SEPTA Service for Obama Rally

SEPTA is adding capacity on some Regional Rail line trains and bolstering some bus service on Sunday to serve riders travelling to see President Obama during his visit to Philadelphia .

The President is visiting Fulton High School , located at 60 East Haines Street in Germantown , Sunday afternoon. Extra capacity will be added to regularly scheduled trains on the Chestnut Hill East and Chestnut Hill West Regional Rail lines. The Germantown Station on the Chestnut Hill East Line is the closest rail stop to the school (about two blocks). Customers can also use the Chestnut Hill West Line to either the Chelten or Tulpenhocken stations and walk north to the school or transfer to a SEPTA bus.

Additional buses will be added to routes 23 and 65 for extra service. Bus routes J, K, XH, 18 and 26 also provide service near the school.

SEPTA encourages all customers travelling in the area on Sunday to be on alert for possible delays or possible road closures. For more information, visit www.septa.org.

Chapter 2 of Toomey's Road to Prosperity

Partial review of The Road to Prosperity: How to Grow Our Economy and Revive the American Dream, by Patrick J. Toomey and Nachama Soloveichik. NY: Wiley, 2009.

A few years ago I wrote a lengthy multi-part review of Rick Santorum’s book. I’d like to do something similar for Toomey’s Road to Prosperity. Each post will discuss one or more chapters of the book with a post at the end with a linked list of all the entries and some final thoughts.

The second chapter "Lessons from History," (pp. 25-49) does indeed spell out Toomey's view of American economic history. Toomey believes the Great Depression was caused by government policy set in place by Pres. Franklin Roosevelt, in particular "the mismanagement of monetary policy by the Federal Reserve Bank" (27). The book says deflation can only be caused by "a contraction in the supply of money relative to the overall volumes of goods and services. Since the Federal Reserve controls the supply of American money, deflation, like inflation, is always the fault of the Fed. (28)." After outlining Hoover's mistakes (continuing to spend on public works projects, raising tariffs, turning on Wall Street with a vengeance, and so on).

Enter FDR who introduced numerous regulations "price controls; minimum wage rules; health requirements; child labor laws; and production quotas" (31). The fiend! Toomey, however, thinks "mandatory wages and work hours for instance, made some labor too costly and thereby increased the ranks of the unemployed"(32). Here again Toomey invokes the specter of the private sector innovations and spending that would have occurred had not the government intervened with regulations and taxes. While acknowledging that FDR's alphabet soup programs (CCC, WPA, etc) put people to work he thinks that had FDR not moved money from the private sector to the public sector, the private sector would have righted the economy on its own, and possibly sooner.

FDR is also presented as a class warrior, blaming the economic problems on the wealthy. His policies are presented as the primary cause of the prolonged depression. There is no mention of the Dust Bowl or agricultural problems, other than farm subsidies. There is no discussion of international events.

Skipping ahead the book moves to the Reagan years. Since Reagan followed the economic principles set out in the first chapter it is no surprise that Toomey views these years as a time when "these gains directly resulted in a better standard of living for virtually all American -- including the poor" (38). The good times lasted until mid-2008, but it is all attributed to Reagen with little mention of the Clinton or Bush years. Jimmy Carter does get some credit for signing a few deregulation bills. Lower taxes and deregulation are credited with starting and maintaining the economic boom.

Then we shift to free trade, which led to "the greatest period of prosperity in the history of the United States" (43). NAFTA, CAFTA, and other free trade agreements led to increased trade. No mention of the effect on employment. Again Bush and Clinton are given passing mention but the lion's share of the credit goes to Reagan.

To add an international flavor Toomey outlines the growth of the Irish economy during the same time period (1980's, 1990's, and 2000's). This also is attributed to lowering tax rates and government spending. One specific example given is the deregulation of the airline industry and the rise of Ryanair to compete with Aer Lingus. There is no mention of the economic downturn in Ireland in 2008 or of other economic problems there, nor the positive effect of EU membership or government subsidies to lure in foreign countries. For an alternate, brief view, see the wikipedia entry on the Celtic Tiger.

My concern with this chapter is that it provides an extremely cursory history and explanation of some very complex topics. It also does not take into account outside factors, such as climate issues, global economic issues, income disparity (while Ireland's overall economy improved during the Celtic Tiger days it did not do so evenly), the entry of women into the workforce, and so on.

The rest of the chapters of the book each concern specific economic topics.

Schwartz Named "Defender of Children"

from the inbox:

U.S. Rep. Allyson Schwartz received two awards for her hard work on behalf of families and children in her district and across the country. Corporate Voices for Working Families and Working Mother Media have once again awarded the congresswoman with the 2010 Best of Congress award for her leadership in improving the quality of life for working families. Schwartz has also received the honor of being named a “Defender of Children” by First Focus Campaign for Children.

“I am honored to receive these prestigious awards from both of these organizations,” Schwartz said. “I share in their commitment to improving the lives of American families and finding commonsense solutions to the challenges they face. This year I was proud to have stood up to the insurance industry on behalf of families, and to have secured access to coverage for children with serious illnesses and to ensure that young adults can stay on their parent's insurance plans.”

“We applaud Congresswoman Schwartz for her unflagging commitment to protect our nation’s future,” said Bruce Lesley, president of the First Focus Campaign for Children. “Children cannot vote, hold press conferences, or donate to political campaigns to thank the Members of Congress that support them and protect their interests. And because of that, we are presenting this award on behalf of children to recognize our nation's top public officials who take action to make them national priority. We look forward to working with Congressman Schwartz to continue protecting America’s next generation of leaders.”

According to their web site, Working Mother Media’s 2010 Best of Congress was awarded to Schwartz because of her action on the following legislation:

* Her leadership led to the creation of the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) in 1992, which served as the model for the federal plan that now provides health insurance to millions of children.
* In 2009, she introduced the Children’s Health Protection Act, which prohibits employers and insurers from imposing preexisting-condition limitations on children, helping to ensure that children with debilitating illnesses have access to comprehensive and affordable health care.
* She was the lead sponsor in overturning a U.S. Department of Agriculture decision to end the Philadelphia School District’s Universal Feeding Program. Schwartz then introduced the Paperless Enrollment for School Meals Act of 2009, which made the food program permanent.
* She supported the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act, which increased funding for Pell Grants and kept federal student loan interest rates low.
* She also supported the Transfer of New GI Bill Benefits to Children of Fallen Troops, eventually signed into law, which expands new GI Bill benefits to cover the full cost of a college education for all children of fallen U.S. service members.
* And in May, she introduced the Support Working Parents Act, which would give families a 35 percent tax credit on expenses they incur for child care.

First Focus Campaign for Children is a national, bipartisan child advocacy group. The title “Defenders of Children” was awarded to members who support policies that advance the well-being of children.

Corporate Voices for Working Families and Working Mother Media developed the Best of Congress Award to recognize Members of Congress who have made a concerted effort to partner with businesses and other stakeholders to create long-term solutions to the challenges that America’s working families face.

Small Business Credits for PA

from the inbox:

Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury announced individual State Small Business Credit Initiative (SSBCI) funding allocations for all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories, which will support $15 billion in new small business lending through innovative local programs that help entrepreneurs expand their businesses and create new jobs. These SSBCI funds are a critical component of the Small Business Jobs Act President Obama signed into law last week to help unlock credit and provide targeted tax cuts for small businesses. (A full listing of the state-by-state allocations announced today is included below.)

