Showing posts with label shutdown. Show all posts
Showing posts with label shutdown. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

Mitch McConnell’s empty promise: We’ll force Obama to rein in government or else risk a shutdown

MitchMcConnell’semptypromise:We’llforceObamato

Mitch McConnell’s empty promise: We’ll force Obama to rein in government or else risk a shutdown

posted at 3:21 pm on August 20, 2014 by Allahpundit

Does anyone actually believe this?

I guess Kentucky Republicans who don’t pay attention to politics but who’ll end up deciding this year’s Senate race anyway do. God bless democracy.

“We’re going to pass spending bills, and they’re going to have a lot of restrictions on the activities of the bureaucracy,” McConnell said in an interview aboard his campaign bus traveling through Western Kentucky coal country. “That’s something he won’t like, but that will be done. I guarantee it.”…

McConnell risks overreaching if he follows through with his pledge to attach policy riders to spending bills. If Obama refuses to accept such measures, a government shutdown could ensue. Republicans bore much of the blame for last year’s government shutdown, which was prompted by conservative tactics McConnell opposed, and their fortunes rebounded only when the administration bungled the rollout of Obamacare.

But asked about the potential that his approach could spark another shutdown, McConnell said it would be up to the president to decide whether to veto spending bills that would keep the government open.

Obama “needs to be challenged, and the best way to do that is through the funding process,” McConnell said. “He would have to make a decision on a given bill, whether there’s more in it that he likes than dislikes.”

To repeat: Does anyone actually believe this? McConnell was one of the sharpest Republican critics of the “defund” strategy that produced a government shutdown last fall. Watch the clip below if you need your memory refreshed. He’s fond of saying about it, “There’s no education in the second kick of a mule,” i.e. the GOP paid a political price for the 1995 shutdown and then foolishly paid the same price again in 2013 (although the backlash was blunted by public outrage at the Healthcare.gov meltdown that was happening simultaneously). Quote: “I think we have fully now acquainted our new members with what a losing strategy that is.” He hates shutdowns almost as much as the people in the GOP’s donor class who bankroll him do.

And yet here he is, soothing conservatives who are leery of reelecting him by vowing to take the fight to Obama this time and make him cause a shutdown if he refuses to agree to Republican demands. And he wants you to believe he’s going to do this while prominent Republicans, including his pal Rand Paul, are declaring their candidacies in 2016. It’s the purest nonsense. To believe it, you need to believe that somehow, if Obama vetoes the sort of bill McConnell’s describing here, that the GOP will win the ensuing media war over who “really” caused the shutdown. Which party, do you suppose, will the press hold responsible? Whom did they hold responsible in 1995, when Republicans controlled both houses of Congress and went head to head with a Democratic president? The party that loves government, the bigger the better, or the one that doesn’t?

McConnell has a history of empty rhetoric about brinksmanship with Obama too. Remember this?

The Senate’s top Republican signaled Tuesday that he will seek to extract concessions from Democrats in exchange for lifting the nation’s debt limit in 2014, potentially foreshadowing a grueling fiscal fight during an election year.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said that he “can’t imagine” that the debt ceiling increase will be a “clean” one — meaning that it will have no conditions attached to it. McConnell, a key negotiator on deals ending the debt ceiling standoff in 2011 and this year during the government shutdown, noted that past significant legislative agreements have been attached to such increases. He was skeptical that the House or the Senate would have an appetite to hand President Barack Obama a clean debt limit hike.

Two months later he voted for cloture on — ta da — a clean debt-ceiling hike, even though Harry Reid had more than enough votes without him to break a filibuster by Ted Cruz. And so we already know what’ll happen next year: McConnell and Boehner will pass a spending bill with some riders attached, Obama will veto it, a shutdown deadline will loom, and eventually McConnell will agree to a clean bill while promising to fight another day. How many times do you need to see this movie to know the plot?

It will, perhaps, not surprise you to learn that Kentucky Democrats are having a field day with the excerpt above, claiming that McConnell’s already cooking up new shutdowns for America. They know which side is helped by shutdown politics. And so does Mitch the Knife, which, again, is why this is an empty threat.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Friday, June 20, 2014

Virginia Gov. McAuliffe vetoes legislature’s anti-Medicaid expansion amendment, vows to find a way

