action=like&channel_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs-static.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fconnect%2Fxd_proxy.php%3Fversion%3D3%23cb%3Df25ea463a7be808%26relation%3Dparent.parent&extended_social_context=false&font=arial&href=http%3A%2F%2Fthinkprogress.org%2Fprogress-report%2Fthe-99-will-march-on%2F&layout=box_count&locale=en_US&node_type=link&sdk=joey&show_faces=false&width=55
• 
• 

Other recent Progress Reports

Nov 14, 2011: What Is The GOP Foreign Policy Vision?

Saturday night’s CBS/National Journal Republican “Commander-in-Chief” primary debate sharply highlighted divisions in GOP foreign policy thinking. Amid the relentless platitudes and occasional conspiracy theory, the candidates offered a mix of George W. Bush administration-style neoconservatism (even when they don’t realize it) — the same movement that brought us the Iraq War — with a splash [...]

Nov 10, 2011: Sabotage?

What’s the GOP’s Real Top Priority? You don’t have to take our word for it, here’s how Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) described his priorities: The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president. Survey Says: Americans Think the GOP is Trying to Sabotage the [...]

Nov 9, 2011: Radical Republican Repeal Day of 2011

When You Fight, You Win: Progressive Pushback Carries the Day Yesterday, we previewed some of the hottest races and ballot questions. We’re pleased to report that progressives across the country triumphed against radical Republicans and their extremist agenda. Here’s the rundown. REPEALED: Ohio’s 99 Percent triumphed by overwhelmingly voting to repeal SB 5, the GOP’s anti-worker [...]

Nov 8, 2011: Election Day 2011: What To Look For Tonight

A Look At Today’s Most Important Races Today, voters across the country are casting ballots in several important races and voting on several hotly-contested ballot measures. Here are a few of the most important things to be watching tonight when returns start to roll in. OHIO SB5 (Issue 2): Unlike Wisconsin, Ohio has a people’s [...]

Obama is toast?

This weekend, The New York Times Magazine ran a long analysis of the 2012 election headlined, “Is Obama toast?”

It uses a mathematical formula to conclude who will win this race.

In other words, it says neither you nor Barack Obama has a role to play in this election, because the outcome is essentially predetermined.

We disagree.

The outcome will depend on what we do every single day between now and November 6th, 2012. And I want to give you an idea of how we know that.

Our Republican opponents, from Mitt Romney and Herman Cain to Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann, have endorsed the same set of Tea Party policies that drive the Republicans in Washington: letting Wall Street write its own rules again and giving special treatment to millionaires and billionaires while asking seniors and middle-class families to pay for it.

All of them would return to the failed economic policies that led us into recession.

Yet the Times piece assigns each of them a score on an ideological scale, ignoring the obvious reality that there has been virtually no difference among the GOP candidates — or between them and the Republican congressional leaders who refuse to do anything to restore economic security for the middle class.

Whoever wins the nomination will no doubt try to appear more “moderate” as they compete for undecided voters in the general election. But they have all made their positions clear. And we will hold them accountable for that.

The only true difference in this race is between their agenda and President Obama’s. Facing historic challenges when he came into office, he has fought every day for a fairer economy where everybody who does their fair share gets a fair shake.

He’s stood up to credit card companies to ensure they can’t target consumers with hidden fees. He’s stood up to insurance companies, who can no longer deny health care coverage on the basis of a pre-existing condition. He’s stood up to Wall Street to end taxpayer bailouts and rein in the kind of risky financial behavior that nearly toppled our economy.

These dramatic differences between the Republican nominee and President Obama will be crystal clear to Americans as the 2012 election approaches, because our grassroots organization in all 50 states will be having conversations every single day with their friends, families, co-workers, and neighbors.

That grassroots organizational advantage is a critical factor in this election that the Times’ “formula” doesn’t consider at all.

More than 1 million people have already taken ownership of this campaign. Millions more are organizing their communities on behalf of the President, online and off. This weekend, we had our single biggest day of action of the campaign — more than 2,000 volunteer events took place across the country, and more than 10,000 volunteers participated.

This work is already having an impact across the country.

We expanded the electoral map in the last election, fighting hard for — and winning — states like North Carolina, Colorado, and Virginia so that the entire election didn’t hinge on the results in a single state, as it had in 2000 and 2004.

We have no intention of returning to the old electoral map. And the organizing you’re doing means we won’t have to. Today, we are showing signs of strength in states we didn’t win even in the watershed election of 2008 — states like Georgia and Arizona, where a recent poll had President Obama beating every potential Republican nominee.

The map isn’t as friendly to our opponents, who won’t be able to compete in traditionally Democratic states because their organization won’t compare to ours. Whether you measure donors giving or doors knocked, there’s grassroots enthusiasm for President Obama that the other side can’t match — but that the Times doesn’t consider relevant.

The truth is this isn’t the first time you’ve been written out of the story by many in Washington and the media — and it’s not the first time they’ve been completely wrong about that.

In the 2007 and 2008 campaign, almost everyone in professional politics said it wasn’t Barack Obama’s “turn” to be president. But millions of people like you took responsibility for the campaign — knocking on doors, making phone calls, and donating whenever you could.

You proved everyone wrong — not just about who was going to win the election, but about the ability of everyday Americans to come together and change the course of history.

The entire premise of the Times article is that you won’t — and can’t — do it in 2012.

The election is now less than one year away. No one thinks it will be easy. But there can be no doubt its outcome depends on how hard you and I work over the next 364 days. Right now, we’re opening field offices in key states, hiring organizers, recruiting volunteers, registering voters, and getting ready for what’s going to be one hell of a fight.

So, is Obama toast? It’s up to you.

- Messina

Jim Messina
Campaign Manager
Obama for America

P.S. — Want to show the cynics that this election is in your hands? Donate $5 or more today. WWW.BarackObama.com

the Progross Report

Survey Says: The Public Supports the 99% Movement

By         ThinkProgress War Room

The Verdict Is In

As the Occupy Wall Street protest and growing 99 Percent Movement enters its second month, poll after poll shows public support for the movement.

Here’s the rundown.

82…percent of New York State voters think it’s OK for the Occupy Wall Street protesters to protest.

70…percent of Americans have heard “a lot” or “some” about the 99 Percent Movement.

67…percent of Americans think it would be a “bad idea” to lower taxes on large corporations.

66…percent of Americans think the distribution of money and wealth in this country should be “more evenly distributed among more people.”

65…percent of Americans think taxes should be raised on millionaires.

66…percent of New York State voters support a millionaire’s tax.

58…percent of New York State voters agree with the views of the Wall Street protesters.

