Having spent a decent amount of time living and traveling throughout Europe I consider myself an avid enthusiast of passenger rail. Each time I return to the US I am almost disappointed that I have to climb back behind the wheel of a car to go anywhere instead of hopping a train. When President Obama announced his pursuit of high-speed rail expansion across the country, I was needless to say, jubilant but in the end unsurprised when Republican lawmakers crucified the effort and state governors refused their portions of federal funding. This refusal to invest in rail service, or public transportation in general, appears to be based on long-held inaccuracies about its performance, ill-informed opinions of its public perception and denial of its overall successes across Europe and Asia.

For anyone who has returned home exhausted from a long road trip, has grown weary of the hassle to even board an airplane or is tired of dealing with an hour long, bumper-to-bumper, 15 mile trip home from work, would you not relish the ability to simply step onto a train and let someone else do the driving? For those on the West Coast wouldn’t be nice to catch a train, leave L.A. and head to San Francisco for the day or hop a late train for an overnighter and spend a 3 or 4 day weekend in Portland or Seattle? Those options are already available for people on the East Coast along the Northeast Corridor. It’s an easy way for someone in Connecticut to head up to Boston for a couple of days or to take a trip down to Washington DC. It also services thousands of commuters heading to all points in between and offers connections to Chicago. I worked on the electrification project of that railway and was able take a number of non-stressful weekend trips on that line. It is well worth the public investment and the benefits of cross-country travel are enormous for everything from job creation to local community growth to tourism.

The editorial here delves into some more detail of the benefits of high-speed rail;

High-speed rail’s many benefits

Even as Congress looks into a new surface transportation bill, U.S.  transportation systems confront daunting challenges of overcrowding and  disrepair. Delays and waste cost the nation more than $100 billion per year in  lost time, productivity and energy.

The U.S. needs modern public transportation not dependent on oil or traffic  patterns. Most developed nations now have high-speed rail, sleek trains that  reach more than 200 mph. Here, this option would be most viable in two distinct  corridors on the East and West Coasts – the Northeast Corridor, from Boston to  Washington, and California.

Read more…

Whenever the topic of public transportation or passenger rail is broached the usual suspects of reasons not to pursue it are marched out. CNN compiled a list of the inaccurate perceptions and addressed them here in this article from April 2011.

U.S. high-speed rail ‘myths’ debunked

Are proposed multibillion dollar high-speed railway projects in the United States a smart move or a huge waste of taxpayer dollars?

CNN.com users are challenging politicians, policymakers and each other about whether the Obama administration’s push to build high-speed rail lines in the Midwest, West Coast and elsewhere is on the right track.

Many users want proof that high-speed rail can be a profitable, efficient job generator to help raise the sagging U.S. economy when compared with other types of transportation.

Experts — including the two most powerful congressional lawmakers on rail issues, think-tank specialists and policymakers at the Department of Transportation — have directly responded to CNN.com user comments.

Read more…

Ohio Republicans want to disqualify voters’ ballots for the mistakes poll workers make.

So much ink has been spilled on how vote suppression will affect the 2012 presidential election, one hesitates to write another word. Ari Berman has done terrific work uncovering the ways in which the new voting laws have aimed at suppressing the votes of elderly, minority, student, and other voters—particularly in swing states—who tend to vote for Democratic candidates. Wendy Weiser of the Brennan Center for Justice has an indispensible primer on the 22 new laws and two executive actions that will severely restrict voting in 17 states in November. These laws, often modeled on draft legislation from the American Legislative Exchange Council, a consortium of conservative state legislators, will have the effect of disenfranchising millions of voters, all in order to address a vote fraud “epidemic” that should be filed somewhere between the Loch Ness Monster and the Tooth Fairy in the annals of modern fairy tales. As Weiser notes, none of this is casual or accidental: “If you want to find another period in which this many new laws were passed restricting voting, you have to go back more than a century—to the post-Reconstruction era, when Southern states passed a host of Jim Crow voting laws and Northern states targeted immigrants and the poor.”