VirginiaGov.McAuliffevetoeslegislature’santi-Medicaidexpansionamendment,

Virginia Gov. McAuliffe vetoes legislature’s anti-Medicaid expansion amendment, vows to find a way

posted at 7:21 pm on June 20, 2014 by Erika Johnsen

The White House will be so disappointed. Obama officials were really counting on McAuliffe to make this Medicaid expansion happen in good time, and McAuliffe in turn was really counting on his boozing-and-schmoozing skills to translate into his own made-up version of bipartisan governance. He has so far been remarkably unsuccessful at persuading either Republican legislators or Virginian voters to come around to his way of thinking on the proposed expansion, and there’s been some speculation that McAuliffe might keep up a budget standoff that could lead to the shutdown of the Virginia state government this summer — but the sudden resignation of a Democratic state senator earlier this month gave Republicans the full General-Assembly majority they needed to try to block Medicaid expansion for good. McAuliffe exasperatedly approved most of the state budget this week, but vetoed Republicans’ added anti-Medicaid amendment, via WaPo:

Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) vetoed portions of the state budget Friday, setting Virginia up for a legal showdown with legislative Republicans who oppose his efforts to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act.

McAuliffe exercised his line-item veto power to strike budget language that Republicans had hoped would block expansion of Medicaid.

McAuliffe railed against Republican opposition to expansion as he announced the move, referring to GOP leaders as stubborn and unwilling to compromise. He said that he would have vetoed the entire budget if it were not just 10 days until the end of the fiscal year, risking a government shutdown.

The General Assembly will take the budget back up on Monday, but for McAuliffe, of course, the fact that the legislature is decidedly against him is no reason to back off of his quest to find a way to expand Medicaid via executive action, à la President Obama. Good grief.

The governor for a month has been quietly exploring ways to get around the General Assembly to provide health care to 400,000 uninsured Virginians. On Friday, he publicly stated that he was pursuing such options.

“Secretary Hazel will have a plan on my desk by no later than September, first detailing how we can move Virginia health care forward even in the face of the demagoguery, lies, fear and cowardice that have gripped this debate for too long,” McAuliffe said, referring to Health and Human Resources Secretary William A. Hazel Jr.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Sunday, February 23, 2014

Quotes of the day

Quotesoftheday postedat8:31

Quotes of the day

posted at 8:31 pm on February 22, 2014 by Allahpundit

The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) just held its winter meeting here, and the wealthy beachfront communities that dot the coast are typically considered one of the beating hearts of the Establishment GOP’s donor community.

Tonight, though, it’s Cruz country.

An event originally scheduled as a small rally for potential 2016 presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) mushroomed into a major political event after nearly 2,000 people RSVP’d online…

“If you have a single candidate rally and you get 500 people in the room, it’s a great day,” Gruters said. “To have almost 2,000 in the room for a single candidate—it’s amazing.”

***

“Do not trust anyone who says they are trying to defeat ‘establishment Republicans,’” she added.

Without mentioning Cruz by name, Coulter railed against tea partiers who fail to understand that the “only way to repeal Obamacare is to elect Republicans.”

“It is not to be fighting against Republicans,” she said.

***

Freshman Senator Ted Cruz says many things that need to be said and says them well. Moreover, some of these things are what many, if not most, Americans believe wholeheartedly. Yet we need to remember that the same was true of another freshman Senator, just a relatively few years ago, who parlayed his ability to say things that resonated with the voters into two terms in the White House. Who would disagree that if you want your doctor, you should be able to keep your doctor? Who would disagree with the idea of a more transparent administration in Washington, or a President of the United States being a uniter instead of a divider?…

Senator Ted Cruz has not yet reached the point where he can make policy, rather than just make political trouble. But there are already disquieting signs that he is looking out for Ted Cruz — even if that sets back the causes he claims to be serving

The most charitable interpretation of Ted Cruz and his supporters is that they are willing to see the Republican Party weakened in the short run, in hopes that they will be able to take it over in the long run, and set it on a different path as a more purified conservative party.

Like many political ideas, this one is not new. It represents a political strategy that was tried long ago — and failed long ago.

***

Senator Ted Cruz (R., Texas) may be the brightest light to adorn the Republican party in many years. He knows how to make the case for conservative ideas, pointing, for example, to the contrasting fates of Detroit and Houston to illustrate the superiority of conservative policies. So it’s particularly galling to see that rather than train his fire at Obama and the liberal machine that cocoons him, Cruz has become a one-man wrecking ball against Republicans

Cruz stoked the shutdown fever, while his aide called other Republicans the “surrender caucus.” Cruz’s allies threatened to primary senators who objected. In the end, the shutdown cratered the Republican party’s popularity and forced them to accept the same deal they could have had in September. That the deal wasn’t worse is a tribute to the much-scorned Boehner and McConnell. If senators are going to face primaries for their votes, Cruz should be among them, because after fulminating for three weeks, he too voted to fund the government.

Senator Cruz has many gifts. He’s a skilled rhetorical marksman (if no tactician), but by firing at his own side, he may be doing more damage to the Republican party than any Democrat has done.