46…percent of Americans think the 99 Percent Movement “reflect[s] the views of most Americans,” compared to just 34 percent who say it does not.

43…percent of Americans agree with the views of protesters, compared to just 27 percent who disagree.

The 1% Wants Higher Taxes on Millionaires Too

68…percent of millionaire investors support raising taxes on millionaires.

61…percent of investors with a net worth of more than $5 million support raising taxes on millionaires.

Americans Understand the GOP is Only Looking Out for the 1%

69…percent of Americans think that the policies of the Republicans in Congress “favor the rich.”

9…percent of Americans think that the policies of the Republicans in Congress “favor the middle class.”

2…percent of Americans (who apparently don’t get out much) think that the policies of the Republicans in Congress “favor the poor.”

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You May Have Missed

The Senate GOP didn’t have a problem with a lesbian court appointee until two anti-gay groups voiced their opposition.

In the past 36 years, the typical hourly wage has only increased $1.23.

Rosie O’Donnell points out that the media bears responsibility for the epidemic of anti-gay bullying.

Herman Cain’s campaign tells its staff: “Do not speak to him unless you are spoken to.”

Mitt Romney says the government shouldn’t play “venture capitalist,” so what actually qualifies him for president?

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) permits guns, but not photos, in the state capitol.

Why Occupy Wall Street should not let its opponents capitalize on protester misbehavior.

How the Israeli right courts African American politicians.

No, military spending is not an efficient way to stimulate the economy.

• http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.html#_=1319817807155&count=vertical&counturl=http%3A%2F%2Fthinkprogress.org%2Fprogress-report%2Fsurvey-says-the-public-supports-the-99-movement%2F&id=twitter_tweet_button_0&lang=en&original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fthinkprogress.org%2Fprogress-report%2F&related=thinkprogress&text=Survey%20Says%3A%20The%20Public%20Supports%20the%2099%25%20Movement&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthinkprogress.org%2Fprogress-report%2Fsurvey-says-the-public-supports-the-99-movement%2F&via=thinkprogress
• http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?action=like&api_key=147327525295796&channel_url=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fconnect%2Fxd_proxy.php%3Fversion%3D3%23cb%3Df33089c7f9334f4%26origin%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fthinkprogress.org%252Ff379249ab74fab%26relation%3Dparent.parent%26transport%3Dpostmessage&extended_social_context=false&font=arial&href=http%3A%2F%2Fthinkprogress.org%2Fprogress-report%2Fsurvey-says-the-public-supports-the-99-movement%2F&layout=box_count&locale=en_US&node_type=link&sdk=joey&show_faces=false&width=55
• 
• 

Other recent Progress Reports

Oct 26, 2011: ThinkProgress & Rick Perry Completely Agree That…

It’s Time to See Millionaire Mitt Romney’s Missing Tax Returns Back on Oct. 14, we asked if Mitt Romney had something to hide since he’s never released his tax returns despite running for or holding elective office for the better part of two decades: Not when he ran for the Senate against Ted Kennedy in [...]

Oct 25, 2011: 2012ers Unite Behind Massive Giveaways To The Wealthy

Trillions In Giveaways to the Rich Enacting massive tax giveaways to the wealthiest Americans seems to rank just after an all-consuming desire to defeat President Obama on the Republicans’ priority list.  Texas Governor Rick Perry’s flat tax plan, which he released today in South Carolina, is just the latest entry in the Republican contest to [...]

Oct 24, 2011: The 99 Percent Are Winning

On Friday, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) was scheduled to make a speech on income inequality at the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. Yet after learning that the event would be taking place in a forum open to the public and that hundreds of protesters from Occupy Philly [...]

Oct 21, 2011: Oops, They Did It Again!

Republicans Vote Down American Jobs — AGAIN In their never-ending quest to protect millionaires and billionaires, Senate Republicans once again voted down American Jobs. Last week, they joined together to unanimously oppose the millions of jobs that would be created by the American Jobs Act. Last night, the Senate took up one part of the president’s [...]