Whether it’s onerous (and expensive) voter ID rules that will render as many as 10 percent of Americans ineligible to vote, proof of citizenship measures, restricting registration drives, cancellation of Sunday voting, or claims that voting should be a privilege as opposed to a right, efforts to discount and discredit the vote have grown bolder in recent years, despite vanishingly rare claims of actual vote fraud. The sole objective appears to be ensuring that fewer Americans vote in 2012 than voted in 2008. But as strange as the reasons to purge certain votes have been around the nation, things have grown even stranger in recent weeks in Ohio, where GOP lawmakers have gone after not only voters but the federal courts, in an effort to wiggle out of statewide voting rules.

First, some background: In 2010, a consent decree—an order issued by a judge setting out a voluntary agreement by the parties in a lawsuit—was entered into a federal lawsuit filed by the Northeast Coalition for the Homeless and then-Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner. The original lawsuit challenged a 2006 Ohio Voter ID law and other provisional voting laws that made it difficult for homeless Ohio citizens to vote. Among the things established by the consent decree was this: Poll worker error should not be the reason for tossing out otherwise good ballots.

That seems reasonable enough. While nobody has uncovered an epidemic of vote fraud, it’s true that a good deal of what goes wrong with elections is due to the human mistakes of poll workers. And presumably if those mistakes are not the fault of the voter, it makes no sense to reject that ballot.

I worked for Reagan and wrote for National Review. But the new hysterical right cares nothing for truth or dignity

By Michael Fumento

I was always way ahead of the curve. And my exposés primarily appeared in right-wing publications. Back when they were interested in serious research. I also founded a conservative college newspaper, held positions in the Reagan administration and at several conservative think tanks, and published five books that conservatives applauded. I’ve written for umpteen major conservative publications – National Review, the Weekly Standard, the Wall Street Journal and Forbes, among them.

But no longer. That was the old right. The last thing hysteria promoters want is calm, reasoned argument backed by facts. And I’m horrified that these people have co-opted the name “conservative” to scream their messages of hate and anger.

Extremism in the defense of nothing

Nothing the new right does is evidently outrageous enough to receive more than a peep of indignation from the new right.

When did I end up in bed with Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber? Could it be because I did specialize in blowing things up while serving my country for four years as an airborne combat engineer? I also watched human beings blown up. I had friends and Navy SEALs I was in battle with blown up. My own intestines exploded on the first of my four combat embeds, three in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. Took seven operations to fix the plumbing. I later suffered other permanent injuries.

Yet now I find myself linked not only with the Unabomber, but also Charles Manson and Fidel Castro. Or so says the Chicago-based think tank the Heartland Institute, for which I’ve done work. Heartland erected billboards depicting the above three declaring: “I still believe in Global Warming. Do you?” Climate scientists now, evidently, share something in common with dictators and mass murderers. Reportedly bin Laden was scheduled to make such an appearance, too.

You see, I’ve published articles saying I do “believe in global warming.” Yes, I’ve also questioned the extent to which man-made gases have contributed to that warming and concluded that expenditures to reduce those emissions would be as worthless as they’d be horrifically expensive. No matter; just call me “Ted.” Or “Charlie.” Or “Fidel.”

Read more…

Reblogged from polentical:

From Talking Points Memo, here’s a visualization of how government spending has grown under different presidential regimes, starting with Ronald Reagan. It can be read as a refutation of the Republican lies that President Obama is running up spending and deficits at above average rates. For me, the proper critique of Obama in these figures is that he’s actually not spending nearly enough on investment, from infrastructure to education.