***

ABC News’ Jonathan Karl told a panel on Sunday’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) is so hated by fellow Republicans these days that he will “need a food taster” at weekly Senate lunches.

Karl’s comments came during a discussion surrounding debt ceiling increases and Cruz’ actions against them: “I’ll tell you, Ted Cruz is so hated among his Republicans,” Karl said. “Now more so than even during the shutdown, at that…lunch they have every Tuesday, he’s going to need a food taster.”

***

There’s a new dividing line in the conservative movement—between a majority who’d like to win against President Obama, and a handful who’d like to win some scalps

Members of Congress routinely cook up situations that force opposing parties to take “tough votes.” This may be the first time a senator did so solely to damage his own party. It may also be the first time a senator has used the privileges afforded him under Senate rules to benefit a small and coordinated band of conservative campaign groups. Their No. 1 target is Mr. McConnell, who Mr. Cruz hasn’t forgiven for failing to embrace his damaging shutdown…

Mr. McConnell holds the same positions as Mr. Cruz on spending, ObamaCare, gun control, etc. His sin? He has refused to ask Republicans to run into the Obama fixed bayonets, a la the Cruz shutdown. Groups like SCF and Heritage Action want to replace the leadership with more of their own kamikaze caucus. They also understand there are far more fundraising dollars and media attention in attacking fellow conservatives.

Republicans have fumbled their last two Senate takeover chances, mostly thanks to infighting. But this latest movement—to take down incumbents over tactics—is a new low. If the GOP remains a minority, this will be why.

***

The senator tells me he hasn’t talked with anyone in Senate Republican leadership since the debt-ceiling vote

I ask if — assuming McConnell wins reelection — the Texan will vote for him as the Republican leader for the next Congress.

Cruz pauses.

“I’m going to leave that election and every other incumbent Republican election to the voters of their respective states,” he says.

***

It was also just three months ago that Senator McConnell was telling us how critical the 60-vote standard was to making the Senate the world’s greatest deliberative body. Yet, when it came time for the debt-ceiling fight, he was ready to waive it faster than an Obamacare mandate. Fortunately for transparency — meaning, unfortunately for the GOP — it was not his to waive. The rules give every senator the power to call for the supermajority vote. That is all Cruz did: no threats to shut down the government, just a call for his tough-talking Republican colleagues to put up or shut up…

Engaged conservatives are on to the ruse. Notwithstanding the Republican establishment’s campaign to marginalize them as what the Journal obligingly labels a “rump kamikaze caucus,” their ranks are swelling. Without them, the Republicans would not have recaptured the House in 2010. Increasingly, they mount primary challenges against Beltway relics. They don’t win all the time, but they win quite a few — like long-shot Ted Cruz’s stunning primary rout over the party’s preferred candidate. And there is a more serious danger for GOP leadership: The conservative base increasingly wears the establishment’s disdain as a badge of honor.

Beltway Republicans do not seem to grasp how ominous this is. They so crave pats on the head from the “let’s make government work” commentariat that they’ve lost any feel for people who are wired differently, who see government as the problem, and who want it substantially downsized. In the end, the “let’s make government work” crowd is with the Democrats; the “kamikazes” are the ones the GOP must have. Condescension toward the customer is never a particularly good business strategy.

It is fitting that the 60-vote standard Republican leaders told us they needed just a few weeks ago was thrust on them in the matter of debt. They are living on borrowed time.

***

[T]his is really about what it has always been about: what kind of purity we’re going to unify behind. And make no mistake, the establishment’s own brand of “purity” is precisely what these attacks on Cruz are about.

The most charitable interpretation of Sowell’s position is this: he seems to be on board with those who believe that if we could bite our tongues and just join forces long enough to provide a unified front, that we could win some elections and start pushing some reforms. That, while in the short term some of the alliances and concessions would be painful, they’re worth it for the overall common purpose. And he’s right that that’s what has to happen.

Unfortunately, as is always the case with the so-called Establishment (though less often with Sowell who I’ve rarely seen take such a strong position in their favor), they believe they have the monopoly on what that common purpose is. As far as “they” are concerned, the common purpose has already been vetted, printed, and handed out. Get on board or you’re inadvertently helping the Nazis.

***

He’s clearly smart, and he thinks a lot about strategy. He has no known demons that would drive him to self-sabotage. Yet since being sworn in last year, he has fallen on his sword several times for highly dubious reasons.