Media Matters for America … 10/25 -27th

“The Most Exciting Tax Plan Since Reagan‘s”: Right-Wing Media Tout Perry’s Flat Tax http://mediamatters.org/research/201110260001 Following the release of Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry‘s (R-TX) tax plan, conservative media have hyped the plan, claiming it is “exciting” and a “radical improvement” over the current system. However, economists from across the spectrum have criticized Perry’s plan, noting that it will lead to “substantial” revenue loss and “draconian cuts” while “undermin[ing]” the need to make the tax code simpler. Conservative Media Hype Rick Perry’s Tax Plan As “A Radical Improvement” Weekly Standard‘s Steve Hayes: Perry’s Plan Is “Very Strong” And “Has A Lot Of Very Appealing Pro-Growth Aspects To It.” From the October 25 edition of Fox News’ Special Report with Bret Baier: BAIER: OK, Steve, thoughts on this plan and the rollout? HAYES: Very strong. I like the plan a lot. I think it has a lot of very appealing pro-growth aspects to it. I particularly like the 20 percent tax. There have been already complaints that this is too complicated, that the phase-in or the opt-in and opt-out will make things too complicated. I think that’s nonsense. You have basically the option for people to choose whether they want to pay higher taxes. Who’s going to choose whether to pay higher taxes? [Fox News, Special Report,10/25/11] Steve Forbes: Perry’s Tax Reform Proposal Is “The Most Exciting Tax Plan Since Reagan’s.” An October 20 Yahoo News article reported that Steve Forbes stated that he “helped devise Perry’s plan” and heaped lavish praise on that plan. From the article: Steve Forbes, whose flat tax plan helped make him an unlikely contender for the Republican presidential nomination 15 years ago, is praising a new version of the idea from Rick Perry. And Forbes, who says he helped devise Perry’s plan, left little doubt that he’ll formally back the Texas governor before long. In an interview with Yahoo News, Forbes called Perry’s proposal, announced in a speech Wednesday, “the most exciting tax plan since Reagan’s,” in 1980. Asked whether that included his own 1996 plan, Forbes said it did, because unlike him in 1996, when he fell short of upsetting front-runner Bob Dole, Perry “is going to win.” Forbes, the chief executive of his family’s eponymous publishing empire, said the Perry camp reached out to him for help in crafting their plan. “We got into discussions of basic principles–how the thing might be shaped,” he said. “The candidate concluded it ought be a simple rate. Make it as simple and bold as possible.” [...] Asked whether the Perry plan would immediately raise as much tax revenue as the current system, Forbes did not answer directly. But he said that in the long-run, it would increase revenue, by spurring economic growth. Many on the left argue that a flat tax would increase the tax burden on the poor, while easing the load on wealthier Americans.  Forbes dismissed those concerns. “It’s gonna be good for all taxpayers,” he said. [Yahoo News, 10/20/11] Forbes Reiterated His Support On Fox: The Flat Tax Is “A Tax Cut For Most People, Not A Tax     Increase.” [Fox News, America Live, 10/25/11, via Media Matters] Big Government‘s Dan Mitchell: Perry’s Plan Has “Some Missing Homework, But [Is] A Solid B+” And “A Radical Improvement Compared To The Current Tax System.” In an October 25 post on Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com headlined “Grading Perry’s Flat Tax: Some Missing Homework, But A Solid B+,” contributor and Cato Institute economist Dan Mitchell wrote: As a long-time advocate of a pure flat tax, I’m not happy that Perry has deviated from the ideal approach. But the perfect should not be the enemy of the very good. If implemented, his plan would dramatically boost economic performance and improve competitiveness. [...] Depending on the answers to these questions, the grade for Perry’s flat tax could be as high as A- or as low as B. Regardless, it will be a radical improvement compared to the current tax system, which gets a D- (and that’s a very kind grade). [Big Government, 10/25/11] Hoft Hypes Perry’s Tax Plan. From an October 24 post on Jim Hoft’s Gateway Pundit blog: Governor Rick Perry unveiled his 20% flat tax and spending plan tonight. The plan will give individuals the option of paying a 20% flat-rate income tax. It will also cap federal spending at 18% of GDP. Another selling point – the simple 20% flat tax will allow Americans to file their taxes on a postcard, saving up to $483 billion in compliance costs. Sounds good. Steve Forbes was impressed. He endorsed the plan on Monday. [Gateway Pundit, 10/24/11, emphasis original] However, Experts Describe The Plan As “Delusional” And Claim It Will Lead To “Draconian Cuts” And “Substantial” Revenue Loss Syracuse University Economics Professor: Perry’s Plan Is “Delusional Policy” And “The Race To The Bottom On Tax Policy Is Getting Scary.” In an October 25 post on Forbes magazine’s website titled “Perry Optional Alternative Flat Tax — Good Politics, Delusional Policy,” Len Burman, Professor of Practice, Public Administration and Economics at Syracuse University, wrote: Here’s a quick note on Perry’s actual plan, as outlined in his Wall Street Journal op ed today. Yesterday, I noted that a flat tax would be regressive and potentially raise taxes on low- and middle-income people. I was assuming, erroneously as it turns out, that Perry’s plan would be designed to raise at least as much revenue as current law. But it would actually amount to a giant tax cut. Here’s what he said in the WSJ: The plan starts with giving Americans a choice between a new, flat tax rate of 20% or their current income tax rate. The new flat tax preserves mortgage interest, charitable and state and local tax exemptions for families earning less than $500,000 annually, and it increases the standard deduction to $12,500 for individuals and dependents. The plan is optional, meaning that low- and middle-income families that benefit from refundable credits will stay in the current system.  High-income taxpayers will jump at the chance to avoid paying tax on interest, dividends, capital gains, rents, royalties, and other capital income. That is a large share of their income, and it would be exempt under Perry’s plan. And the 20% rate is much lower than the current top rate of 35%. And, moderately well off people get to keep the most popular deductions. The idea of an optional alternative tax system is not new. John McCain proposed one in 2008 and it would have added $7 trillion to the debt over a decade. It’s virtually always true that if you offer taxpayers a choice, it will cost the Treasury money. I have no idea how big a tax cut Perry’s plan is, but there’s no way this plan will come close to raising 18% of GDP (Perry’s spending target) unless there are hidden revenue raisers that I missed. The idea of adding to our enormous deficits to provide giant tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires just blows my mind. And, by the way, an optional alternative tax system is not simple. Millions of middle-income taxpayers will have to figure their taxes two ways to figure out which plan is better for them. Will it be called the Alternative Maximum Tax? The race to the bottom on tax policy is getting scary. [Forbes.com, 10/25/11] CBPP: Perry’s Plan Would Require “A Dismantling Of Federal Programs” And “Draconian Cuts In Virtually Every Kind Of Spending.” From a New York Times article headlined “Perry Calls His Flat Tax Proposal ‘Bold Reform’ “: Gov. Rick Perry of Texas unveiled a plan on Tuesday to scrap the graduated income tax and replace it with a 20 percent flat rate. By throwing out  rates as high as 35 percent and eliminating estate and investment taxes, the plan would grant a major tax cut for the wealthy. [...] The plan also proposes reducing the scope of the federal government by requiring drastically austere federal budgets — compared with what exists now — that spend no more than 18 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product, which analysts said would most likely force big cuts in government spending at almost every level. That would equate to a cut of one-quarter of the budget from 2011 expected levels, and it would mark the lowest level of spending relative to G.D.P. since the mid-1960s, though rising tax receipts during the roaring economy of a dozen years ago temporarily brought the level close to 18 percent. To address the projected long-term financial shortfall within Social Security, Mr. Perry suggested raising the retirement age and potentially changing the age eligibility for Medicare and using a sliding scale to limit benefits based on income — two proposals that could face significant opposition in Congress. Mr. Perry, who said his plan would balance the budget by 2020, also proposed letting younger workers divert some of their Social Security taxes into private investment accounts, a longtime goal of economic conservatives. Analysts said it would take time to examine the effects of the Perry plan. But Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the nonpartisan Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, said: “There are two things we can say with certainty: It will lower revenue and be a great benefit to the wealthy.” He said the poor who have children would most likely do better under the current system, because refundable tax credits provide some with net payments from the government. But