“Innovative local initiatives that support small business lending are under extraordinary pressure because of state budget difficulties,” said Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner. “These funds will provide vital support to successful state-level programs that help local entrepreneurs obtain the credit they need to put more Americans back to work. President Obama fought hard for the Small Business Jobs Act because it will help ensure that small businesses continue to strengthen our nation’s recovery and serve as critical engines for job creation.”

Under the SSBCI, states are offered the opportunity to apply for federal funds for programs that partner with private lenders to extend greater credit to small businesses. States are required to demonstrate a minimum “bang for the buck” of $10 in new private lending for every $1 in federal funding. Accordingly, the $1.5 billion funding commitment that the federal government will make for this program is expected to support $15 billion in additional private lending.

The SSBCI allows states to build upon existing, successful state-level small business lending programs, including examples such as collateral support programs, Capital Access Programs (CAPs), and loan guarantee programs.

* Collateral Support Programs for Small Manufacturers: Collateral support programs help viable businesses that are struggling to get credit because the value of the collateral they hold has fallen, often due to the decline in commercial real estate values. These programs – which set aside funds to augment collateral the borrower already holds – provide banks greater confidence in extending credit to these borrowers, particularly in some of the communities hardest hit by the economic downturn.

* Capital Access Programs (CAPs): CAPs, which are already up and running in over 20 states, are loan portfolio insurance programs in which states provide a matching contribution to bank loan loss reserves when lenders extend credit to qualified small businesses. These reserve enhancements allow lenders to expand credit to new borrowers at a time when many of these lenders might otherwise pull back.

* Loan Guarantee Programs: Under loan guarantee programs, states provide partial guarantees on certain small business loans to give lenders greater confidence to extend credit.

If a state does not have an existing small business lending program, officials can establish one in order to access this funding. States must provide plans for utilizing their funding allocations to Treasury for review and approval.

The amount of SSBCI funds a state is eligible to apply for is determined based upon formulas in the Small Business Jobs Act that take into account each state’s respective unemployment rate and decline in employment relative to other states.

In addition to the State Small Business Credit Initiative, the Small Business Jobs Act includes a number of important provisions to support small business job creation. The Act includes eight new small business tax cuts that went into effect immediately upon becoming law last week; creates a $30 billion Small Business Lending Fund to help small and community banks provide new loans to small businesses; extends and expands existing Small Business Administration loan programs; and delivers other important benefits for small businesses. For more information on the Small Business Jobs Act, please visit, link.

The Pennsylvania allocation is:
state: Pennsylvania

State Small Business Credit Initiative Allocation: $29,241,232

Expected New Lending (10:1 Match): $292,412,320

Stop Loss Application Deadline Approaching

from the inbox:

[update: I am told the deadline to apply has been extended to Dec. 3rd and there is a headline to that effect on the website referenced at the end of this post, but I cannot absolutely guarantee this is true. Veterans are encouraged to meet the original October 21 deadline where possible, and to check with someone about the extension.]

Today, Congressman Paul E. Kanjorski (PA-11) announced that about 145,000 service members who were forced to extend their tours of duty, known as stop loss, in Iraq and Afghanistan, are eligible to receive payments that they deserve for their service to protect the United States. Congressman Kanjorski strongly supported legislation which ensures that that those eligible for the special pay will receive $500 for each month or partial month served in stop loss status. At the Dupont VFW, Congressman Kanjorski discussed that our troops deserve these payments and pointed out that many service members and veterans who are applicable still have not applied to receive these payments. The deadline to file paperwork to receive the stop loss payments closes on October 21, 2010. The payments apply to service members affected by the stop loss between September 11, 2001 and September 30, 2009.

“Our troops and service members have put their lives in jeopardy and fought to protect our country – one of the most noble and selfless acts possible,” said Congressman Kanjorski. “For many of these troops, their tours in Iraq or Afghanistan were extended involuntarily, and I have worked in Congress to ensure that at the very least, they are fully compensated for their hard fought efforts. I strongly encourage eligible veterans to apply to receive the payments they deserve before the deadline in just over a month. I also encourage Northeastern Pennsylvanians to help spread the word to local service members and veterans about these payments. We must work to continue to support our troops and their families, and provide needed services to our troops and veterans who put their country above all else.”

“I would like to thank Congressman Kanjorski for supporting legislation that ensures that eligible Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans, such as myself, are recognized and compensated for our involuntary extensions,” said Jeff Demko, an Iraq war veteran from Luzerne County. “I hope that all eligible service members apply for the payments in advance of the deadline next month. I signed up to serve and defend my country, and like many other service members, my tour in the Army was involuntarily extended at the request of the military. Because of the legislation that Congressman Kanjorski supported, I, and many others are able to receive compensation for the sacrifice we made to protect the country that we love.”

Mr. Demko served in the Army from January 8, 2003 until April 30, 2006. His enlistment terms stated that he should have completed his service on January 7, 2006, but it was involuntarily extended for almost four months.

As of July 29, 2010, the Pentagon had paid out $111 million to 25,000 service members and veterans affected by the stop loss. The average payout is $3,000 to $4,000 per claim. The Pentagon has approximately $423 million left in the program’s fund.

The 2009 War Supplemental Appropriations Act, which Congressman Kanjorski supported, states that those eligible for the special pay will receive $500 for each month or partial month served in stop loss status.

Who is Eligible for Retroactive Stop Loss Special Pay?

Service members, veterans, and beneficiaries of service members whose service was involuntarily extended under Stop Loss between Sept. 11, 2001 and Sept. 30, 2009 may be eligible for Retroactive Stop Loss Special Pay. This includes members of the Reserve Components, former, and retired members who served on Active Duty while their enlistment or period of obligated service was extended, or whose eligibility for retirement was suspended from one of the following:


* Contractual Expiration of Term of Service (ETS), Expiration of Active Service (EAS), or Reserve End of Current Contract (RECC)
* An approved separation date based on an unqualified resignation request or Release From Active Duty (REFRAD) order
* An approved retirement based on length of service


Who is Not Eligible for Retroactive Stop Loss Special Pay?

Service members who received a bonus for voluntarily re-enlisting or extending their service after being involuntarily extended no longer qualify for retroactive stop loss pay.

How to Apply for the Retroactive Stop Loss Special Pay Program

Service members can apply for the Retroactive Stop Loss Special Pay Program online at www.defense.gov/stoploss.

Service members can also download and print the form by clicking here.

In order to apply, service members will need their DD 214 or DD 215.

Chapter 1 of Toomey's The Road to Prosperity

Partial review of The Road to Prosperity: How to Grow Our Economy and Revive the American Dream, by Patrick J. Toomey and Nachama Soloveichik. NY: Wiley, 2009.

A few years ago I wrote a lengthy multi-part review of Rick Santorum’s book. I’d like to do something similar for Toomey’s Road to Prosperity. Each post will discuss one or more chapters of the book with a post at the end with a linked list of all the entries and some final thoughts.

The book opens with a foreward by Larry Kudlow which is primarily a criticism of the first months of the Obama administration. This is followed by a preface by Toomey, dated May, 2009, which focuses on economics, and the simplicity of economic principles. He states, for example:

We all know intuitively, from a very early age, that, all else being equal, a shortage of something makes it more precious and an excess makes it less so. We understand without questioning that people respond to economic incentives because, as consumers, we are bombarded with and often take advantage of clearance sales, coupons, volume discounts, and the like. (xv)

He also references zero percent financing and how popular it is when it is available.

I kind of disagree with him on several of these points. Supply and demand only works when enough people actually want the good or service. I have an almost complete set of Star Wars bubblegum cards from the first movie back in the late 1970’s. Not many people have a set like that but it doesn’t have a lot of street value. You might say that is understood, but if you are spelling out economic principals, or principals of any kind, it is more effective when you go into all of the underlying motivations. I think there are also a lot of people, my household included, that view zero percent financing with some skepticism because there are often less desirable strings attached.