So, why do it?…

Cruz is perfectly capable of being polite, in other words. The fact that he sometimes chooses not to be made me suspect that his tendency to flout his senior colleagues in the Senate isn’t simply Tea Party umbrage about politics as usual. Of course, political calculations may well have something to do with it; Congress does have a 13 percent approval rating. But it’s hard to see a strategy behind something like last week’s dustup. Instead, it seems to point to a real idiosyncrasy that this otherwise disciplined operator can’t or won’t bother to conceal: a suspicion of authority, a distaste for being scolded about etiquette or a sincere disdain for politicians who strike him as craven or chicken…

Cruz will, no doubt, win some fights in his political career. He will also lose some, as he did often last year. He is, after all, a junior member of the Senate’s minority party. And maybe he has won something big already: If senior Republicans won’t stand up to him when they disagree with him, doesn’t that say as much about them as it does about him?

***

***

***


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Thursday, February 13, 2014

Video: Government shutdown as winter storm hits

Video:Governmentshutdownaswinterstormhits

Video: Government shutdown as winter storm hits

posted at 9:21 am on February 13, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

And it’s not just the federal government that’s shutting down in Washington DC, but the entire city — and for good reason. The infrastructure in the Beltway can barely handle a small snowfall, as the city rarely sees any more than that at one time, but even a metropolitan area like Minneapolis/St. Paul would struggle with eight inches overnight:

As Bloomberg reports, the heavy snowfall extends up and down the eastern US, and power failures have been widespread. If you’re thinking about traveling to the East Coast today, get used to disappointment:

A winter storm that piled as much as 12 inches (30 centimeters) of snow and ice across the U.S. South spread into the Northeast with gusty winds, shutting government offices inWashington and blanketing streets for start of the morning commute.

More than half a million homes and businesses were without power as of 7 a.m., while more than 4,000 flights were canceled around the U.S. Twelve deaths in the South were blamed onthe storm, the Associated Press said. …

The National Weather Service predicted 8 to 12 inches for New York along with wind gusts of 35 miles (56 kilometers) per hour by the time the system moves out tomorrow, while Washington may get 6 to 10 and parts of New Jersey 10 to 14. An ice storm warning was posted for central Georgia as winter weather alerts stretched north to Maine.

Reuters puts the upper projection limit for snowfall at 18 inches, and reports that 13 deaths have been attributed to the storm:

A deadly and intensifying winter storm packing heavy snow, sleet and rain pelted a huge swath of the U.S. East Coast on Thursday, grounding flights and shuttering schools and government offices.

Winter storm warnings and advisories were in place from Georgia up to Maine, and the powerful system could blanket the Atlantic Coast over the next two days with 12 to 18 inches (30 to 46 cms) of snow, said Jared Guyer, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service. …

About 4,470 domestic and international flights were canceled and another roughly 290 were delayed early on Thursday morning, according to flight-tracking website FlightAware.com.

The storm system, which has dumped heavy snow, sleet and freezing rain from eastern Texas to the Carolinas since Tuesday, was blamed for at least 13 deaths in the Southern region and for knocking out power to hundreds of thousands of customers.

The storm is shifting north, CNN says this morning:

By the weekend, this should subside, but it’s just another episode in a tough winter season. I’ve seen some griping in social media about being a bit wimpy and ordering closures “before the first snowflake falls,” but as some in the South learned the last time, it’s better to get ahead of the storm and keep people off the roads than to wait until it’s too late.  Chick-Fil-A can’t come to everyone’s rescue.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

Mia Love: I probably would have voted for that lame budget deal

MiaLove:Iprobablywouldhavevotedfor

Mia Love: I probably would have voted for that lame budget deal

posted at 7:21 pm on December 18, 2013 by Allahpundit

A nice catch by the Right Scoop and a useful complement to yesterday’s post about Jim Matheson’s retirement. The budget deal by itself is too penny-ante to imperil her standing among grassroots righties, I think, but between this, her criticism of Mike Lee’s “defund” tactics, and the fact that she recently refused to call herself a tea partier for fear of being “labeled,” I wonder if she won’t end up with a contested primary after all. The litmus test may be the next debt-ceiling standoff: If she ends up supporting a small ask or quick compromise on that too, maybe some opportunistic Utah conservative will see an opening and jump in.

“But wait,” you say. “Why would a candidate running in a deep red state, which ushered in the tea-party era by replacing Bob Bennett with Mike Lee, take a more moderate line this time?” Two reasons. One: She’s running in a district that, while Republican on balance, was blue enough to send Matheson to Congress for seven terms. The further right she goes now, the greater the risk that she gets a credible Democratic challenger. She’d probably win anyway, but having lost to Matheson despite having Mitt Romney at the top of the ballot and a high national profile by House standards, she naturally figures she should take fewer chances this time. Two: I linked this Utah poll from October yesterday but go look at it now if you haven’t yet. Mike Lee’s approval rating took a hit back home during the shutdown, with 57 percent of Utahns saying they wanted him to compromise on a budget even if it meant funding ObamaCare. A poll of Utah “insiders” taken later the same month showed a majority skeptical that Lee would ever fully shed the baggage of the “defund” episode. The lesson Love’s taken from all that, presumably, is to avoid shutdowns at all costs, and to even avoid too close of an association with a tea-party movement that’s more willing to tolerate a shutdown in the name of its achieving its goals than, say, John McCain is.