Read more… 69 more words

During an interview with Time magazine Mitt Romney promised to reduce the unemployment rate to 6% within his first term as president. Let the celebrations begin! But wait… there may be a catch here. According to economic forecasts the current rate of growth already projects the unemployment rate will fall to 7% by 2015 and 5.5% by 2017. So Romney may well be correct, by the end of his first term in office (should he prevail) unemployment would drop to the level he promised. The one point he omits is he would have little to do to keep this campaign promise except to leave Obama’s economic policies intact.  It is also interesting he is touting 6% as a significant goal for a Romney administration to aspire to given his previous statements which make it clear anything above 4% was not worth celebrating.  In a separate, yet assuredly linked campaign stump speech, Paul Ryan stated Romney and the Republicans will “save this country”.  A wonderful prediction but given the current trends, it seems the country is already well on its way to being saved.  

Romney promises to bring unemployment down to 6%

(CNN) – After repeatedly pinning the president for the unemployment level, which now sits at 8.1%, Mitt Romney pledged he could cut the rate by two points if he makes it to the White House.

“I can tell you that over a period of four years, by virtue of the policies that we’d put in place, we’d get the unemployment rate down to 6%, and perhaps a little lower,” the presumptive GOP nominee said in a TIME interview published Wednesday.

The number marked the first time Romney had talked about a specific rate during this election cycle, although he listed 5.9% as the number he would strive for in his 59-point economic plan released in September.

Read more…

Additional Romney Budget Plan Posts

The Daily Scoop: Romney’s severely conservative budget promises

The Daily Scoop: Romney plan raises taxes on poor families

      I voted for you in 2008 and you have my support for a 2^nd term as President. While I was initially hesitant during the primaries, I warmed to your ideas and inspiring message of change in Washington. Many of us had high hopes for a more effective government, one able to work toward the progressive change we desperately needed.  Alas, the political realities burst that bubble all too quickly due in large part to a minority Republican Party determined to place its own designs on power above the needs of a struggling country. But many also found they could not reconcile the icon created in voters’ minds throughout the campaign with the man who entered the White House after the election.  While each of us harbor disappointments over what did not come to pass, there are many who appreciate and are capable of recognizing the accomplishments you have made despite overwhelming opposition.

     As I considered all that has transpired over the past 3 ½ years I found a number of reasons to vote for you once again. Here is a list of the prominent ones;

1. Your administration, in conjunction with the Democrat-led Congress and the Federal Reserve, acted quickly to shore up a financial system and job market in free fall, held us back from a entering a depression and, as the CBO director put it in congressional testimony back in 2010, the “…aggressive action by the Federal Reserve and the fiscal stimulus package helped moderate the severity of the recession and shorten its duration.”

2. You and congressional Democrats put your own political careers at risk to produce the most meaningful health care reform this country has seen in 45 years in an effort to expand access to care for nearly 30 million uninsured  Americans. While some may criticize you for abandoning the public option, these individuals forget the ardent opposition and misinformation campaign waged against it, culminating in Senator Joe Lieberman’s last minute reversal, deciding to vote against any reform with such a measure. This, as you know, is what effectively struck the the final nail in the coffin of the Public Option.

3. Against significant opposition you decided to bailout the American auto industry which resulted  in an undeniable success, so much so that your presidential challenger is now attempting to credit himself with the idea. But many, even some fellow liberals, claim you chose big business over struggling Americans. These views fail to take in the bigger picture. Your critics do not consider the average Americans employed by the industry itself, the parts manufacturers, the shippers who transport those parts, the auto dealerships or the communities where those very workers and businesses reside. It would appear these bailouts did more for the average American than your critics care to admit.

4. You and the Democratic-led Congress reinstated many of the very regulations whose repeal led to the Great Recession. These new regulations include provisions for a controlled “winding down” of failing financial institutions eliminating the need for taxpayer bailouts in the future, something your Republican counterparts have tried to reverse.

5. You and congressional Democrats created the Consumer Financial and Protection Bureau (CFPB) which, as you know, is tasked with ensuring contractual language and documents from banks, credit card companies, mortgage brokers, payday lenders, student loan providers and other financial institutions are understandable to average consumers. It seeks to educate consumers so people can make financial decisions based on sound comparison and assessment of all available information.