Toomey lists some acknowledgements, just a list of names with no further information.

Chapter 1 (pp. 1-24) “Principles of Prosperity" sets out his four basic tenets: “private property rights, a relatively unfettered market, low tax burdens and government spending levels and a stable currency” (3). Toomey believes that these principles have led to America’s economic succeess.

Toomey includes intellectual property in his definition of private property. He also thinks one role of the government is to record ownership, in the form of deeds, titles, and patents. Conversely, restrictions on the use of sale of private property are detrimental. As examples he gives is the restriction the sale and use of land in the New Jersey Highlands. A theme throughout the book is first used here – that government restrictions automatically blocks what would have been positive outcomes. In this case he mentions the houses that could not be built on the land, and all the jobs not created there, and the farm workers not employed. He applies this to more mundane matters as well, by mentioning laws that prevent ticket scalping and therefore preventing sports fans from making a profit by selling their tickets. He does not take into consideration professional scalpers that artificially drive up the cost of tickets until they are outside the ability of true sports fans to afford them.

The second principle is a free market economy. Toomey believes that in a free market competition will keep product and service value up and costs down, and also innovation. It also leads to specialization of skills and worker cooperation in a process such as an assembly line. He views regulations as perhaps well-intentioned but always accompanied by unintended consequences. As specifics he mentions government set prices and licensing requirements for haircutters or taxi drivers. Health care mandates are also thrown in. Reading through I was surprised that monopolies were not mentioned, nor is there a heading for it in the index. [update: the index does have one listing for monopoly but it leads you to a page on public school's monopoly on education.] In this book monopolies do not seem to exist. Nor does he mention food safety, product safety, or, in fact, any regulation that might be viewed positively.

The third principle is taxation, “the lower the better” (12). He views a sales tax as “less objectionable” (13) than other taxes, but is opposed to taxing some issues and not others.. His philosophy in a nutshell is “The higher we tax people’s income, the less they work” (14). This section of the chapter also includes government spending as the opposite side of the coin from taxation. One passage I found surprising was his shock at the number of lobbyists who wanted him to continue or expand government spending programs. He seems equally shocked that no one lobbied for less spending (16).

Returning to something mentioned earlier in the chapter he expands on his “the seen trumps the unseen” theme, wherein in all government spending prevents private spending. On page 17 he uses the example of a bridge, which he feels would have been built with private funds if it were truly needed, as opposed to being built with government money. This one really threw me. I’m not sure what private enterprise would go around building bridges. Are residents to have bake sales to repair the aging infrastructure?

While they will be dealt with in greater detail later in the book Toomey introduces the concept of entitlement programs, such as medicare and social security which he views as unsustainable and simply redistributes wealth from one group to another.

The fourth principle is a stable currency. The guiding views of money are as a unit of measure, a medium of exchange, and to store value over time. In a rare show of support for a government agency Toomey says he agrees with giving the Federal Reserve the power to control the supply of money, but only because giving that power to Congress would be much worse, and the purview of the Fed should be limited

Toomey ends the chapter by saying that a laundry list of good things, “life spans, child survival, health care, scientific knowledge, sanitation, living conditions, opportunities to pursue interests and leisure, the state of our environment, and all forms of material will-being” (24) improve when these four principles are followed. To my mind, some of these improvements are also the result of labor unions, federal funding of medical research, and environmental regulations, but, hey, that’s just me. Economic principles certainly played a role but so did rule of law, government policies, and social movements.

Patrick Murphy's Health Care Meetings

A number of times I have read of someone saying that Congressman Patrick Murphy has not held any public meetings on health care. This always puzzles me because I attended one public meeting on health care that featured Murphy and watched with my own eyes as he fielded a number of questions on the topic and heard with my own ears a number of people heckling and catcalling – may favorite being the woman who, when another woman invoked “what would Jesus do” said “Jesus would throw you out.” What a charmer.

In any event, in this past Sunday’s debate between Murphy and the man he defeated in 2006, Mike Fitzpatrick, Fitzpatrick said something about Murphy not holding townhall meetings on health care (see question 8 in the post on the debate).

In hopes of providing some evidence to the contrary, beyond my own experience, here is a list of at least some of his public meetings, as reported in the Bucks County papers have reported on several public meetings. I don't know if this is a complete list; I just got tired of looking.

August 1, 2009, “congress on your corner,” 150 people at Concerto Fusion restaurant in Morrissville, 90 minutes long, and later at the Acme in Levittown (Vineberg, 8/02/2009)

August 13, 2009 Philadelphia Biblical University in Langhorne Manor, Lower bucks County Chamber of Commerce, (Anastasi, 8/14/2009)

August 22, 2009, impromptu meeting in front of Murphy’s Bristol office, 40 people (Kall, 8/28/2009)

August 27, 2009, Warminster, 100 residents of Ann’s Choice in Warminster (Ciavaglia 8/28/09)

August 27, 2009, tele townhall, 6,200 people on the call (follow up questions taken and answers provided in the paper on 9/30) (Weckselblatt, 8/28/2009 – I listened in and reported on this also)

August 31, 2009, Perkasie, meeting of business leaders and residents, 2 hours, 80 people in attendance (Debree 9/01/09. Ciavaglia, 9/02/2009))

September 1, 2009, Grundy Towers, Bristol retirement community, 20 people (Ciavaglia, 9/02,2009)

September 12, 2009, Lower Bucks Senior Activity Center in Bristol (Wagh, 9/13/2009)

September 12, 2009, Philadelphia to a group of veterans (Wagh, 9/13/2009)

September 12, 2009, Quakertown meeting with seniors (Wagh, 9/13/2009)

September 16, 2009, tele townhall, 9,000 people on the call (Ciavaglia 9/09, Weckselblatt, 9/17/2009; I wrote about this call also)

September 18, 2009 meeting of the Regional Biotechnology Council in Buckingham (debree 9/20/2009)

September 18, 2009, private home in Doylestown with small business owners (Debree, 9/20/2009)

October 12, 2009, BuxMont Unitarian Universalist Fellowship in Warrington, 100 people (Portnoy, 10/13/2009

October 13, 2009, Central Bucks Chamber of Commerce breakfast

Sources

Anastasi, John, “Health care plan can help small business,” Bucks County Courier Times 8/14/2009)

Ciavaglina, Jo, “Murphy tries to dispel health reform myths,” Bucks County Courier Times 8/28/2009

Ciavaglia, Jo, “Reform meetings public,” Bucks County Courier Times 9/02/2009

Debree, Crissa Shoemaker, “Health costs crippling,” 9/20/2009

Debree, Chrissa Shoemaker, “Murphy continues pitching health insurance reform,” Intelligencer 9/01/2009

Kall, Rob, “Impressed by Murphy’s answers but more questions need to be resolved,” Bucks County Courier Times 8/28/2009

“Murphy’s answers on health care reform,” Bucks County Courier times 9/30/2009

Portnoy, Jenna, “Interfaith service focuses on health care debate,” 10/13/2009

Vineberg, Andy, “Murphy hears it from both sides of the issue,” Bucks County Courier Times (8/02.2009)

Wagh, Manasee, “Seniors want bill passed, “ Bucks County Courier Times 9/13/2009

Weckselblatt, Gary, “Health care, fiscal responsibility is possible,” bucks County courier Times 10/14/2009

Weckselblatt, Gary, “Murphy takes fight to tele-town hall,” Bucks County Courier Times 8/28/2009

Weckselblatt, Gary, “Murphy: Reform just a ‘tweak’,” 9/17/2009

More Montco Fun

Check out the latest Montco whackiness from "More talks, more sniping from Montco commissioners," by John P. Martin in today's Inky:

"You're a sick bastard," Matthews sneered. "I'm not some hyena up here making things up."