This really is the smart play politically, though. Conservatives respect her, rightly so, for risking endless left-wing nastiness by embracing a party that black women especially aren’t supposed to belong to. She can afford to burn a little of that political capital in the name of better positioning herself for the general election. Besides, she knows the national party would love her to have this seat and will do what it can to help her. Why alienate them by dumping on Boehner/Ryan?



Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Monday, December 16, 2013

Paul Ryan on the budget deal: Hey, we might fight on the debt ceiling instead

PaulRyanonthebudgetdeal:Hey,we

Paul Ryan on the budget deal: Hey, we might fight on the debt ceiling instead

posted at 11:41 am on December 16, 2013 by Allahpundit

The key bit runs from 5:45 to 7:15. My pal Karl asks a good question:

The whole point of the budget deal, I thought, was to defuse a political landmine in the GOP’s path to the midterms. Take away the possibility of another shutdown, the thinking went, and you’re taking away an ace in the hole that desperate red-state Dems might otherwise play to save their seats next November. Mission accomplished. Except now Ryan’s saying that hitting the debt ceiling, which everyone understands would be far more damaging economically than a shutdown, is still in the picture if Republicans don’t have their as-yet-unspecified demands met. Krazy kwestion: Having folded at the last minute in a debt-ceiling standoff more than once before, why would the GOP’s threats be taken seriously this time? They just caved on the budget in order to avoid any new brinksmanship that might come back to haunt them in the midterms. Now Ryan’s vowing … much more dangerous brinksmanship early next year? Does anyone, starting with Obama and Harry Reid, think they GOP will stand firm this time knowing what sort of political backlash it could inspire?

Their plan, I guess, is to lie low for now and then take stock of ObamaCare’s status next month. Maybe Healthcare.gov will be running smoothly, insurers will be up to speed in processing applications, and middle-class people whose insurance was taken away in the name of booting them onto more expensive O-Care plans will have magically made peace with their predicament. Or maybe Healthcare.gov will have new technical problems due to the payment system not having been built yet, insurers will be overwhelmed by the combo of backlogged applications and HHS’s endless half-assed seat-of-their-pants “fixes,” and new O-Care enrollees will be up in arms over their new deductibles and shrinking provider networks. In that case, the GOP might conclude — maybe not unreasonably — that O and his caucus will be so frazzled by ObamaCare screw-ups and what it might mean for the midterms that they might agree to some sort of delay. What that delay would look like, though I have no idea; the more people who sign up, the more impossible a mid-enrollment-period delay becomes. Even a popular GOP demand, like agreeing to scale back the “risk corridor” provisions in the law so that HHS can’t bail out insurers, could cause chaos if Dems acquiesced in it now. I think they and O have already passed the point of no return on ObamaCare. Which is great news for the GOP insofar as it means their opponents are fully committed to stay the course through next year’s havoc all the way up to the midterms. But it also means that O’s unlikely to make any debt-ceiling deals.

Maybe Ryan knows that and the point of the next round of brinksmanship is simply to make the Landrieus and Pryors in the Senate squirm by forcing them to either stick by the O-Care clusterfark or humiliate O by voting with the GOP. If nothing else, once Republicans do cave, they can use it as a campaign commercial for their audience of grassroots righties to illustrate why it’s so important to get the Senate back in GOP hands in 2015.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Friday, November 8, 2013

October jobs report: 204k jobs added, 7.3 percent unemployment rate

Octoberjobsreport:204kjobsadded,7.3percent

October jobs report: 204k jobs added, 7.3 percent unemployment rate

posted at 9:21 am on November 8, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

The big questions ahead of today’s release of the October jobs report were all about the government shutdown: How it affected markets, how markets affected hiring, and how much Obama administration officials can manage to blame any and all negative economic news on those effects alone for months to come.

Economists were expecting some 128,000 jobs added, but the BLS‘s topline numbers are coming in a bit “better than expected”:

Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 204,000 in October, and the unemployment rate was little changed at 7.3 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Employment increased in leisure and hospitality, retail trade, professional and technical services, manufacturing, and health care. …

Both the number of unemployed persons, at 11.3 million, and the unemployment rate, at 7.3 percent, changed little in October. Among the unemployed, however, the number who reported being on temporary layoff increased by 448,000. This figure includes furloughed federal employees who were classified as unemployed on temporary layoff under the definitions used in the household survey.