Mr. Williams said it was unclear how many among the middle class would benefit — though families with more children or bigger mortgages would be more likely to opt for his proposal. Mr. Perry pledged to not cut any benefits of current Social Security retirees or those about to tap into the system. But to do that, and cut the budget to 18 percent of G.D.P., would require cutting at least one-third of the remaining federal budget, said James R. Horney, the vice president for federal fiscal policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal research group in Washington. It would require “a dismantling of federal programs,” Mr. Horney said, and “draconian cuts in virtually every kind of spending.” [The New York Times, 10/25/11] Brookings Senior Fellow: Perry’s Plan “Undermines” The Idea That The Tax Code Should Be Made Simpler While Leading To A ” ‘Substantial’ Decrease In Revenues.” From a CBSNews.com article: Perry is offering taxpayers two choices — either stick with the current tax system or opt into a new system in which they pay a 20 percent flat income tax. That incentivizes those who would pay less under the current system to stick with it, and those who would pay less under the flat tax plan — largely Americans on the upper end of the income scale – to opt for the new plan. That would add up to a “substantial” decrease in revenues, says Ted Gayer, the co-director of the Economic Studies program and a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution. Perry has yet to lay out all the specifics of the plan, which makes it difficult to estimate its full impact. But “it’s clearly going to be a reduction in revenues, I think fairly substantial,” said Gayer. Many conservative Republicans want to reduce the role of government in society in part by starving it of funds. [...] What Perry’s plan boils down to is a tax cut for the highest-income Americans, who currently pay a top marginal income tax rate of 35 percent, and no tax change for those who don’t opt for the new system. Perry argues that his plan simplifies the tax code, saying Tuesday that taxpayers will simply need to fill out a postcard to file their taxes. But since they will need to decide between the old system and the new one, it won’t be quite so simple for many Americans. “It kind of undermines the whole we’re making your taxes simpler argument, because you still have to go through both systems to see which one is best for you,” said Gayer. Perry vowed to balance the budget by 2020 and cap on federal spending at no more than 18 percent of Gross Domestic Product. Under current policy forecasts, the United States will be spending 26 percent of GDP in 2020 and 34 percent of GDP by 2035. Perry would need to dramatically slash federal spending to meet his 18 percent goal. [CBSNews.com,10/25/11] Even Conservative Economists Have Called Perry’s Plan “Fiscally Irresponsible” And “A Disaster” Economist Peter Morici: “Rick Perry’s Tax Plan Would Be A Disaster For America.” In a post on FoxNews.com, Peter Morici, Professor of Logistics, Business and Public Policy at the University of Maryland, wrote: Seeking to jump start his flagging presidential campaign and establish his pro-growth and fiscal responsibility credentials, Governor Rick Perry is unveiling a tax plan that will not jump start the economy and is fiscally irresponsible. In a nutshell, Mr. Perry would give taxpayers a choice between filing under the current income tax system– with all its flaws — and an alternative flat tax 20 percent system. Under the latter, families could maintain their mortgage deductions if they earn less than $500,000, which is about 99 percent of taxpayers, and could declare exemptions of $12,500 for each family member. It seems appealing — a simplified tax system, fewer IRS agents, and so forth. But the plan falls short in two important respects — it won’t encourage many better investment decisions and foster growth, and it will spin the federal deficit permanently into the stratosphere. The whole purpose of a flat tax is to encourage individuals and corporations to invest more in sound business opportunities, instead of prospecting for tax breaks by buying homes bigger than they need or spending on government hobby horse projects like solar panels. By giving tax payers the option of filing under the old system, however, the Perry plan  will encourage the wealthy and near-wealthy to continue prospecting for loopholes and credit. Most of those folks don’t pay 20 percent now, so don’t count on them to volunteer for Mr. Perry’s plan. [...] With less revenue in hand, Gov. Perry proposes slashing government spending to 18 percent of GDP–that would require $900 billion in annual spending cuts, when the Congress is having trouble agreeing on an additional $100 billion. Such cuts are possible by increasing the retirement age to 70 and slashing Medicare and Medicare spending and gutting the defense budget. If Gov. Perry wants to slash taxes that’s fine but let’s go to a real flat tax. Let Gov. Perry tell Americans how he is going to tame the monster that ate Washington–created through escalating health care spending–and rationalize social security and defense spending. [FoxNews.com,10/25/11] Former Chief Economist For House Committee: “Perry’s Plan Would Preserve Crony Capitalist Tax Code.” In an October 25 blog post titled “Perry’s plan would preserve crony capitalist tax code,” Alex Brill, a research fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and former chief economist for the House Ways and Means Committee, wrote: Governor Perry’s new proposal for an optional pro-growth tax code will do little for our economy while increasing the complexity of the tax code. A flat rate income tax would lead to positive economic growth, but making it optional as Governor Perry has proposed preserves the opportunities for “crony capitalism” and other existing distortions in the code. This is because an optional flat tax is only appealing to those taxpayers who see it as a tax cut. Taxpayers who can reduce their tax liability by exploiting an existing tax break will do just that. In other words, an optional flat tax is appealing only to those who can’t get a good break elsewhere in the code. In one sense, an optional flat tax is the polar opposite of the AMT: a mandatory, parallel tax system that hits those taxpayers who are “too effective” at lowering their tax burden. But in another sense, it’s quite similar: yet another tax code. [American Enterprise Institute, The Enterprise Blog, 10/25/11] AEI “Resident Scholar”: Perry’s “Optional Tax Code Worse Than A Gimmick.” In an October 25 blog post titled “Optional tax code worse than a gimmick,” Andrew Briggs, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, wrote: Jim Pethokoukis points out what he calls a “gimmick” in Governor Rick Perry’s proposed flat tax plan: taxpayers would get the choice to file under the current tax code or under the new flat tax plan. While I agree that this is a bit silly from a policy point of view, the problems go deeper than that. Why? Well, the flat tax is supposed to do three things: raise sufficient revenue, reduce compliance costs, and reduce economic distortions. But if you can choose which tax code to file under then, to a first approximation, people will choose whichever costs them the least. In theory at least, to raise the same revenue in a static analysis the flat tax would have to be set such that no one could pay lower taxes than under current law, since if they could pay lower taxes they will pay lower taxes. It’s easy to respond that people would choose the flat tax for its simplicity even if it costs them more, but they can already have a simple tax code under current law: just don’t bother hunting down all your deductions. The same goes for compliance costs: to know which tax code to file under you need to do your taxes under both, undermining the simplicity of the flat tax. One of the reasons compliance costs are so high today is that there can be such a reward for figuring out strategies to minimize your taxes; it’s not clear that Perry’s flat tax fixes this problem. And finally, if people have the option of filing under the current tax code then all the economic distortions embedded in it will remain, at least for that significant portion of the population who would do better under current law than the flat tax. A person may say to himself, “I can pay lower taxes than under the flat tax plan so long as I [insert governmentally imposed distortion here].” Marginal tax rates for high earners would be lower, reducing economic distortions, but it’s unclear where you’ll make up the revenue if low and middle earners get to file under current law where they pay next to nothing. [American Enterprise Institute, The Enterprise Blog, 10/25/11] AEI’s Director Of Economic Policy Studies: Under Perry’s Plan Government Would Have To Drastically Slash Spending. From the Associated Press: By design, Perry’s plan “must lose revenue” for the government, said Kevin Hassett, director of economic policy studies at the right-of-center American Enterprise Institute. To avoid higher deficits, Hassett said, the government would have to slash spending in ways not seen since the steep military drawdown after World War II. [Associated Press, 10/25/11, via ABCNews.com] Contact: Special Report with Bret Baier http://twitter.com/specialreport Contact: Fox News Channel FOX News Channel 1-888-369-4762 1211 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 http://twitter.com/foxnews