Castor shot back: "You wouldn't know the truth if it jumped up and bit you in the bottom." Then he renewed his claim that Matthews had improperly recorded a campaign commercial in his county office.

Bruce Castor and Jim Matthews are two of the three elected county commissioners. Their terms are up next year. Something to think about.

Life Insurance Increasingly Perk of the Wealthy

from Monday's Wall Street Journal "Shift to wealthier clientele puts life insurers in a bind," by Mark Maremont and Leslie Scism:

A few sentences from the article

The life-insurance industry has enjoyed beneficial tax treatment for its products for nearly a century. Whenever Congress tried to change that, insurers always had a mantra at the ready: We protect widows and orphans

later

Instead, statistics show, an increasing portion of insurers' business consists of selling large policies to wealthier Americans, often as part of complex estate-tax plans.

Might be time to review that beneficial tax treatment.

Notes from Bryan Lentz and Pat Meehan Debate (9/22)

It doesn't sound like there will be any other debates between the contenders for the open 7th congressional district seat. I made a point of watching and taping their recent debate on PCN and typed up rough notes.

Some of the remarks were difficult to catch. The sound quality was not the best and some comments, especially those of Mr. Meehan, were a little convoluted at times.

This is not intended as a transcription. I encourage the voters in the 7th district to watch the debate if possible (it is about 75 minutes long). PA2010 has posted some video clips here -- if you don't want to watch all of it, catch the closing statements. As always I apologize in advance for any errors or misconceptions.

I didn't set the tape quite right and so missed the first few minutes where the rules are set.

The debate was originally held on Sept 22nd.

Moderator: Matthew Handel, JCRC and Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia

Introductions

Republican Pat Meehan. first elected as District Attorney in 1995, he tried the DuPont murder trial and the Aimee Willard murder. In 2001 he was sworn in as US Attorney, protect region from terrorism, prevent crime, fraud and abuse. Health care fraud cases. corrupt public officials in Philly.

Democrat Bryan Lent, 2 term state rep. 4th generation Army veteran, graduate of Valley Forge Military Academy, served in the 82nd airborne served in Iraq, Bosnia and the Sinai. Between deployments he served in the Philadelphia District Attorney’s office. In office he supported [missed a few things] and education funding.

opening statements

PM: thanks. Talk about important issues to 7th cong district, particularly to the Jewish community, peace and prosperity in the Middle East. As US Attorney began job 7 days after 9/11 see impact of terrorism and what it can do to sense of safety and security to nation, an experience Israelis have lived under for generations. First and foremost Iran and nuclear Iran and impact on peace and prosperity in entire region. Must not allow that to take place. Second, an experience I had sitting at top of Masada this summer when I visited Israel. Think back some 2k years ago. those trapped on a hilltop concerned about a siege. 2k years later same kind of mentality. Never again true today regarding nuclear Iran and other nations that deny Israel’s right to exist. Need complete agreement of Israel’s right to exist. America’s role needs to continue to be paramount, in Mid East. capacity we have with our America economy to be able to support for us to serve from a position of strength. Going through a remarkably challenging economic times, must focus on real opportunity to create jobs and prosper and let us continue to take leadership role

BL: thanks. Our country faces difficult challenges, record deficit, 2 wars, struggling economy. I want to go to Congress to confront those challenges while maintaining our commitments as a country, to seniors, middle class and allies around the world. Unfortunately in our politics today there is a move to a radical right wing, toward abandonment, meet challenge of debt by abandoning seniors and allies like Israel. Promote economic policies that have wiped out our middle class. I’ll go to DC not to meet an agenda but to solve problems. As a paratrooper do a job well and get results.

q1: Israel and Palestinian Authority recently begun negotiations, settlement moratorium. what is US role in negotiations?

BL: Served in Middle East in 1987 as a peacekeeper in Sinai, keeping peace set at Camp David. The way we get to peace is not putting preconditions on Israel. let Israel come to the table without preconditions.

PM; We cannot impose preconditions on Israel. We appreciate that right now the negotiations with Palestinians are captured by the inability of [Abbas? Hammas?] to even represent on the front end that he can control those [missed this] 2 state solution is objective to be working towards but security of Israel must be guaranteed.

q2: as a follow up what actions would your personally take as a congressmen

PM: deal with influence of Iran. The greatest concern I have is their capacity to continue to act as an agent of terrorism. aggression throughout entire Middle East. We have to rein in threat from Iran. Begins with their potential to be able to secure nuclear weapons. Our role is calling for negotiations. Cannot have preconditions. Take a leadership role in assuring Israel is free to act in its best interests

BL: one of the keys to peace in Middle East is a strong Israel. I would reject argument that we end foreign aid. Israel must be able to defend itself. Advocate for foreign aid, essential for Israel. Against unilateral condemnation against Israel. Israel must be able to come to the table unencumbered.

q3: Iran, Obama signed legislation economic sanctions against Iran. UN security council also sanctions. but Iran continues to enrich uranium. What do you see as the role of congress?

PM: We have to stand and speak with unified voice as Americans on behalf of Israel and peace in Middle East. Some of Obama's commentary sends mixed signals. Tried various approaches to deal with Iran. Sanctions. Looking to tighten them. Deal with ability of Iran to project itself into Iran. Opportunities to allow nascent opportunities to Ahmadinejad after stolen elections. return to kind of govt that would respect world order. lost that when the president recognized Islamic Committee of Iran. what we need to be doing is to assure that if sanctions don't work we stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel. Assure that nuclear threat does not pose threat to Israel.

BL: When Pat says there was an opportunity to return to govt. The last govt was the Shah, a brutal dictator. His actions that led to revolutions and govt we had today. Ahmadinejad elected, illegally but elected. We invaded Iraq, mistake, Blunder. Led to removal of only counterbalance of Iran. strengthened hand of extremists in Iran. Led to more instability. nuclear Iran unacceptable. We must pursue sanctions and if they aren't effective see what we can do to improve them. US will not tolerate an Iran with nuclear weapons.

q4: Homeland security, threats since 9/11. Some homeland security funds made available to nonprofits including some Jewish non-profits. Role for govt in this, funds?

BL: resources whether grants or other resources devoted to where threat is. There is a heightened threat again Jewish groups. Help with defense of that. advocate for that in Congress.

PM; As US Attorney helped create joint task force. aware of scope of threats, global perspective, threats came here within US, Islamic factions, skinheads, growing threat, it can be appropriate in certain circumstances, groups given support to allow them to do some kind of security, cameras, and such to protect themselves.

q5: economy, further stimulus spending, nonprofits in Jewish community

PM: not in support of further stimulus spending, spent already, and unemployment went up to near 10%. we have invested money in our public sector to the point where we have 65000 more public sector employees where 8M private sector employees laid off. For US to be able to be supportive of entities like you mentioned that function, what will let us get our economy started again. Not more stimulus spending or borrowing that will put on backs of our children trillions and trillions of dollars of debt. Allow those capable of investing in business, create environment to let people create real jobs

BL: if I could have written stimulus or had input would have liked to see more investment in infrastructure, mass transit, more done about that because that is key to Delco having vibrant economy. what would Pat have done. Part of that stimulus was aid to states that would have let Upper Darby increase spending to bring them up to level of wealthier school districts. Pat says he would have voted against that, aid to schools districts. What about hospitals that were able to do things because of stimulus. I go to trains stations every morning. seems like very third person works in health care. When I look at stimulus I look at how that will affect people of the 7th congressional district not people in boardroom.