Because furloughed government workers count as “unemployed” if they were away from work the entire week that included October 12th (the week or payroll period of the month on which jobs numbers are based), that partially accounts for the uptick in the unemployment rate. The labor force participation rate, however, once again worsened past its standing 35-year low:

The civilian labor force was down by 720,000 in October. The labor force participation rate fell by 0.4 percentage point to 62.8 percent over the month. Total employment as measured by the household survey fell by 735,000 over the month and the employment-population ratio declined by 0.3 percentage point to 58.3 percent. This employment
decline partly reflected a decline in federal government employment.

Partly. This time last year, the labor force participation rate was 63.8 percent.

The report also includes some upward revisions in the past two months’ employment gains, with a total of 60,000 more jobs added than previously thought:

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for August was revised from +193,000 to +238,000, and the change for September was revised from +148,000 to +163,000. With these revisions, employment gains in August and September combined were 60,000 higher than previously reported.

Update: James Pethokoukis at AEI hits the nail on the head:

So for this monthly only, Republicans will look to the bright side of the monthly jobs numbers — “See, the government shutdown was a non-event” — the Democrats the opposite. Of course the counterfactual here, one Democrats will try and sell, is that even more jobs would have been created without the government shutdown. Indeed, the Obama White House seems to like counterfactuals. Recall the “jobs created or saved” metric to judge the stimulus.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

October jobs report: 204k jobs added, 7.3 unemployment rate

Octoberjobsreport:204kjobsadded,7.3unemployment

October jobs report: 204k jobs added, 7.3 unemployment rate

posted at 9:21 am on November 8, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

The big questions ahead of today’s release of the October jobs report were all about the government shutdown: How it effected markets, how markets effected hiring, and how much Obama administration officials can manage to blame any and all negative economic news on those effects alone for months to come.

Economists were expecting some 128,000 jobs added, but the BLS‘s topline numbers are coming in a bit “better than expected”:

Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 204,000 in October, and the unemployment rate was little changed at 7.3 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Employment increased in leisure and hospitality, retail trade, professional and technical services, manufacturing, and health care. …

Both the number of unemployed persons, at 11.3 million, and the unemployment rate, at 7.3 percent, changed little in October. Among the unemployed, however, the number who reported being on temporary layoff increased by 448,000. This figure includes furloughed federal employees who were classified as unemployed on temporary layoff under the definitions used in the household survey.

Relatively speaking — emphasis on the relatively — this is the best , this is the Because furloughed government workers count as “unemployed” if there were away from work the entire week that included October 12th (the week or payroll period of the month on which jobs numbers are based), that partially accounts for the uptick in the unemployment rate. The labor force participation rate, however, once again worsened past it’s standing 35-year low:

The civilian labor force was down by 720,000 in October. The labor force participation rate fell by 0.4 percentage point to 62.8 percent over the month. Total employment as measured by the household survey fell by 735,000 over the month and the employment-population ratio declined by 0.3 percentage point to 58.3 percent. This employment
decline partly reflected a decline in federal government employment.

Partly. This time last year, the labor force participation rate was 63.8 percent.

The report also includes some upward revisions in the past two months’ employment gains, with a total of 60,000 more jobs added than previously thought:

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for August was revised from +193,000 to +238,000, and the change for September was revised from +148,000 to +163,000. With these revisions, employment gains in August and September combined were 60,000 higher than previously reported.

Update: James Pethokoukis at AEI hits the nail on the head:

So for this monthly only, Republicans will look to the bright side of the monthly jobs numbers — “See, the government shutdown was a non-event” — the Democrats the opposite. Of course the counterfactual here, one Democrats will try and sell, is that even more jobs would have been created without the government shutdown. Indeed, the Obama White House seems to like counterfactuals. Recall the “jobs created or saved” metric to judge the stimulus.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Thursday, November 7, 2013

Top Cuccinelli advisor: What killed us more than anything was … the shutdown

TopCuccinelliadvisor:Whatkilledusmorethan

Top Cuccinelli advisor: What killed us more than anything was … the shutdown

posted at 7:21 pm on November 7, 2013 by Allahpundit

It’s Chris La Civita, the same guy whose comment Tuesday night about national Republicans abandoning Cooch in early October lit the fuse of the RINO/tea party powderkeg that exploded yesterday. Don’t blame the RNC, he now says. Blame the damned shutdown, which of course was very strongly opposed by the big-money RINOs who’ve been slammed for supposedly having stabbed Cuccinelli in the back.

“It moved the disaster of Obamacare away from our narrative,” he says, in an interview with National Review Online. “It sucked the oxygen out of the room. Instead of talking about Obamacare, we were talking about the shutdown.”