6. You lobbied for New Deal style work projects in an effort to return Americans’ to work. You pushed for infrastructure investment and maintenance, you pressed Congress for national passenger railway funding which many GOP-led states refused to take. You pushed for broadband internet expansion into rural areas and continued to advance your transportation legislation through Congress. Yet at every turn these efforts were hampered by a GOP intent on holding firm to an agenda of austerity.

7. Your first act as President was to sign the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, a bill designed to break down wage discrimination barriers for women. Since then you have made it a point to eliminate inequality at numerous levels.

8. You made reinvestments in education and career transition training, advanced policy to make college more affordable and to assist students with student loans.

9. You eliminated Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and have stood up for LGTB rights and just yesterday officially backed the rights of same-sex couples to marry.

10. Under your leadership we have seen a marked improvement in the economy. Of the 8.7 million jobs lost since September 2008 including the 4.3 million lost under your administration virtually all those lost since your time in office have been regained. We’ve seen GDP go from 0.4% in March 2011 to 3.0% in the 4^th quarter of that year. It has dropped to 2.2% in the first quarter of 2012 but with a historical average of 3.8% and the fact that we’re in a recovery, there isn’t much room for criticism.

      Despite all these accomplishments, Mr. President you still have your detractors many of whom are from your own party. They seek to punish you for not implementing all of your campaign promises or for pursuing all of their agenda items.

      You were criticized for extending the Bush Tax cuts. While this was against a campaign promise, your critics forget you agreed to their continuance only to ensure benefits for unemployed Americans were extended through the 2011 holiday season.

      Another criticism which I’m sure is ever-present on your mind is the broken promise to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facilities. But your many critics apparently disregard your continued efforts to do just that amidst a coordinated opposition and fear-mongering strategy against such attempts and an unwilling Congress.

      From the onset your decision not to pursue war crime prosecutions against George Bush and Dick Cheney has been met with harsh criticisms from left-wing members of your base. While satisfying to witness the net benefits to the nation of such an event would have been negligible. In the midst of a massive economic crisis as the one we were facing such a diversion  would have only wasted time and resources much better allocated to slowing our descent into a possible depression. Instead you took a page from President Ford when he decided to pardon Richard Nixon, recognizing it is the President’s “duty, not merely to proclaim domestic tranquility but to use every means that I have to insure it.” You realized, as did he, it was simply time to move on and hope this gesture would foster a cooperative climate in Washington after many contentious years. Unfortunately, this did not come to pass and you were fought every step of the way by a unified opposition forged on the very night of your inauguration.

      As you enter this new election cycle and hear the constant drumbeat of criticism in your ear, remember one thing… it is always easier to criticize those who govern than to govern yourself. It takes character to forge ahead with what is best for the country as a whole rather than bending to the demands of a few.

Best of luck to you Mr. President, with hopes for another 4 years.

An OpenSalon.com Editor’s Pick

Tagged: 2012 election, Affordable Care Act, Americans, community, Congress, Democrats, Economy, jobs, Obama, Opinion, Politics, Republicans, unemployment, Voters, women's rights ]]> http://mashedpotatobulletin.com/2012/05/10/10-reasons-why-i-will-be-voting-for-you-president-obama/feed/ 12 mpbulletin http://mashedpotatobulletin.com/2012/05/08/daily-scoop-xtra-ryan-budget-may-cut-economic-data/ http://mashedpotatobulletin.com/2012/05/08/daily-scoop-xtra-ryan-budget-may-cut-economic-data/#comments Tue, 08 May 2012 22:14:11 +0000 Mashed Potato Bulletin http://mashedpotatobulletin.com/?p=1534 ]]> Starting in the early 1990s, the U.S. Census Bureau asked Congress for extra funding each year so it could better analyze the services sector, which was quickly replacing industrial activity as the biggest driver of the U.S. economy. In 2003 the bureau requested more funding to survey financial, real estate, and other companies on a quarterly basis, rather than wait to take their pulse with its Economic Census, which gathers data on business every five years.