PM: Impact of that spending is this incredible debt. Spending largely borrowed. he supported billions of dollars in new spending. billions of dollars held in reserve by school districts. there needs o be some level of cushion but shouldn't borrow when sitting on reserves

BL: pat is campaigning with a state rep candidate who is president of the Upper Darby school board. You should talk with her about that and how she has raised prop taxes. I voted to increase spending in education to make sure Upper Darby and other schools had adequate finding. Our economy will never be vibrant if we don’t have good schools. stimulus not sole cause of debt. 2 wars that we didn't pay for, prescription drug program under Bush that we didn't pay for.

q6: congressional spending and growing deficit, what would you cut?

BL; foreign aid fraction of budget. Israel receives $30 mil over 10 years, but we spend $100 mil each year on Afghanistan. small price to pay in Israel. foreign aid lets us avoid sending soldiers to fight. Debt is a real problem. Pat and tea party want to fix debt by privatizing medicare which ends medicare, privatizing social security which ends social security. Pat had breakfast event with Eric Cantor, leader in privatizing social security. Fix debt by making tough choices, look at defense for spending, trillions to corporations. Don’t solve debt problem by giving tax cuts to people who make millions of dollars.

PM: Be honest in debate. BL suggested positions I have taken that I have not taken. He had tv ad up that has been labeled misleading. I have never advocated privatizing social security. We must be honest in dialog. The best way for us to deal with deficit is to create sustained and growing economy. Generate tax revenues that will do the most to bring back the dollars that since the beginning of the downturn in economy biggest problem is loss of tax expenditures in addition to stimulus spending. Create economic environment that will let us grow our way out of problem. Tough decision make in bipartisan manner. Problems. need to control costs of health care. We need genuine competition. control health care costs.

BL: Pat left out most significant contributor to debt. It is TARP passed by Bush with support of [John] Boehner. bailout of Wall St. commercial is true. You do want to extend tax cuts for people who make millions of dollars without making spending cuts you will grow debt. if you want to work in a bipartisan fashion to cut budget. how about voting to pass small business spending act. Pat opposed it.

q7: If elected what policies would you pass on taxes

PM: I have spoken out about in support of idea of not allowing Democrats to raise taxes across the board as would happen if tax cuts expire. BL talks about this having no impact on deficit. Of the $4 trillion that would be generated by this new taxes. so the fact of the matter is we do not want to be raising taxes at this time on anybody. That’s the kind of thing that would put us back into a negative situation. 35 Democrats wrote a letter to Nancy Pelosi about impact of raising taxes at this time. funding of small business -- hit hard by taxes. subchapter S corporations would be at risk.

BL: every economist has said there is a difference in extending tax cuts for those who earn under $250K, of those who earn over $250K over 80% earn more than $1 million. They tend to save if earn more than million. if make less than 250K you spend it, put it back into the economy. gets economy going. tax cuts for wealthy doesn't do that. also an impact on economy. no impact on economy for over 1 million. If you are blessed with wealth you need to do more. small business lending act. number 1 issues ,need access to capitol. that act would have made credit available to small businesses and cut their taxes.

PM: small business lending act. my concern including the fact that what they were trying to do is infuse capital from fed into local banks, influence what lending was done at local level. next step to where determination is made on ideological bases on what loans ought to be made. banks are flush and have more capital than ever before but not lending in uncertain economy.

BL: Pat describes what bill is trying to do. Our local business need capital. he would have govt be a bystander and watch business suffer. govt can do something. we aren't spending that money, we’re making loans. how can be you against that unless adhering to far right and boardroom not people. lets do something lets not oppose everything.

q8: tax policy. president proposes limit on charitable deductions on top tax brackets. worry about local giving to charities

BL: when top bracket goes back to 39% charitable deductions remains at 35%. to pay for expansion of health care. something the Jewish Federation believes in. example of paying for things we are trying to do as a country. some additional pressure on people trying to make charitable donations.

PM: hidden taxes put in place by Pelosi health care. talking about creating a disincentive when nonprofits increasingly challenged to deliver social services. even those in the arts. a time when we want to create policies to encourage those who are wealthy. need some small turnback on the donations they can make. reducing the amount they can make by raising tax rates and lowering rate they can get back. health care bill we haven’t figured out how to pay for.

q9: health care reform. what legislation would you support and what measures do you want to see

PM: I will support vote for repeal of current health care bill. replace with something to work to control health care costs. There was no debate, a problem of one party rule. Pelosi fashioned bill in midnight hours, said pass first and then read. will cost more than promised. will cause regulation. all unknown quantities. there are real opportunities to hold down cost of health care, competition across state lines. compel health insurance companies not reward them with franchise. create competition that will drive down costs. create pooling for small businesses. allow them to compete. tort reform. BL had come out against. saving in systems so no defensive medicine.

BL: PM, every job he’s ever gotten is as a result of one party rule is now against one party rule. second, if you're going to congress and your first mission is to repeal a bill that will give insurance to sick people, discriminate again children who are sick, then I don't want you to be my congressman. Pat has on his website or did, that his first three priorities were end discrimination against pre-existing conditions, do away with cap on expenses and let adult children stay on their parents’ policy. those are in the current bill. families went bankrupt after paying for insurance because family member got sick. I disagree with repeal. don't return it to the insurance companies. we do need to do more on costs. we need to reduce cost of care. reform system. don't repeal a law that is providing a benefit to people you want to represent.

PM: absolutely I' was in support of common sense things that people were in favor of that weren’t part of bill. creation of bill whose costs are going to increase above what was promised.

BL: he mentioned pooling. that is in bill with the health care exchanges. it isn't perfect but it has a lot to do in cost containment. you can't campaign on being against discrimination on pre-existing conditions and then be in favor of letting insurance companies run it again.

q10: lowering health costs, how ?

BL: one of the untold stories of health care debate are many pilot programs in legislation. deliver quality care more cheaply, remove redundancies, remove unnecessary testing. there are ways. There are two systems in Texas and one delivers care for a fraction of what the other one costs. We need to replicate that through incentives. Look at Geisinger, Cleveland Clinic or Mayo.

PM: never included in bill. things that generate real savings, competition. I saw this as a prosecutor, dealing with things like prescription drugs. tremendous dollars when they were able to represent both sides of negotiations, they represented both the govt and health care systems. lack of ability to see what they were doing with negotiations. what were are able to do with prosecutions is to see what is going on. see what competition could do.

BL: there is competition in state exchanges. originally a Republican idea, to see that people had choices, including basic packages, see what is offered. agree that you should be able to buy across state lines.

q11: balance budget, what would you cut?

PM: look at those dollars currently in unspent stimulus dollars. TARP funds not expended. work on performance based budgeting in govt agencies. making them each year produce dollars spent appropriately and effectively. look across the board at all expenditures. start again and return genuine efforts at controlling costs of health care.

BL: look at everything. 76% of annual budget is entitlements and national defense. you could cut everything else there are 2 areas growing and contributing to the debt. need to protect entitlements. medical care for seniors and greatest poverty program we have ever seen, social security, should be preserved. invest in education system. if we don't have an educated workforce or good transportation system we won't have a prosperous economy. He should have a more specific answer if deficit is his first priority. We need to cut defense. You can't be serious about debt and deficit reduction if you don't cut defense. I have experience doing it. last budget I voted for cuts in 31 of 35 budget lines. not because we wanted to but because we had to.