Fox Revives Myth That “America Is A Center-Right Country” http://mediamatters.org/research/201110260024 This year, Fox has continued to push the right-wing talking point that “America is a center-right country.” In fact, on issue after issue, polls are clear that Americans favor progressive policies. Fox Again Claims America Is “Center-Right” Doug Schoen: “America Is A Center-Right Country.” On the October 19 edition of America Live, Fox News contributor Doug Schoen said: SCHOEN: America is a center-right country, Megyn. Forty percent of America are conservatives, 36 are moderates, 20 percent are liberals, and if the Democrats throw in so closely with a group whose values are inimical to those of swing voters, I think that they will be dangerously out of step with the broad base of American opinion, which, after all, the congressional elections rebutted and refuted the Obama policies and endorsed small government. [Fox News, America Live, 10/19/11] Brit Hume: Obama Advisers Were Wrong To Declare That America “Was No Longer A Center-Right Country.” On Fox News’ Special Report, senior political analyst Brit Hume stated: HUME: For an incumbent president seeking re-election to say publicly that people are not better off than they were before he took off is to say the least unorthodox. Voters are not in the habit of returning to office president who admit that things got worse on their watch. But one begins to suspect that the president and his political advisers are not the wizards they’ve once seen, recalled right after Mr. Obama’s election, David Plouffe, his senior political strategist then and now declared that America was no longer a center right country but had turned center left. You might think that he and the president would have changed their minds after the historic repudiation they and their party received in the midterm election. [Fox News, Special Report with Bret Baier, 10/4/11, via Nexis] Bernie Goldberg: “America Is A Center-Right Country.” On Fox News’ The O’Reilly Factor, discussing why Fox News is “now dominating the information flow in America,” Fox News media analyst Bernie Goldberg said to host Bill O’Reilly: GOLDBERG: Well, it’s — let me tell you — let me — this is my take on it. America is a center-right country. Fox tilts to the right. Every single person, if not literally 99.9 percent of the people watching us right now, used to, before Fox, watch the evening news at CBS, NBC, or ABC. They came over to Fox. [Fox News, The O'Reilly Factor, 9/27/11] Fox Hosted Andrew Breitbart To Claim That “We’re A Center-Right Nation.” On Fox Business, David Asman hosted right-wing blogger Andrew Breitbart to claim that the United States has a “2-1 ratio of conservatives to liberals.” From the broadcast: ASMAN: There was a narrative you don’t remember, but I do. I was there in 1980 when Ronald Reagan was running for president, and the narrative back then from the entire media was that if Reagan is elected, we’ll be at war with the Soviets in a couple of months. The economy, as bad as it was back then, is going to be much worse. And this was with no Fox News, no Rush, no Internet, no Breitbart. And yet, the American public didn’t buy it. All of the media and all of the — the conservative media and the fair and balanced media didn’t exist back then. But despite that, the American people went against the mainstream media. So how do you account for that? BREITBART: Well, look — well, first of all, we’re a center-right nation that’s — and the media’s controlled by the people on the elite coasts. So they — the way that the minority in this country — and according to Gallup, we’re still a 2-to-1 ratio of conservatives to liberals. Yet, we have these squeakers every election cycle. They’re squeakers and it’s 50-50, it’s so close, because of the media being able to frame who the good guys and who the bad guys are. [Fox Business, America's Nightly Scoreboard, 8/24/11] Laura Ingraham Suggested “Most Of The Country Is A Little Bit More Conservative” Than The Media. From the August 15 edition of The O’Reilly Factor: INGRAHAM: [W]hat politician out there today would pass your litmus test on your point. That’s a legitimate point that you just made. You know, speak the same way to every person. GOLDBERG: Not many. INGRAHAM: Who in the Republican field would pass that litmus test? GOLDBERG: Not many. I acknowledge that. INGRAHAM: The point is, the questions always go one way, right, the media they are not going to ask questions from another point of view when, you know, when probably most of the country is a little bit more conservative on some of these social issues than the media. But they are not going to ask the questions the other way around, right. They are always going to put — try to put the conservative in the box by asking them these questions, oh, you are a hateful person. You are not a nice person or whatever. [Fox News, The O'Reilly Factor, 8/15/11, via Nexis] Fox Panelist Charles Krauthammer: America “Has Remained” Center-Right “For Over Four Decades.” On his show, O’Reilly argued that the media “will all be trying to get President Obama re-elected.” Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer replied: KRAUTHAMMER: You’ve got to remember this: The left, the Democrats always have the press on their side. They’ve had it for 40 years. Nonetheless, the Republicans have won the presidency seven out of the last 11 elections. And that’s because what Republicans have, what conservatives have is the country, which is a center-right country, has remained so almost unchangingly for four decades. So what the media bias does is it slightly — it gives an advantage. It’s a major advantage, but it’s undoing the deficit that Democrats and liberals already have, because it’s a country that is not essentially conducive to a liberal message. [Fox News, The O'Reilly Factor, 5/24/11] Bill O’Reilly: “We Are A Center-Right Nation.” Claiming that The New York Times “is crushed” and is “lamenting, wailing their guy is not doing the liberal thing,” O’Reilly asserted: “If Obamacare is thrown out, the left will have pretty much lost everything. The why behind all of this is that President Obama badly underestimated the American public. We are a center-right nation.” [Fox News, The O'Reilly Factor, 4/5/11] The Majority Of Americans Are Progressive On Issues Ranging From The Economy… Major National Polls Show That Americans Believe We Need To Raise Taxes. In a September 19 post on the Capital Gains And Games blog, Fiscal Times columnist Bruce Bartlett wrote: I have previously posted a table showing that people support raising taxes as part of deficit reduction by a 2-to-1 margin over the Grover Norquist/Club for Growth/Tea Party position that the deficit must be reduced only by spending cuts without a penny of higher taxes. In light of President Obama’s new budget plan, which includes higher taxes, I am posting an updated table, including a poll on Friday showing that three-fourths of people support higher taxes and only 21 percent support the doctrinaire right-wing position. [Capital Gains And Games, 9/19/11] Gallup: 70 Percent Of Americans Want To End Wasteful Tax Giveaways To Corporations. In a recent Gallup poll, 70 percent of respondents favored “increasing taxes on some corporations by eliminating certain tax deductions.” [Gallup, 9/20/11] Three Out of Four Voters Support Tax Increases On Oil And Gas Companies, Private Jet Owners, And The Wealthy.In a July CNN poll, 73 percent of those questioned, supported “increasing the taxes paid by oil and gas companies” and “people who make more than $250,000/yr.” Seventy-six percent supported increasing taxes “paid by businesses that own private jets.” [CNN, 7/21/11] Nearly Three-Fourths Of Americans Disapprove Of GOP’s Handling Of Default Crisis. Following this summer’s debt crisis, a CBS News/New York Times poll found that 72 percent of Americans disapproved of congressional Republicans’ handling of the issue. [CBS News/The New York Times, 8/4/11] Time: Americans Agree With Occupy Wall Street Movement. A Timepoll from this month found that among Americans familiar with the Occupy Wall Street movement, 79 percent agree that “the gap between the rich and poor in the U.S. has grown too large,” and 86 percent agree that “Wall Street and its lobbyists have too much influence in Washington.” [Time, 10/13/11] To Education… Committee for Education Funding: Polls Show Americans Overwhelmingly Oppose Education Cuts. In March, the Committee For Education Funding reported: “Results from nine different public opinion polls since January make clear that the American public strongly opposes cutting federal