Blogs

Lighting a Fire

| Fri Jan. 9, 2009 12:15 PM EST

LIGHTING A FIRE....Felix Salmon finds a silver lining to today's very, very grim employment report:

Maybe the only real upside to this report is that it should light a fire under Congress to pass a stimulus package sooner rather than later — including the release of the second tranche of TARP funds. Let's start getting money out the door now: that's more important than haggling over what goes where.

Well, it worked for FDR. Maybe it will work for BHO too.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Liberal Economists Skeptical of Obama Stimulus Package

| Fri Jan. 9, 2009 12:00 PM EST

Despite the fact that President-elect Obama described his stimulus package on Thursday with only broad generalities, the proposal is already coming under criticism from economists on the left. Anxiety that the package is too small is combined with a fear that the rumored $300 billion in tax cuts for individuals and corporations will do little to jump-start the economy. They argue that Obama, in seeking a solution that Republicans on the Hill will support, has sacrificed key components that would make the package work most effectively.

Paul Krugman, Nobel Laureate and in-house economic lefty for the New York Times, wrote on his blog this week:

Obama's Aide from the "Dark Side"

| Fri Jan. 9, 2009 11:51 AM EST

With one hand, he giveth, with the other....

By tapping Leon Panetta to be CIA chief, President-elect Barack Obama sent a clear signal: no to torture. A year ago, Panetta wrote an article declaring, "We cannot and we must not use torture under any circumstances." And he included waterboarding--which the CIA has used---as torture. When Obama on Friday morning publicly announced his appointment of Panetta, he declared, "under my administration, the United States does not torture." He noted that he was handing this "clear charge" to Panetta and that this policy "will ultimately make us safer."

In fact, Obama's reported first choice for the CIA job, John Brennan, a career CIA official, had had his chances scuttled after bloggers and others griped that he had been soft, if not supportive, when it came to torture and CIA renditions. A New Yorker piece by Jane Mayer identified him as a "supporter" of so-called enhanced interrogation methods. And in a 2006 PBS interview, Brennan said, "we do have to take off the gloves in some areas" but without going so far as to "forever tarnish the image of the United States abroad." He added that the "dark side has its limits."

Well, Brennan didn't get the top post at Langley. But Obama has selected him to be his chief counterterrorism adviser in the White House. The job requires no Senate confirmation. So Brennan will not be inconvenienced by questions regarding any past involvement with CIA renditions and waterboarding. (Brennan has reportedly told Obama he had no direct role in CIA's abusive interrogation policies and even internally expressed reservations.) In announcing Brennan's appointment, Obama noted, "John has the experience, vision and integrity to advance America's security."

Pay No Attention to the Party Behind the Curtain

| Fri Jan. 9, 2009 1:56 AM EST

PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE PARTY BEHIND THE CURTAIN....Citigroup has agreed to drop its opposition to "cramdown" legislation:

Key congressional Democrats on Thursday reached an agreement with financial giant Citigroup Inc. on a proposal to make it easier for bankruptcy judges to adjust the terms of home loans and possibly forestall many foreclosures.

....The breakthrough agreement boosts the chances that Democrats can push new laws through Congress that direct bankruptcy judges to rework mortgage terms by writing down the principal on the millions of homes that now are worth less than the mortgages they carry.

Most of the reaction to this announcement has been dismay that Congress had to "negotiate" with Citigroup in order to pass this legislation, but it's important to get clear what's actually going on here. The negotiation wasn't really with Citigroup, it was with Senate Republicans, who have almost unanimously opposed this legislation in the past. With Citigroup on board, Durbin and Dodd and Schumer hope that other banks will hop on board too, and once the banks are on board then maybe a few of those legendary "moderate" Republicans will also see the light and do the right thing.

Maybe it will work, maybe it won't. But it's Republicans that are the problem. Banks are just fronting for them.

Airline Powers Test Flight With Pond Scum

| Thu Jan. 8, 2009 5:45 PM EST

Desperate times call for desperate measures. Nowhere is this more the case than with today's commercial aviation business, whose slow death has been accelerated of late by the twin nightmares of soaring fuel costs and global recession. The price of oil is way down from last year, but the financial breather will inevitably be short-lived as scarcity of fossil fuels grows in years to come.

What's a desperate airline to do? Charging for alcoholic beverages and checked bags won't cut it. (Don't expect these costs to vanish any time soon.) Nope, the only solution lies in experimentation with new fuel sources. Take Virgin Atlantic. Last year, Richard Branson's airline made news by powering a Boeing-747 with fuel partially derived from oils extracted from babassu nuts and coconuts.

In a piece I wrote for Mother Jones prior to the Virgin flight, I reported on widespread speculation that Branson might also choose to test algae as a biofuel. He never did so, of course, and now Continental Airlines has beaten him to the punch.

From the BBC:

The 90-minute flight by a Continental Boeing 737-800 went better than expected, a spokesperson said.
One of its engines was powered by a 50-50 blend of biofuel and normal aircraft fuel.
Wednesday's test is the latest in a series of demonstration flights by the aviation industry, which hopes to be using biofuels within five years.
The flight was the first by a US carrier to use an alternative fuel source, and the first in the world to use a twin-engine commercial aircraft (rather than a four-engine plane) to test a biofuel blend.