PM: talking about cutting taxes from a guy who voted for a budget that was $1 million more than year before. Republican refusal to pass compelled them to cut. I worked on the ability to analyze by making presentations for base realignment and closure committee. doing it by a basis of genuine competition and what stood on merits. performance based budgeting.

BL: which of your taxes increased and did so dramatically?. property taxes -- brought to you by Delco GOP. brought to you by his running mate.. I did my job in Harrisburg and will do it in Congress

PM: Republican budget helped education and still cut costs. he's picking and choosing. property taxes, we should draw down school district reserves before raising prop taxes

BL: hope you will deliver message to Republicans that control county govt and school districts. those reserves held to pay for increases in pensions.

[exchange between candidates over state budget. BL asks if PM would have supported increased to education funding. PM would have supported budget that would have held line on spending]

q12: defense spending: barney frank 25% cut in military budget

BL: flat cuts are a way to avoid difficult decisions. I know what works in field for our soldiers, what programs are effective. lets have that debate line by line. significant reduction in defense. support what Secretary of Defense Gates is doing. we can’t afford any longer to buy every program offered

PM: great rhetoric why wasn't that done in Harrisburg [BL: we don't have an army in Harrisburg]. where was he when a large budget was introduced. the rhetoric doesn't match what he did. he didn't change things in Harrisburg he won't change things in Congress

BL: in PA we have to pass balanced budget. my job as a legislator is to have priorities. Education is a priority. who raised your taxes recently. Republicans in Delco, Republican controlled school districts. Those tax increases would be greater without help from state. have voted to keep and cut good programs. another local tax controlled by Republican, largest county govt in pa

PM: rhetoric doesn't match the actions. only done when Republicans in legislature compelled those decisions to be made. yes he voted but only after pulled there kicking and screaming.

q13: energy dependence

PM: we have to make a real commitment to allow our energy policy to include all resources at our disposal., include nuclear energy, gas in PA, that would allow us to have energy generated from own region. must be scrupulous about it being safe. must investigate oil from off our coast. also look at wind and solar. not let govt tell you what to do but tax incentives for most efficient on table and let market decide. don't rely on foreign nations.

BL: its not that we have a bad energy policy. we have no energy policy. threat to economy, natural security. when our soldiers fired upon in Iraq and Afghanistan the money comes from oil money, from Saudi Arabia and Iran. need to get off oil addiction, off addiction to foreign fuels, 60% of Iran's gdp is oil. jobs -- China and Europe creating thousand of jobs in new energy. we can put electricians to work here putting solar panels in. need to get away from hundreds of years of bad policy. I'll be a leader for that in Washington just as I’ve been a leader for that in Harrisburg.

closing statements:

BL: thanks. there's a real difference between PM and me. I've been a legislator for 4 years he's been a politician for 30. my first job out of college as a paratrooper. whoever is elected has to make tough choices, speak truth to constituents. you cannot cut taxes for millionaires and reduce deficit. cannot encourage shipment of jobs overseas. must invest in infrastructure. you cannot do this if you promise tax cuts to rich people and corporations. Independence Hall tea party has endorsed two people within 15 miles of this podium. Pat and Christine O’Donnell. Pat running with endorsement of tea party. if he had a chance to vote for aid to states, aid for school districts, he would have voted no. He chose the tea party and ideology over constituents. he would have voted no on closing Florida loophole. Pat will go with ideology and rhetoric over real needs. would have voted no on small business act. if you send me to DC I'll standup for you. fight for real solutions.

PM: thanks. my opponent continues to characterize what he says rather than what I stand for. he was a prosecutor now says he thinks that is purely a political position. I was a District Attorney for 14 years. take issues that affect people and work with others. work I did as US Attorney. work with people of both parties. work on issues like violence in urban issues. worked with Democrat mayors, look at solutions that didn't care about partisan activity. issues we face are real. people who are out of work. sense of uncertainty about future. lost sense of confidence in future of this country. go back to basics. develop vibrant economy based on principles of free enterprise. He's wrapped himself in policies Nancy Pelosi has been promoting, public option, cap and trade, billions in new spending. things that have put us in situation we are in. need to have genuine dialog. it will not happen unless there is a Republican voice in current Congress.

Fall 2010 White House Interns from PA

from the inbox:

The White House Internship Program announced today the incoming participants for the fall 2010 session. The program’s mission is to make the White House accessible to future leaders all around the nation and cultivate and prepare those devoted to public service for future leadership opportunities.



A White House Internship provides a unique opportunity to gain valuable professional experience and build leadership skills. Interns work in one of several White House departments, including the Office of Cabinet Affairs, the Office of the Chief of Staff, the Office of Scheduling and Advance, the Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs, the Office of Health Reform, the Office of Legislative Affairs, the Office of Management and Administration, the Office of White House Counsel, the Office of Political Affairs, the Office of Energy and Climate Change, the National Economic Council, the Office of Presidential Correspondence, the Office of Presidential Personnel, the Communications Department, the Domestic Policy Council, the Office of the First Lady, and the Office of the Vice President.

Additional information about the White House Internship Program is available here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/internships/. The application for the Spring 2011 program is now on the website, and the deadline is October 10, 2010.

Interns with Pennsylvania hometowns or schools are:

Emily Berret. Hometown: Sinking Spring, PA; Alvernia University, PA.
Patrick Cunnane. Hometown: Jenkintown, PA; University of Miami, FL
Kyle Gracey. Hometown: Johnstown, PA; University of Chicago, IL.
Catherine Hendricks. Hometown: Alexandria, VA; Penn State University, PA.
Timothy Hoffman. Hometown: Greenwood Village, CO; Bucknell University, PA
Daniel Mullen. Hometown: Pittsburg, PA; University of Colorado at Boulder, CO.

Early Retiree Reinsurance Program in PA Update

from the inbox:

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) today announced additional employers and unions accepted into the Early Retiree Reinsurance Program, including a number of applicants in Pennsylvania. Nearly 1,000 large and small businesses, state and local governments, educational institutions, non-profit organizations, and unions have been accepted into the program and will begin to receive reimbursements for their early retirees’ medical claims this fall. The approvals announced today bring the total number of approvals to nearly 3,000 organizations. HHS announced the first round of nearly 2,000 approvals in August.

“I am incredibly pleased to see so many employers embrace this important new program to maintain coverage for people who often have a difficult time finding affordable coverage," said HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “The Affordable Care Act helps large and small businesses to provide security to early retirees and their families.”

Secretary Sebelius made the announcement from the Mine Safety Appliances Company (MSA) manufacturing plant in Cranberry Township, Pennsylvania – one of the now nearly 3,000 organizations participating in the Early Retiree Reinsurance Program.

Created by the Affordable Care Act as another bridge to the new health insurance Exchanges in 2014, the Early Retiree Reinsurance Program provides $5 billion in financial assistance to employers and unions to help them maintain coverage for early retirees ages 55 and older who are not yet eligible for Medicare. Businesses and other employers and unions that are accepted into the program will receive reimbursement for medical claims of their early retirees and their spouses, surviving spouses, and dependents. Savings may be used to reduce employer or union health care costs, provide premium or out-of-pocket relief to workers, retirees, and their families, or both. The program ends on January 1, 2014, when the State-based health insurance Exchanges will be up and running.

HHS’ Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight has approved nearly 3,000 employer and union plans, representing a broad range of employers and unions from all 50 States and the District of Columbia, for participation in the Early Retiree Reinsurance Program, with more applications being reviewed every day.