spending for education programs for both K12 and higher education.” From Bloomberg News: A March 2011 Bloomberg National News poll found that by an almost four to one margin (77-21 percent) the public opposes proposals to “significantly cut education programs, including No Child Left Behind, Head Start, and subsidies for college loans”. [Committee for Education Funding, 3/11] To Public Workers And Labor Issues… CNN: Three Out Of Four Americans Support Using Federal Funds To Hire More Public Workers. In a September CNN Poll, 74 percent of respondents said they favored “providing federal money to state governments to allow them to hire teachers and first responders.” [CNN, 9/14/11] Gallup: A Majority Of The Public Supports Unions And Public Employees. From Gallup: [Gallup, 8/31/11] Wash. Post On Wisconsin Labor Dispute: “The Verdict Is Clear: Americans Support Public Employees In This Standoff.”In a March 2 post, The Washington Post‘s Greg Sargent reported on the public’s consistent support of public employee bargaining rights: Indeed, the verdict is clear: Americans support public employees in this standoff. Whether that will impact the outcome of the fight, of course, remains to be seen. But the bigger story here — one that will ripple far beyond what happens in Wisconsin — is that public employees are not proving the easy scapegoat many predicted they would be, and when faced with the question of whether their fundamental union rights should be taken away, Americans have stepped up and answered with a firm No. [Washington Post, 3/2/11] To Social Benefits… CNN: Americans Overwhelmingly Oppose Cuts To Social Security, Medicare, And Medicaid. Eighty-seven percent of Americans don’t want the government to make cuts to Medicare and 84 percent oppose cuts to Social Security in order to reduce the deficit. [CNN, 7/21/11] Pew: Three Out Of Five Americans Feel The Government Needs To Honor Medicare Benefits. Pew found that 62 percent of Americans feel that “the government needs to keep its promises to older people” by maintaining their Medicare benefits, “even for those who are well-off.” [Pew Research Center, 6/11] CNN: Nearly Three Out Of Four Americans Don’t Believe Social Security Is A Failure. From the CNN/ORC poll released on September 13: The Social Security system has been described as a “monstrous lie” and as a failure. Do you think those phrases are an accurate description of the Social Security system, or don’t you think so? Accurate 27% Not accurate 72% No opinion 1% [CNN, 9/13/11] Pew: 87 Percent Of Americans Say Social Security Has Been Good For Our Country. From the poll: [Pew Research Center, 7/7/11] Pew: Americans Also Oppose “Allowing States To Limit Medicaid Eligibility.” From the same Pew article: The public also opposes making Medicare recipients more responsible for their health care costs and allowing states to limit Medicaid eligibility. About six-in-ten (61%) say people on Medicare already pay enough of their own health care costs, while only 31% think recipients need to be responsible for more of the costs of their health care in order to make the system financially secure. [Pew Research Center, 7/7/11] To Environmental Issues… Sixty-Nine Percent Of Americans Support Stricter Limits On Air Pollution. According to a Greenberg Quinlan Rosner poll, 69 percent of respondents favored the EPA “updating standards with stricter limits on air pollution.” [Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, 2/11] Only 18 Percent Of Americans Agree With GOP Attempts To Block The EPA From Keeping Corporate Polluters In Check.From an ORC International polling memo: Americans do not want Congress to kill the EPA’s anti-pollution updates. Only 18 percent of Americans –including fewer than a third of Republicans (32 percent) — believe that “Congress should block the EPA from updating pollution safeguards,” after being told: “Some members of Congress are proposing to block the Environmental Protection Agency from updating safeguards to protect our health from dangerous air pollution, saying they will cost businesses too much money.” More than three out of four Americans (77 percent) — including 61 percent of Republicans– say “Congress (should) let the EPA do its job.” [ORC International, 2/2/11] The Hill: “Even The Most Hardened Conservatives” Support Investing In Solar. A series of polls conducted by Public Opinion Strategies and Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates testing the impact of the Solyndra scandal reportedly found that “even the most hardened conservatives” showed overall support for the solar industry. From The Hill: In addition to the Ohio survey, FM3 conducted focus groups in California on behalf of the Sierra Club, finding that awareness of the Solyndra issue was higher there. The memo states that male GOP swing voters in California voiced “strong faith” about the solar industry’s viability. “These voters were quick to condemn the federal government for failing to do its due diligence in evaluating Solyndra’s business prospects, and for squandering taxpayer dollars on what they saw as a bad bet. But even the most hardened conservatives in that group strongly agreed that the solar industry is strong, growing, and worthy of future investment,” it states. [The Hill, 9/28/11] Sixty-One Percent Of Americans Agree That Government Regulations Keep Businesses Ethical.From the Public Religion Research Institute: Overall most (61%) Americans disagree that most businesses would act ethically on their own without regulation from the government. Less than 4-in-10 (37%) believe that they would. This holds true across political and religious lines, with the lone exception of those who identify with the Tea Party movement (53% agree). [Public Religion Research Institute, 4/20/11] …And Social Issues Gallup: “A Majority Of Americans (53%) Believe Same-Sex Marriage Should Be Recognized By The Law As Valid.” From the May 20 Gallup memo: For the first time in Gallup’s tracking of the issue, a majority of Americans (53%) believe same-sex marriage should be recognized by the law as valid, with the same rights as traditional marriages. The increase since last year came exclusively among political independents and Democrats. Republicans’ views did not change. [Gallup, 5/20/11] CNN Poll Found That 78 Percent Of Americans Favored Repealing DADT. From The Hill article: More than three-fourths of Americans favor repealing “Don’t ask, don’t tell,” according to a new CNN poll. A full 78 percent of respondents said that “people who are openly gay or homosexual” should be able to serve in the armed forces. The results are similar to what CNN found in December of 2008 (81 percent) and May of 2007 (79 percent). [The Hill, 5/25/10] Gallup: A “Record-High” Number Of Americans Favor Legalizing Marijuana. From the October 17 article: A record-high 50% of Americans now say the use of marijuana should be made legal, up from 46% last year. Forty-six percent say marijuana use should remain illegal. [Gallup, 10/17/11] CNN: Three Out Of Four Americans Support A Woman’s Right To Choose In “Any Or Some Circumstances.” In a September CNN poll, 25 percent of respondents agreed that abortion should be legal under “any circumstances” and an additional 53 percent said it should be legal under  “some circumstances.” [CNN Poll, 9/15/11] Media Figures Attempted To Push The Same “Center-Right” Claim In 2008 Newsweek’sJonathan Darman insisted America is a “center-right country.” [Newsweek,9/19/08] Newsweek’sJon Meacham: “America remains a center-right nation — a fact that a President would forget at his peril.” [Newsweek, 10/17/08] On CNN Newsroom, Republican strategist Bay Buchanan said, “No question this country is center-right.” [CNN, CNN Newsroom, 11/6/08, via Media Matters] During the November 5, 2008, edition of America’s Election HQ, Fox News contributor Karl Rove said: “Barack Obama understands this is a center-right country, and he smartly and wisely ran a campaign that emphasized that.” [Fox News, America's Election HQ, 11/5/08, via Media Matters] Click here for more on the “center-right” myth Contact: The O’Reilly Factor The O’Reilly Factor http://twitter.com/oreillyfactor Contact: Charles Krauthammer letters@charleskrauthammer.com Contact: Laura Ingraham Laura Ingraham Contact: Brit Hume brit.hume@foxnews.com Contact: Bill O’Reilly oreilly@foxnews.com Contact: Special Report with Bret Baier http://twitter.com/specialreport Contact: Fox News Channel FOX News Channel 1-888-369-4762 1211 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 http://twitter.com/foxnews You can help support our work: donate to Media Matters for America.