Every year, Census asked for the extra funds; every year, Congress denied them the money, leaving the Census Bureau largely blind to the health of a sector that made up more than half the total economy.

Finally, in early 2009, after the real estate-fueled financial crisis, Congress gave Census what it had been asking for—an extra $8.1 million. In the view of many, it was too late. “That’s a grand example of how nickel-and-diming statistics agencies can screw up the economy,” says Andrew Reamer, a research professor at the George Washington University Institute of Public Policy and a member of the BEA’s advisory committee. “The government saved $8 million, but how many trillions were lost as a result of not being able to see the crisis coming?”

That extra data, says Reamer, would’ve revealed just how quickly certain parts of the economy were slowing down.

These agencies have always had to fight for more funding. Now they may have to fight just to keep their budgets intact. As part of $19 billion in nondefense discretionary cuts in Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) budget—recently passed by the House of Representatives—the agencies are likely to get less funding.

Read more…

Obama was backed by 49 percent of registered voters in a telephone poll conducted from May 3-7, compared to 42 percent who supported his likely rival in November’s presidential election. In April, the poll showed Obama leading Romney 47 percent to 43 percent.

Obama’s overall approval rating among the 1,131 adults surveyed was 50 percent, up one point from last month, while 47 percent said they disapproved of how he handles his presidency.

“The economy continues to chug along. Presidential ratings are correlated fairly closely with economic optimism and when the public sees things like unemployment going down and other signs of economic recovery, they are more inclined towards voting for the status quo – which in this case is to keep the incumbent in office,” said Ipsos pollster Julia Clark.

Read more…

As the budget battles in Washington begin anew, it seems the importance of tax revenue for repairing the national debt problems has been quite clearly illustrated. It’s also worth postulating, with the regaining of virtually all the jobs lost under the Obama Administration does it not stand to reason that putting people back to work where they contribute to the tax base is the best way to reduce the debt spending? Would it not be a wiser choice for Republicans from the local, state & federal levels to heed this logic, halt their attempts to slash everything to the bone and instead focus on job creation through investment in the country’s future? It would seem the strategy subscribed to by the Obama Administration and the Democrats in Congress has, and is, working.  Is it not time for the GOP to swallow a bit of pride, acknowledge this reality and come together to continue down the past to recovery rather than hindering as has been the case for the past 3 1/2 years?  

By Michael Ono | ABC OTUS News

The Congressional Budget Office has reported a monthly budget surplus of $58 billion,  which would be a first in nearly three years.

The improved numbers are attributed to a 10 percent increase in tax revenue.  The month of April coincides with tax season which typically results in a yearly surplus, but hasn’t happened since the 2008 financial crisis when tax revenue fell.

“It is a clear signal that the government’s fiscal situation is finally moving definitively in the right direction,” said Mark Zandi who is the chief economist for Moody’s Analytics.

Next month’s report will likely show a budget deficit, but the small surplus is an important milestone in the nation’s struggle to fend of a future debt crisis.

Some economists argue that a rush to curb the deficit through immediate spending cuts could harm the economy in the short term.  Britain recently announced that it fell back into recession, with some blaming the drop in gross domestic product on harsh austerity measures.

“It goes to how important economic growth is to addressing our fiscal problems,” said Zandi.

The other school of thought says that a massive budget deficit is too risky because the interest on the debt could grow to become unmanageable.

Lawmakers will likely have to find a way to cut the deficit over the long run.

“Policymakers have a lot more work to do to establish fiscal sustainability,” said Zandi.

The conventional wisdom is that Congress will address the long-term problem after the election is over.

Referenced from YahooNews!