In mid October, LaCivita says, the campaign was startled by how the shutdown affected their momentum. Their internal poll numbers dipped and several of the Virginia attorney general’s donors, especially conservative groups aligned with Cuccinelli, “suddenly became gun-shy.”…

LaCivita, however, doesn’t blame national Republican power brokers for Cuccinelli’s loss. Yes, he says, they spent less in Virginia than they did during the 2009 gubernatorial race, which was easily won by Republican Bob McDonnell. But they did step up, he says, and provided valuable support.

“Wait a sec,” you say. “Didn’t the exit polls in Virginia show that voters there blamed the GOP and Obama nearly equally for the shutdown?” Indeed they did, but La Civita’s not really claiming otherwise. He’s not saying that people turned against Cooch because of it, he’s saying that the campaign was deprived of the chance to spend the entire final month hammering McAuliffe on O-Care. The shutdown was a distraction at a crucial moment. Then again, just because the final exits showed a nearly even split on blame doesn’t mean that that split was even all along. La Civita himself says Cuccinelli’s polling dropped initially because of it, which evidently was enough to convince some righty donors that he was a lost cause. Dig a bit further into the exits and you’ll see that the shutdown hurt Cooch a lot with a not-so-small segment of the electorate: “[McAuliffe] also won the three in 10 Virginia voters who said someone in their household was affected by the partial federal shutdown last month, by a 19-point margin.” Maybe most of those were Democratic households to begin with, but not all were. Some were surely headed by people in the defense industry. How many potential GOP votes switched there?

It could even be that the reason the polls didn’t detect Cuccinelli’s near-win is because anger over the shutdown gradually evaporated after it ended. As the story of the government closing down faded and the story of the O-Care trainwreck emerged, people who were initially sour on the GOP because of the former began to see some merit in the “defund” campaign in hindsight — just not quite enough to bring Cooch all the way back from the hit he took earlier in the month. That’s conjecture, but it’s interesting that a guy as close to Cuccinelli as LaCivita would say something that might feed it. Ah well. Doesn’t really matter. Both wings of the party are convinced that it was the other side that kneecapped Ken. Nothing will change that.

Exit question: Many grassroots conservative groups spent money to try to elect Cuccinelli, but some didn’t — and they’re criticizing the RNC anyway for having spent “only” $3 million. How come?


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Coburn on Congress, NPS: It’s time to stop acquiring land and start taking care of it

CoburnonCongress,NPS:It’stimetostop

Coburn on Congress, NPS: It’s time to stop acquiring land and start taking care of it

posted at 4:41 pm on October 30, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

As the recent government shutdown so very aptly demonstrated, the care for and conservation of many of our country’s natural treasures are currently tied to the caprice of national politics, and even worse, the federal government is constantly acquiring more land while the parks that they already own and operate are subjected to budgetary shortfalls that often result in both recreational restrictions and environmental degradation. These sites need tending, and it is an irresponsible, damn shame that we have an ever-mounting deferred maintenance backlog of more than $11 billion dollars but Congress and the executive branch continue to bring still more swaths of land under bureaucratic control through the Land and Water Conservation Fund and various amendments.

We now have more than 400 national parks on the registrar, and while adding still more makes for a great one-time ribbon-cutting ceremony, there are too many opportunities for waste and neglect to keep this practice up. Repubican Sen. Tom Coburn has been hitting this theme for awhile now, and his office is out with a report detailing some of the opportunity costs associated with it, via Fox News:

His report documents a federal agency that is top heavy with bureaucracy and management, but badly mangles its spending priorities.

“This is an agency that spends $650 million a year administering a $2.6 billion budget,” says Coburn — a ratio he calls, “outlandish.” …

“Congress continues to add things – ‘parks’ – that aren’t significant in terms of national interest in a declining budget.  What we have is our most treasured resources, the big parks, with maintenance backlogs in excess of $2 billion.”

The report catalogues a litany of unfilled potholes, crumbling stairs and deteriorating infrastructure in many of the nation’s most visited national parks. “Look at the Grand Canyon,” says Coburn.  “They’re not even replacing water lines that are 50 years old. They can’t even flush the toilets, because they’re not doing the critical maintenance that’s needed.”

He adds, “If you continue to add federal land and federal parks, what you are going to do is make this problem worse.”

