Progressive Breakfast: Jobs Is Job #1

The daily Progressive Breakfast serves up what progressive movement members need to know to start their day.

Renewed Push To Save Jobs

Bloomberg reports WH wants more investment in jobs: "President Barack Obama is considering a mix of spending programs and tax cuts to respond to widening job losses that would amount to an additional economic stimulus without carrying that label ... Administration officials have told allies in Congress that a broader transportation bill, and extensions of a homebuyer tax credit and unemployment benefits are all on the table, a Senate aide said..."

NYT also notes proposals for biz tax breaks: "Among the options for additional steps is some variation on Mr. Obama’s proposal during the stimulus debate to give employers a $3,000 tax credit for each new hire, which Congress rejected last winter partly out of concern that businesses would manipulate their payrolls to claim the credit. Another option would allow more businesses to deduct their net operating losses going back five years instead of the usual two; Congress limited the break to small businesses as part of the economic stimulus law."

Robert Reich calls for a 4-point job strategy on HuffPost: "Use existing authority under both the stimulus package enacted earlier this year and the nefarious TARP bailout fund -- extending and combining them into a fund to make up for state and local cuts ... Propose a one-year payroll tax holiday on the first $20,000 of income ... Give small businesses a 'new jobs tax credit' for every net new job created over the next year ... Dramatically expand the Small Business Administration's lending programs and have the Fed buy up the SBA's debt."

Vote Delayed While CBO Scores

Senate Finance Committee waiting for new CBO cost estimate before voting. "... a committee vote on health-care reform will be pushed back to later this week, and perhaps into next week..."

Will CBO conclude fewer people will get coverage in Finance bill? WSJ: "The Congressional Budget Office estimated that an earlier version of the Senate Finance bill would ensure health insurance for 91% of Americans -- leaving about 25 million people without coverage. The CBO's estimates for the latest version of the bill are due out this week; it is expected to cover fewer people. About 85% of Americans currently have health insurance."

Salon.com optimistically speculates,"Is the tide turning for the public option?": "Congressional aides and outside activists say the White House is still pushing for the public option in private talks. A growing number of Democrats in the Senate say they think the bill will include some form of public option, including Majority Leader Harry Reid and health committee chairman Tom Harkin. "

NYT once again ignores cost-saving elements of reform plans, pitting "Coverage v. Cost."

The Hill quotes several lawmakers unhappy with WH-Baucus-PhRMA deal: "Dorgan said he 'wasn’t involved' in the deal [and] will offer an importation amendment to the healthcare reform bill when it reaches the Senate floor, something that administration officials may find difficult to lobby against."

Republican Tommy Thompson, Republican Bill Frist and Independent Mayor Mike Bloomberg urge passage of health care reform this year.

Change The Exchange?

Jonathan Cohn rips Finance's weak standards for health insurance marketplace:

In the bills that passed three House committees and the Senate [health] Committee, the exchange would be a "prudent purchaser." In other words, it would have a staff that bargained with insurers to bring down premiums--and that made sure all plans lived up to strict guidelines for coverage and customer service. In effect, any insurer that wants to offer coverage through the exchanges has to get the equivalent of a "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval" from the administrators. This is precisely how it works in Massachusetts.

By contrast, the Senate Finance bill envisions much weaker exchanges. Instead of choosing which plans to make available, the exchange administrators would, by law, have to accept any plan that meets a relatively minimal set of standards.

Jon Kingsdale, who runs the Massachusetts exchange, calls that a recipe for "policy disaster," as consumers faced a dizzying array of more expensive, less regulated choices. "It would be like telling your grocery store they have to offer every single kind of bread baked by every single bakery. ... The exchanges would be nothing more than an automated Yellow Pages."

NYT raises conservative concerns with House version of health insurance marketplaces:

So far, the House proposal calls for the creation of a national exchange where someone in Iowa, for example, may have the same choice of health plans as buyers in Maine and California. Because insurance is now a state-by-state patchwork, such an approach would conceivably enhance competition by creating an interstate market.

But critics worry that the result may be a few big providers of one-size-fits-all plans, still leaving many small businesses and consumers with products that do not meet their needs or budgets.

Both Senate proposals, meanwhile, favor the creation of state-based exchanges, where a state may have the choice of deciding whether its residents can also buy from a national or regional exchange. The exchanges may have other wide variations, depending on the model chosen by a state or outlined in the legislation.

Some may mirror the one in Massachusetts, which actively screens the policies and negotiates with insurers on behalf of customers. Others may operate more like electronic yellow pages, where insurers list their offerings with little government involvement or oversight.

Banker Salaries May Be Cut

WSJ speculates on WH plan to restrict bank exec salaries: "Instead of awarding large cash salaries, Kenneth Feinberg is planning to shift a chunk of an employee's annual salary into stock that cannot be accessed for several years ... Mr. Feinberg is expected to issue by mid-October his determination on compensation packages for 175 of the most-highly compensated executives and employees at the seven firms he oversees. The companies are: American International Group Inc., Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., General Motors Co., GMAC Financial Services Inc., Chrysler LLC and Chrysler Financial ... The Obama administration has tasked Mr. Feinberg with more closely tying compensation to long-term performance, something the White House believes will help prevent employees from taking unnecessary risks for short-term gains. A government official said shifting some salary away from cash and into stock will help achieve those goals. The move is aimed squarely at salaries, not bonuses, which are restricted under rules passed by Congress earlier this year."

Politico updates on lesser known aspects of the financial reform debate: "The financial reregulation effort is just now beginning in earnest, with most attention focused on a proposal to create a consumer watchdog agency and one to expand the powers of the Federal Reserve. But Tuesday the House Financial Services Committee is holding a hearing on three lower-profile, but equally provocative, sections of the reform effort: hedge fund registrations, creation of a new agency to oversee the insurance industry and a new law aimed specifically at protecting consumer investors."

New Climate Report Renews 350 v. 450 Debate

W. Post on study finding low costs for driving down CO2 concentration to 350 ppm: "...the world could get to a dramatically lower level of greenhouse gas emissions at a cost of between one and three percent of global GDP per year, according to a report issued Tuesday by a group of economists. That price tag is in line with previous economic estimates aimed at meeting more modest climate goals ... the study looked at what it would take to meet the recommendations of climate scientists who call for reducing carbon atmospheric concentrations from their current level to 350 parts per million ... However Robert J. Shapiro, chairman of the U.S. Climate Task Force and Sonecon, an economic advisory group, said the goal of reducing carbon concentrations below their current levels is unrealistic ... 'The only prospect of reaching 350 is if we came to develop a technology that would pull greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere -- that is, pull the concentrations out of the atmosphere,' Shapiro said. 'That is probably impossible without a technology that we can only conceive of today.'"

Conservative senator tries to stop CIA from assessing climate risk to national security. CQ: "No sooner did the CIA set up a Center on Climate Change and National Security than Sen. John Barrasso began trying to shut it down ... The Wyoming Republican has offered an amendment to the fiscal 2010 Defense appropriations bill (HR 3326) that would cut off funding for the center, the opening of which the agency announced Sept. 24. A vote on the amendment is possible this week; a Democratic aide predicted its defeat."

Views expressed on this page are those of the authors and not necessarily those of Campaign for America's Future or Institute for America's Future