In Pennsylvania, 165 organizations have been approved to date. A full list is available online:

http://www.healthcare.gov/law/provisions/retirement/states/pa.html

Debate for 8th Congressional District at Shir Ami

8th congressional district debate between Mike Fitzpatrick and Patrick Murphy
Shir Ami Synagogue
October 3, 2010

Usually I put personal comments at the end of event notes. but since this is so long I’ll put them at the front. The crowd was rowdy and had to be repeatedly admonished by the moderator to quiet down. In places the audience noise was sufficiently loud that I couldn’t clearly hear something. In those cases a note about that is missing or what I thought I heard is in brackets – those are blogger’s notes.

Standard disclaimer: These are rough notes taken by hand. It is not intended as a full transcription and while an attempt is made at accuracy, I cannot guarantee it. I apologize in advance for any errors or misconceptions.

A PCN camera was there so hopefully in the near future this will be broadcast on PCN and perhaps put on their website so voters can see and hear for themselves what was said.

President of the synagogue’s men’s club welcomes everyone and thanks those who helped plan and arrange the event.

Moderator will be Jody Bender, who is on the board of the Philadelphia League of Women Voters, but does not live in the 8th district.

The time keeper is Judy Clark of the Bucks County chapter of the LWV.

She introduces the candidates and asks the audience to behave in a civil manner.
Congressman Patrick Murphy is an Iraq War veteran and law professor who has represented the district since 2006.

Mike Fitzpatrick is a former Bucks Commissioner and former congressman.

The LWV is a non-partisan group and does not endorse candidates.

Candidates will give opening and closing statements (order decided by a coin toss). They will alternate answering questions and then each have a chance to rebut. [There are set times for this but I missed what they were.]

Opening statements.

MF: Thanks and greetings. Elections are about choices. PM believes that we can spend our way to prosperity and borrow our way to [missed word]. [something about the stimulus.]

PM: Thanks and greetings. I served our country in uniform and proud to serve as a congressman. I brought 3,000 jobs to the district. My opponent had his chance. MF gave his vote to the Bush administration and Wall St.

Q1: If elected what would your top 3 priorities be?

PM: jobs, jobs, and jobs. I have focused on that. We need to get back to making things, not just a service economy. [References companies such as Lockheed, a company that makes flight simulators and another in green energy. I did not catch their names.] We cannot turn back to outsourcing. We need to do more because people are hurting.

MF: jobs. When PM took office unemployment was at 4.65, it is now almost 10%. Lockheed came when I was a county commissioner. Must have experience. Jobs are created by businessmen not DC politicians.

PM: You can't complain about unemployment when you voted to outsource jobs.

MF: Jobs are the issue, balancing the budget, paying off the debt -- it is a moral imperative.

Q2: Programs you support or oppose in reference to jobs

MF: Companies need two things: certainty regarding tax rates and certainty regarding health insurance costs. The health care reform bill is a jobs killer. Congress adjourned without addressing tax rates.

PM: We need to create things in America. When MF had the chance, he looked people in the eye and said he wouldn't support CAFTA then flipped and voted for it. Hurts our middle class families.

MF: Trade deficits since CAFTA went from trade deficits to trade surplus. There is too much regulation, litigation and taxation.

PM: [did not catch name] worked at Jones New York. CAFTA lost those jobs. Tax incentives and ???? [MF interrupts.]

Q3: value of homes falling

PM: People are hurting. I want to work with people to do things like extending a 20 year mortgage to 30 years. Wall St. playing Russian roulette with housing. When MF was in congress he was on the committee to oversee Wall St. We need regulation.

MF: The Community Reinvestment Act caused some problems, forced banks to make loans they knew were bad loans. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. PM in favor of bill supported by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. left Fannie and Freddie out. Get gov't out of the way.

PM: When you hear "get out of the way" it means let Wall St. get away with murder.

MF: [cedes 30 second response time]

Q4: globalization -- jobs outsourced

MF: We do need to recognize that we live in a global economy. We don't compete with NJ and MD but with India and the Far East. Should the federal govt try to bring jobs back? Private industries have to bring them back. Corporate tax and regulation and litigation are preventing jobs from coming back.

PM: We need to close tax loopholes that incentivize outsourcing. At old steel mill plant there are now green energy companies. solar panel manufacturers and wind turbines company. large solar panel area. wind energy. [starts Wayne Gretzky story but time runs out.]

MF: In favor of incentives but want to avoid having feds incentivize some industries over others. Want to avoid having foreign companies coming here on tax free land and then laying off American workers.

PM: When I played hockey I remember hearing that Wayne Gretzky was a great player because he figured out where the puck was going to be and went there. We need to anticipate what the new jobs will be.

Q5: national debt

PM: I cosponsored a bill to amend the Constitution to require a balanced budget. I voted against two govt budgets. I worked with Republican congressmen to cut Medicare abuse. Worked with a Republican congressman to pass the improper payments act. It won't solve all our problems but help. When MF in Congress he did not cosponser any bill to cut spending.

MF: When I was in Congress the budget deficit was going down not up. The annual deficit has gone up since PM has been in Congress.

PM: MF had no problem spending on the Iraq War. Never voted against a budget. I fell like the clean up crew after an Eagles game.

MF: [cedes 30 second response time.]

Q6: extend tax cuts and estate tax?

MF: I am opposed to the federal estate tax. Congress failed to act to extend the end of the estate tax so at the stroke of midnight it will go from 0 to 55%. Job crushing taxes. I would extend all tax cuts.

PM: Estate tax -- we need to protect family farms. Extend tax cuts for 98% of the people, but not for millionaires during a time of war. MF wants to fight for Paris Hilton's tax breaks. You can't lower the deficit and lower taxes.

MF: Unemployment is at 9.6% because they want to faise taxes on job creators. PM never took on the party leadership over family farms. I was the 2nd most independent congressman. He doesn't fight his leadership.

PM: MF continues to fight for Paris Hilton's [interruptions, couldn't hear]

Q7: social security

PM: I don't want to privatize it. MF want to privatize. Stop raiding trust fund and make sure it is solvent.

MF: We're all for protecting seniors and social security. This was the first time in 20 years there was no cost of living increase in social security. I'm against privatizing social security. Need to get people back to work.

PM: MF quoted in the local paper 4 times saying he was in favor of privatizing social security. We do need to grow the economy but not by outsourcing jobs.

MF: Those jobs were lost under your watch. Rising tide lifts all ships. Shore up entitlement programs. Obamacare -- we have to pay for it.

Q8: Health care reform

MF: I am opposed to it and said so in March. PM refused to have face to face townhall meetings. He said it would guarantee four things: deficit neutral, keep your policy if you like it, rates won't rise [missed 4th thing]. They are all wrong. I'm against the bill. We need to allow people to purchase health care across state lines. We need real reform.

PM: It won't add to the deficit. In the paper today. Easiest thing to do in DC is to say no. I took an oath to represent all in the 8th district, not just Democrats. MF wants to go back to discriminating on the basis of pre-existing conditions, against allowing parents to keep children on their policy until age 26, against closing donut hole.

MF: Giving $250.00 to seniors vs. trillions of dollars in debt to our grandchildren. We need to get back tot he federal government only creating programs to end problems.

PM: The Clinton years created jobs, the Bush years lost jobs. Bush allowed pay go, which means you pay as you go, to expire. He talks about it. I've done it.

Q9: cost of health care reform

PM: Medicare is now strengthened under hcr and closes donut hole. MF wants to reopen it. CEOS in the paper say bill is deficit neutral.

MF: Only one way to pay for it -- steal $550 million from Medicare and then start raising taxes, including a real estate tax. Nothing in the bill will make us healthier or reduce costs.