The worst part of it is that, while environmentalists and bureaucrats are always eager to add land to the whimsical budgetary rolls of big government, there are other and much better options for conserving lands for public use. State parks and private-public partnerships have a much better record of both stewardship and fiscal responsibility, and private leasing especially often tends to act as a revenue-generator rather than the drain on government coffers. It doesn’t have to be this way.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

ADP: Private sector job growth sags to 130K

ADP:Privatesectorjobgrowthsagsto130K

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Video: CNBC host calls for Mexican music on segment about Ted Cruz; Update: Liesman apologizes

Video:CNBChostcallsforMexicanmusicon

Video: CNBC host calls for Mexican music on segment about Ted Cruz; Update: Liesman apologizes

posted at 10:01 am on October 23, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

As The Hill points out, Ted Cruz isn’t actually of Mexican descent, which makes this faceplant by Steven Liesman on CNBC yesterday even more obnoxious than it already was.  Liesman, who blamed Ted Cruz for delaying the September jobs report from the BLS because of the shutdown, decided to title the data the “Senator Ted Cruz Jobs Report,” which certainly falls within the bounds of a supportable argument, whether one agrees with it or not.  It’s when Liesman called for a soundtrack that CNBC got into trouble:

“We’re going to call this the ‘Senator Ted Cruz Jobs Report’,” Liesman said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.”

“There he is!” Liesman shouted when the network showed a picture of Cruz.

“Can we get some music to go along with that, some Mexican music or something?”

Cruz’s father was born in Cuba and his mother is of Irish and Italian descent. Neither are of Mexican descent.

Normally, I’d tend to dismiss this kind of ignorance as unremarkable; there are a lot of fools, and the media has its share, and more.  But with the doyenne of Salon shrieking about racism with every legitimate criticism of Barack Obama and opposition to his policies, including the shutdown about which Liesman gripes about here because a government report was late, the somewhat-more-than-latent hostility expressed about Cruz’ heritage (or non-heritage, as it turns out) is well worth noting.

In the future, if media outlets want a soundtrack for Ted Cruz stories that poke fun at his heritage, they should probably stick with this song, which would be slightly more accurate:

Personally, though, I prefer this, and it’s even more accurate for Cruz’ heritage:

Update: I didn’t realize that the screen grab from the video showed Joe Kernan rather than Steve Liesman.  I’ve replaced it with a photo of Liesman.

Update: Liesman apologized earlier today:

Regarding my recent remark on Squawk Box regarding Senator Ted Cruz, I first want to deeply and sincerely apologize if my remarks were insensitive.

Second, I want to explain that it was not intended to be offensive in any way.

I thought of him only as an American senator from Texas, and in an attempt, on the fly, to choose music representing that state, I chose Mexican music.

As a musician for many decades, I’ve played and listened to tons of Texas songs infused with Mexican themes. A better choice would have been Country/Western or Texas Roadhouse Blues – it was a bad reach all the way around.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Some federal workers to get “bonus” for not working during the shutdown?

Somefederalworkerstoget“bonus”fornot

Some federal workers to get “bonus” for not working during the shutdown?

posted at 12:41 pm on October 23, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

It’s real, but it’s not a windfall — and it may be unavoidable. The Washington Post points out one bizarre consequence of the federal shutdown — some federal workers will end up with extra cash because of it.  The “bonus” isn’t high, and it’s not widespread, but some of those who applied for jobless benefits won’t be forced to return the money after getting their back pay.  Oregon is among the states that have no clawback provisions for this scenario:

Thousands of federal employees across the country received jobless benefits during the government shutdown this month. Now that they’re getting back pay, many are being told to give it back. But at least some won’t have to.

In Oregon, fewer than 1,500 furloughed federal employees received unemployment insurance benefits during the 16-day government shutdown. That money is theirs to keep if they want, even if they collect back pay from the federal government, the state’s Employment Department wrote on its Web site.

“Oregon law does not permit UI benefits to be recovered in these circumstances,” the statement reads. “Oregon law provides that if a worker is entitled to receive UI benefits and then receives back pay, the worker is still entitled to the UI benefits. This applies to all workers regardless of whether they worked for the government.”

Oregon is a standout among states that are now weighing in on the issue. Several are in the process of notifying furloughed workers who got benefits that they need to repay the money. Idaho, for example, plans to send letters out Wednesday.

Four other states intend to get the money back, but only Washington has a plan to take it back involuntarily.  They want federal agencies to impound part of the workers’ paychecks to reimburse the state for the payments, but that’s not yet settled.

Otherwise, the states can do little except to send letters demanding repayment, at least for now, and even that may take a while.  States have to identify the workers and the money owed, the total of which varies widely from state to state.  Washington is out $500,000, while Illinois spent $230,000, and Virginia only $65,000.  Those figures might have some states balking at enforcement and collections, as the cost (especially in the public sector) might exceed the amounts they hope to recover.

Can Congress avoid this in a future shutdown? It’s difficult to see how.  Most federal workers need some income to pay their bills, and the uncertain nature of shutdowns and their length means that applying for jobless benefits for an indefinite furlough is a necessity, just in case it goes far longer than anyone anticipates.  The solution in this case may need to come from the states, but it would be moot if Congress could get back to responsible normal-order budgeting that produced balanced and rational spending plans.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair