Sunday, November 11, 2012



1000 px. Big birds everywhere rejoice.

Leftover notes that I want to keep handy:

DONORS WANT TO KNOW HOW OBAMA COULD HAVE WON: "Karl Rove's Crossroads outfit is holding a phone call for its big donors Thursday to sum up the race, said Stan Hubbard, a Minnesota media mogul and mega-donor. 'Obviously, somebody made a mistake and didn't do things right. There's no question about that,' he said," per Ken Vogel. " Romney and his allies spent $1.2 billion on the race, compared with $1 billion spent by Obama and his allies, according to a POLITICO analysis of records on Federal Election Commission data and public statements. Nearly 40 percent of Team Romney's spending came from super PACs and other unlimited outside money groups, compared with about 12 percent for Team Obama."

Republicans To Obama On Taxes: Let’s Compromise By Not Raising Taxes It’s a big ask, given the results of the election, and Obama’s long-standing pledge to veto legislation that extends all of the Bush tax cuts, even temporarily. Thus, their hopes rest on a vague suggestion that they’ll concede higher revenues in a future tax reform agreement with Obama, so long as he drops his demands for higher tax rates and agrees to cut entitlement spending. This sounds familiar because it’s broadly speaking the same deficit cutting deal Republicans spent most of this past Congress pursuing — one that raises little, if any revenue, let alone revenue from high earners. And early signs indicate that Democrats won’t bite.

House Majority Leader Already Taking Debt Limit Hostage For Spending Cuts At the time, Republicans demanded spending cuts equivalent to the amount the debt ceiling would be increased; while they didn’t get that, they did receive cuts that cost about one million jobs and lowered economic output by about 2 percent. Now, with another debt ceiling increase necessary in early 2013, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) isalready taking it hostage again, demanding entitlement cuts in return for ensuring that the nation doesn’t default on its debt.

PAUL RYAN MUST NAVIGATE CAREFUL PATH: "Ryan has an incentive to remain a purist - even after his vice presidential loss, the Wisconsin Republican remains an icon in the conservative movement, and at just 42, has a bright future in the party," John Bresnahan and Jake Sherman report. "John Boehner, by contrast, has to deal with the grind-it-out realities of legislating and determine if he can cut a major fiscal deal with an even more liberal Democratic Senate and an triumphant President Barack Obama, who believes he has a second term mandate to force the kind of budget deal he wants, including raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans. Republicans say any budget deal Boehner tries to reach will still need Ryan's imprimatur."

So do tax hikes on the rich happen next? ”Does Obama's win last night mean tax hikes for the rich are on their way? That's what leading Democrats and liberal supporters of the president are saying this morning: The president and victorious congressional Democrats campaigned heavily on raising taxes on the wealthy, and voters approved of that message, so Democrats should strengthen their push to let the Bush cuts for upper-income households expire, they say…Not so fast, says the business community. On a conference call Wednesday morning, leading industry lobbyists said that the president's mandate was to demonstrate leadership by being willing to work with the opposition, rather than draw a line in the sand on Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.”

YGLESIAS: Actually, the GOP’s problems run deeper than that. ”Pundits are quickly turning to immigration to explain the Republicans' Latino problem and to offer a possible cure, but the reality is that the rot cuts much deeper. The GOP doesn't have a problem with Latino voters per se. Rather, it has a problem with a broad spectrum of voters who simply don't feel that it's speaking to their economic concerns. The GOP has an economic agenda tilted strongly to the benefit of elites, and it has preserved support for that agenda — even though it disserves the majority of GOP voters — with implicit racial politics.”

Analysis: 20 states will run their health-law exchanges. ”Twenty states will operate their own insurance exchanges in 2014 under President Obama’s healthcare law, according to a new analysis. Avalere Health released its estimate after Obama won a second term on Tuesday, a victory that all but ensures the Affordable Care Act’s future. Governors have a choice as to whether to implement the law’s exchanges or leave the task to the federal government. A third option is a ‘partnership’ model in which the state and federal government jointly manage the marketplace. According to Avalere, 13 states are likely to use the partnership model, while more than a third will default to a federally run exchange.”

Cantor wants to get rid of Medicare advisory board. ”House Republicans will take aim at President Obama’s divisive Medicare cost-cutting board during the new Congress, Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) wrote Wednesday…IPAB is tasked with cutting Medicare reimbursement rates when the program’s per-person spending becomes too great. Conservatives have long argued that the 15-member panel will bring about de facto rationing as Medicare providers limit their services in response to cuts.”

U.S. trade commission upholds solar-panel tariffs. ”When the United States International Trade Commission decided on Wednesday to uphold tariffs of about 24 to 36 percent on most solar panels imported from China, the case's proponents claimed a major victory. Domestic solar manufacturers said the duties, to be in place for five years, would make up for unfair business practices by Chinese companies that had harmed the domestic market and allow homegrown companies to hire more workers and thrive…The Commerce Department had imposed the tariffs earlier this year after finding that Chinese solar companies had received unfair subsidies from their government and dumped solar cells below costs. But whether the duties can help save the American solar industry is a matter of some dispute.