Right-Wing Media Go On Attack Against Student Debt Relief http://mediamatters.org/research/201110270002 Fox News and the right-wing media are attacking President Obama’s student loan relief plan as a “campaign speech” and an attempt to “buy votes.” Obama’s plan is designed to help ease the burden of student loans for millions of people by lowering interest rates, consolidating outstanding student loans, and providing debt relief to students after they spend 20 years paying off their loans. Obama Announces Student Loan Relief Plan AP: “Obama Announces Help For Student Loan Borrowers.” From an October 26 Associated Press article: President Barack Obama recalled his struggles with student loan debt as he unveiled a plan Wednesday that could give millions of young people some relief on their payments. [...] Obama’s plan will accelerate a measure passed by Congress that reduces the maximum required payment on student loans from 15 percent of discretionary income annually to 10 percent. He will put it into effect in 2012, instead of 2014. In addition, the White House says the remaining debt would be forgiven after 20 years, instead of 25. About 1.6 million borrowers could be affected. He will also allow borrowers who have a loan from the Federal Family Education Loan Program and a direct loan from the government to consolidate them into one. The consolidated loan would carry an interest rate of up to a half percentage point less than before. This could affect 5.8 million borrowers. Student loans are the No. 2 source of household debt. The president’s announcement came on the same day as a new report on tuition costs from the College Board. It showed that average in-state tuition and fees at four-year public colleges rose $631 this fall, or 8.3 percent, compared with a year ago. Nationally, the cost of a full credit load has passed $8,000, an all-time high. [Associated Press, 10/26/11, via ABCNews.com] White House: “Obama Administration To Lower Student Loan Payments For Millions Of Borrowers.” In an October 25 press release, the White House outlined the Obama administration’s plan to help Americans “manage student loan debt.” The press release stated that the plan will “offer recent graduates an opportunity to consolidate loans and reduce interest rates.” From the press release: Today, the Obama Administration announced it is taking steps to increase college affordability by making it easier to manage student loan debt. The announcement is part of a series of executive actions to put Americans back to work and strengthen the economy because we can’t wait for Congressional Republicans to act. The Administration is moving forward with a new “Pay As You Earn” proposal that will reduce monthly payments for more than one and a half million current college students and borrowers.  Starting in 2014, borrowers will be able to reduce their monthly student loan payments to 10 percent of their discretionary income. But President Obama realizes that many students need relief sooner than that.  The new “Pay As You Earn” proposal will allow about 1.6 million students the ability to cap their loan payments at 10 percent starting next year, and the plan will forgive the balance of their debt after 20 years of payments.  Additionally, starting this January an estimated 6 million students and recent college graduates will be able to consolidate their loans and reduce their interest rates. [WhiteHouse.gov, 10/25/11] Conservatives Attack Student Loan Relief Plan Guilfoyle: Obama’s Student Loan Relief Plan Is “Campaigning, It’s Politics …. He Wants To Buy Some Votes Of The Youth.” During the October 26 edition of Fox News’ The Five, co-host Kimberly Guilfoyle suggested Obama’s plan to provide some relief to people with student loans was actually an attempt to “buy some votes of the youth.” From Fox News’ The Five: GREG GUTFELD (co-host): Kimberly, I want to ask you, though. The real problem here is tuition. It’s not the loans. If the tuitions were lower you wouldn’t have this problem with the loans. But because you have the loans, the tuition goes up. KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE: Right, but where’s the incentive then to lower the tuition? Some people in colleges and institutions, they like their money. But what this is about is campaigning, it’s politics, it’s 2012. He wants to buy some votes of the youth. It makes sense. GUTFELD: Yeah. GUILFOYLE: These are the people who were very popular, came out for him, supported his presidency. He needs them again. Even more so this time. So this a way to rally them kind of speak to the people that are protesting and the college students. [Fox News, The Five, 10/26/11] Bolling: Obama’s Plan To Help Americans With Student Loan Debt Is An Attempt To “Buy The Young Vote.” During the October 25 edition of The Five, co-host Eric Bolling attacked Obama’s plan to help Americans consolidate and lower their payments on student loans after college before it was even announced. Bolling proclaimed the administration was attempting to “buy the young vote” and asserted that it “should be illegal.” [Fox News, The Five, 10/25/11] Lou Dobbs Claimed Obama’s Plan Offering Relief To Student Loan Recipients Is About “Getting Re-Elected.” In an October 26 Facebook post about Obama’s new student loan relief plan, Fox’s Lou Dobbs wrote, “this is more about getting re-elected than it is spurring economic growth.” [Facebook,10/26/11]   Perino Called Obama’s Announcement Of Student Loan Relief Plan A “Campaign Speech.” In an October 26 Twitter post, co-host for Fox News’ The Five Dana Perino wrote: [Twitter,10/26/11] Hoft: “Obama’s Plan To Bailout Student Loan Recipients Is His Latest Attempt To Buy Votes At The Expense Of The American Taxpayer.” From an October 26 blog post on Jim Hoft’s Gateway Pundit blog: Obama’s plan to bailout student loan recipients is his latest attempt to buy votes at the expense of the American taxpayer. It also happens to be the latest move in his Cloward Piven strategy to destroy the US economy. Free Obama Money for … special interest groups. Obama announced a new plan today that will add billions to his record debt and erode the US economy by giving free money to students who borrowed their way through college.[Gateway Pundit, 10/26/11] Student Loan Debt Is A Growing Burden Data Shows Average Debt For Students Graduating From College Is Rising At A Staggering Rate. Data analysis by The Project on Student Debt found that the average debt for graduating seniors at public universities is “$22,200 — 20% higher than in 2004.” The average debt for graduating seniors at private for-profit universities was “$33,050 – 23% higher than in 2004.” From the January 2010 study titled Quick Facts about Student Debt: Average debt levels for graduating seniors with student loans rose to $23,200 in 2008 — a 24% increase from $18,650 in 2004. In 2008: • At public universities, average debt was $20,200 — 20% higher than in 2004, when the average was $16,850. • At private nonprofit universities, average debt was $27,650– 29% higher than in 2004, when the average was $21,500. • At private for-profit universities, average debt was $33,050 — 23% higher than in 2004, when the average was $26,850. [The Project On Student Debt, Quick Facts about Student Debt, January 2010] U.S. Department Of Education: Student Loan Default Rate At 8.8 Percent — The Highest It Has Been In More Than A Decade. The U.S. Department of Education announced in September that the latest national student loan cohort default rate is at “8.8 percent.” This is an increase from the 7.0 percent rate from the previous fiscal year, and is the highest rate in more than a decade. The cohort default rate is defined as “the percentage of borrowers who enter repayment in a fiscal year and default by the end of the next fiscal year.” From the announcement: The U.S. Department of Education today released the official FY 2009 national student loan cohort default rate, which has risen to 8.8 percent, up from 7.0 percent in FY 2008. The cohort default rates increased for all sectors: from 6.0 percent to 7.2 percent for public institutions, from 4.0 percent to 4.6 percent for private institutions, and from 11.6 percent to 15 percent at for-profit schools. The rates announced today represent a snapshot in time, with the FY 2009 cohort consisting of borrowers whose first loan repayments came due between Oct. 1, 2008, and Sept. 30, 2009, and who defaulted before Sept. 30, 2010. More than 3.6 million borrowers from 5,900 schools entered repayment during this window of time, and more than 320,000 defaulted. Those borrowers who defaulted after the two-year period are not counted as defaulters in this data set. [U.S. Department of Education, 9/12/11, accessed 10/26/11] Contact: Lou Dobbs Email: lou.dobbs@turner.com http://twitter.com/loudobbsnews Contact: Fox News Channel FOX News Channel 1-888-369-4762 1211 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 http://twitter.com/foxnews You can help support our work: donate to Media Matters for America.