Top 5: Peter Bjorn & John Get Bouncy, A Slumdog Standout, and More

| Thu Jan. 8, 2009 5:23 PM EST

We've been rather dry around the Riff lately (D.R.M.! TV News!) so I think it's time to get back to basics: New Tunes That Are Good. This week, a Swedish stomper, Texas tempos, a Slumdog standout, Bogota boogie, and, er, Scottish self-hatred.

1. Peter Bjorn & John - "Nothing to Worry About" (from Living Thing, out March 31)

Kanye could barely contain his enthusiasm, and neither can I. If you thought PB&J were only about shuffly, twee little ditties, get ready to have your mind blown by this stompy, shouty number. A bunch of kids scream the chorus while a wobbly guitar noodles over the beat from "Lip Gloss." What's not to like? (mp3)

2. Aether - "Orfeu Negro" (from Artifacts, out now on Exponential)

Aether is San Antonio producer (and graphic designer) Diego Chavez, and if you go look at some of his pretty pictures on his MySpace page whilst listening to this groovy number from his new album, you may notice some similarities: both his music and art are experimental but warm, detailed but instantly catchy, undeniably new but with a delicate retro patina.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Conyers vs. Gupta

| Thu Jan. 8, 2009 3:01 PM EST

CONYERS vs. GUPTA....Sam Stein reports that Rep. John Conyers has decided to publicly oppose the nomination of Sanjay Gupta as Surgeon General. That's.....weird. I don't really care much one way or the other about Gupta (though having a telegenic personality lead our public health service seems like a pretty inspired idea, frankly), and it's hard to believe that Gupta's smackdown with Michael Moore three years ago is anything more than a minor blip in the grand scheme of things. I wonder why Conyers is bothering to expend political capital on this?

Quote of the Day - 01.08.09

| Thu Jan. 8, 2009 2:26 PM EST

QUOTE OF THE DAY....From Ezra Klein, explaining why Cass Sunstein's appointment as head of OIRA matters:

The key event here, and this gets a bit dull, was Executive Order 12291.

That does sound dull, doesn't it? But it's not, really, and Ezra provides a nickel summary of how the Office of Management and Budget has gotten so powerful over the past few decades and why its regulation watchdog is important. Go read.

Green Regulations

| Thu Jan. 8, 2009 2:12 PM EST

GREEN REGULATIONS....Josh Marshall wonders what kind of coalition is likely to arise to support green infrastructure spending:

In the avalanche of writing about a massive Stimulus Bill, the one proposition (though grandly general) that's been of most interest to me is one that is heavy on infrastructure spending and spending and R&D geared toward developing a sustainable Green economy....But is there a constituency in Congress for that?....The key is that I don't think it really lines up in traditional left-right terms. For instance, it's not clear to me that the Progressive Caucus in the House is that constituency necessarily. I suspect it likely cuts across established factions among the Democrats, and likely brings in elements of the business community — not surprisingly, the ones who'd get the contracts.

I don't know enough about this to say anything substantive, but I have the strong impression that a huge part of the answer to this is related to regulation. Right now, the energy industry is hemmed in by a vast web of state, local, regional, and federal regulation, and to get anything serious done you have to somehow either get all these various actors moving in the same direction or else cut completely through the mess via federal fiat. Which is much harder than it sounds. Even something relatively simple, like a carbon tax (simple from a policy perspective, anyway), has wildly varying consequences on different power generation plants depending on what kind of regulatory regime they operate under. Getting projects built and economic incentives right when they intersect with byzantine networks of regulation will turn you old and gray before your time.

This is something I should learn more about, but I haven't done it yet. In the meantime, I just wanted to mention it. In the real world, a lot of the solutions we'd like to see happen are going to be harder on a micro scale than a macro scale, and the coalitions that support them could end up looking pretty peculiar depending on what local regulatory changes are needed. On the upside, it's also a chance to bring in more supporters for green projects, since well-conceived regulatory changes could turn an erstwhile enemy into a newfound friend. More on this later.

Scientific American Just Can't Let It Go

| Thu Jan. 8, 2009 2:12 PM EST

I'm joking, of course. The esteemed science mag runs an article in its January 2009 issue slamming John McCain and Sarah Palin, but with a serious purpose: pointing out that many of those oh-so-hilarious earmarks that the GOP ticket brought up as illustrations of congressional waste — "We spent $3 million to study the DNA of bears in Montana. I don't know if that was a criminal issue or a paternal issue," said John McCain, repeatedly — were actually examples of valuable scientific projects.

The DNA work on grizzlies that McCain mentioned was actually fairly standard stuff mandated by the Endangered Species Act. Scientists have to do DNA studies to track population fluctuations, which are important when an animal is, you know, endangered. The "overhead projector at a planetarium in Chicago, Illinois" that McCain mocked in a debate with Obama was, in reality, a replacement for the Adler Planetarium's star-projection system in its historic Sky Theater, the first planetarium theater in the Western Hemisphere. A statement from the planetarium after the debate said pointedly that the earmark request, which was not funded, was "not an overhead projector." And finally, the "fruit-fly research in Paris, France" that Sarah Palin dumped on during the campaign was actually $211,000 in funds that helped French researchers figure out ways to protect American crops from dangerous pests.

This is just the latest phase in the Republican war on science. We have some recommendations on how Obama can bring this long, stupid saga to a close.