the Progress Report

ThinkProgress & Rick Perry Completely Agree That…

By         ThinkProgress War Room

It’s Time to See Millionaire Mitt Romney’s Missing Tax Returns

Back on Oct. 14, we asked if Mitt Romney had something to hide since he’s never released his tax returns despite running for or holding elective office for the better part of two decades:

• Not when he ran for the Senate against Ted Kennedy in 1994, despite calling on Kennedy to release his tax returns to prove he had “nothing to hide.”
• Not when he ran for governor of Massachusetts in 2002, despite calling for his opponent’s husband to release his tax returns (after his opponent, who filed separately from her husband, released her own).
• Not when he was governor of Massachusetts.
• Not when he ran for president in 2007 and 2008.
• Not now, despite the fact President Obama has released his own tax returns when running for office in 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008, and since becoming president.

Rick Perry Wants to See Mitt’s Missing Tax Returns Too

Yesterday morning, when rolling out his own highly regressive tax plan that would benefit the wealthiest Americans while threatening Social Security and Medicare, Texas Gov. Rick Perry called Mitt Romney a “fat cat”:

JOHN HARWOOD: And you mentioned class warfare. In 1996, when your advisor Steve Forbes was running on a flat tax, Mitt Romney said it was a tax cut for fat cats. If he says that about your plan, what are you going to say to him?

RICK PERRY: Well I would said that he ought to go look in the mirror I guess. I consider him to be a fat cat.

Later in the morning, Politico’s Ben Smith asked the Perry campaign if they wanted to see millionaire Mitt Romney’s tax returns.  The answer:

Governor Perry has always released his tax returns and Mitt Romney and the other candidates should do the same.

The Romney campaign followed up with a non-response:

But Romney aide Eric Fehrnstrom said his candidate wouldn’t even consider releasing them until next spring.

“We’ll take a look at the question of releasing tax returns during the next tax filing season,” he said. [...]

Fehrnstrom didn’t offer a defense of Romney’s position but attacked Perry on an unrelated transparency issue.

Who Else Wants to See Mitt’s Missing Tax Returns?

• Iowans: Progress Iowa, a local progressive group in Hawkeye State, who called on Romney to release the returns when he visited the state last Thursday.
• Virginians: Progress Virginia, a local progressive group in Virginia, who called on Romney to release the returns when he visited the state today:

Virginians deserve to know once and for all whether Romney is one of the 100,000 millionaires who is paying a lower tax rate than many middle class workers.  Unless Romney has something to hide there’s no reason he can’t follow President Obama’s lead and show Virginians his tax returns.

What Might Mitt Want to Hide?

• The fact that he’s worth as much as $250 MILLION and uses tax loopholes to cheat the system and pay a lower tax rate — some estimate as low as 14 percent — than many middle class Americans.

IN ONE PICTURE:

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You May Have Missed

At this point in his administration, President Bush had generated more regulations than has President Obama.

Rick Perry touts his reductions to safety net health programs, but he’s “not ready” to cut defense.

A North Carolina judge has blocked state Republicans’ forced ultrasound law.

Michigan considers major new restrictions on voting rights.

Americans support the 99 Percent Movement’s causes and view the GOP as defenders of the wealthy.

What the new show Boss reveals about the grotesqueness of pop culture politics.

Why do liberals dislike Herman Cain?

Anita Hill, Thurston Moore, and the slow decline of sexual harassment.

Why do New Yorkers fight over bike lanes?