PM: This election is a choice. Go back to discriminating based on pre-existing conditions, and a donut hole for seniors that costs them $4,000 per year for prescriptions. I support the new bill.

MF: I am for covering pre-existing conditions. We need to take health insurance portable. Need health care liability reform. Doctors practice defensive medicine.

Q10: Supreme Court's Citizens United decision

MF: People who live in the district should have more say. I suggest we cap campaign spending on this race at $1 million each. He said no. He will spend millions from out of state on tv ads. Congress passed a bill on campaign spending that left out trade unions.

PM: I thought the Supreme Court decision was a travesty. Corporations are not people. MF spent millions in 2006 attacking my military record. People may not agree with me but when I say something, that's my word and my bond.

MF: Still nothing on my statement on spending only a million. Should unions be included?

PM: I still want you to give back CAFTA money.

Q11: open govt

PM: Transparency in political campaigns and govt spending. There is a new rule on earmarks. I have to sign an affadavit that I don't have any financial interests in companies. The first bill MF signed was to help Tom DeLay.

MF: Earmarks doubled from this year to last year. Disclosure of spending and earmark. Commend PM on that. PM only PA congressional that refused to disclose earmarks when requested the year before the new rule passed.

PM: MF doesn't want to talk about Tom DeLay.

[someone leaves shouting]

MF: Absolutely in favor of transparency. No scandal in the county when I was a commissioner. Obama bringing in lobbyists in the back door.

PM: I called on Charlie Rangel to resign from Congress. Challenged my own party.

Q12: escalating partisanship

MF: To change the direction and tenor of Congress we need to change the people in Congress. PM talks about DeLay and Rangel. The problem is that people are there too long. We need term limits. If elected I will promise to serve three terms and no more.

PM. My wife is a Republican. People are hungry for leadership. I've done that in Congress for 3.5 years. I've partnered with Republicans on improper payments act, Scrap the Map, and other legislation.

MF: Talk is cheap. He voted with party leadership over 90% of the time. I was the second most independent member of Congress.

PM: When my party is right I vote with them. When they're wrong I vote against them. I was the only Democrat to vote against the lawsuit over the Arizona immigration legislation.

Q13: What should the fed govt do to improve education?

PM: I attended Archbishop [missed name] High School, Bucks County Community College and then a Catholic college, King's College. I taught at West Point. We need accountability in the classroom. We need to empower teachers. No Child Left Behind means teach to the test and leave the money behind.

MF: My wife is a high school science teacher. The role of the federal govt can be that of a leader, set standards and get out of the way. Let school boards make decisions on things like what to serve for lunch. Fully fund schools.

PM: Part of that is to make sure they have jobs when they graduate. Partner with Bucks County Community College for green jobs academy.

MF: I have two daughters in college. One graduated with a nursing degree. We used to have a nursing shortage now hospitals are laying them off. The unemployment rate for recent graduates is nearly 50%.

Q14: BP, off shore drilling, marcellus shale

MF: energy independence is important and needs discussion. We need to identify energy sources and go after them. In favor of off shore drilling and drilling for natural gas and also nuclear energy. We need 100 new nuclear energy plants in [missed this number] years.

PM: We need to create energy in our country. Drill off shore and in marcellus shale responsibly. Also invest in wind, solar, geothermal and nuclear. When the Republicans had the presidency, House and the Senate, how many nuclear plants did they build? [zero?]. In the last 14 months we have 2.

MF: [cedes follow up]

Q15: Arizona immigration bill

PM: I support it but not racial profiling. I was the only Democrat to support what Arizona is doing. Why are immigrants coming here? Jobs. They are paid under the table. Passed e-verify. Put 20 more miles on the border fence. MF voted with Nancy Pelosi to create sanctuary cities.

MF: I support Arizona law Sb 1070. State has to do the feds job. Voted for identical law when in Congress. PM early back of Obama -- he needs to talk with him about immigration.

PM: People in Bucks County voted for Obama. DId put troops on border.

MF: [cedes follow up]

Q16: Mid-East conflict

MF: American needs to continue leadership. In favor of 2 state solution. Hamas Palestine does not recognize Israel [not sure I got this right]. Need to be careful and not create deadlines.

PM: Israel has the right to defend herself. Biggest threat is Iran. Ensured we had tough sanctions against Iran. First time in 10 years we got other countries on board. Must make sure Iran doesn’t get nuclear weapons.

MF: peace process. 2 state solution. Only so much we can ask of each side.

PM: Continue to work with Jewish leaders.

Q17: [missed this – possibly do we support using force to stop Iran from using nuclear weapons]

PM: Yes

MF: as a last option

PM: facilitation peace process.

MF: [cedes follow up]

Q18: War in Afghanistan.

MF: We’re there so we must win. Listen to the generals on the ground. They asked for surge. PM voted against it but it worked. Don’t provide deadlines.

PM: After 9/11 we diverted out attention to Iraq. Should pay attention to [Pakistan? Afghanistan? missed this]. MF never broke with party or president on that. Now they're saying its not enough.

MF: Truth is that I was one of the few congressmen to tell the president in 2006 that he was wrong on this. If we are there we should listen to the generals on the ground.

PM: Our heroes in harm's way in Afghanistan are doing their best. We have to support them.

Q19: Cost of military vs domestic spending

PM: There's good spending and bad spending. I stood with Defense Secretary Gates. Failed anyway. Part of good spending, give them the education, housing and VA facilities they need.

MF: There is wasteful spending all over the budget. Continue to spend on programs we would like to have but can't afford. Most important job of govt is to protect. Squeezed out by domestic spending and debt.

PM: I supported the largest increased in spending on veterans since [missed this]. His record -- cut, voted against soldiers getting a pay raise.

Q20: global climate change

MF: The jury is out on this. Should not pass national energy tax. We need to get back to basics. Reduce spending. Rolling spending back to pre-08 level. Do what Gov. Christie has done.

PM: When MF in Congress he supported climate change, and he co-sponsed that bill and was endorsed by Sierra Club. MF says climate science research has changed. It hasn't. He has flipped on many issues.

MF: The League of Conservation Voters endorsed me because of my environmental record. Fact is the science has changed. Opinion of scientists has changed.

PM: We are losing jobs to countries that are investing in green jobs.

Q21: This congressional race is in the national eye. Is it a referendum on Obama?

PM: People want to tie me to Obama, etc. I will tell you where I stand. Will continue to do that and fight for middle class.

MF: Maybe PM will identify jobs that went to Nicaragua. [PM interrupts him.] This will be a referendum on Obama.

PM: He's trying to reheat the same Bush policies. Thinks all of you have amnesia. We need to get people back to work.

MF: Voting 97.1% of the time with one administration shows zero independence.

Closing Statements

PM: Thanks. Contrast couldn't be clearer. We need to bring jobs back to Bucks County. If MF doesn't think people are hurting he doesn't get it. Let's make things here in Bucks County.

MF: People are hurting. Unemployment nearly 10%. PM things that is all because of my two years in Congress. PM won't do a commercial saying he supported Obama policies.

Moderator: Thanks.

Santarsiero on Drilling

Catching up, from last Wednesday's inbox:

State Rep. Steven J. Santarsiero, D-Bucks, today said the House has passed a plan to enact a drilling tax on oil and gas companies for the natural gas they extract from Pennsylvania's rich supply of Marcellus Shale natural gas reserves.

Santarsiero said the plan would ensure protection of Pennsylvania's rich natural resources by dedicating funds to help mitigate the effects of the gas drilling industry, including maintenance and upgrades for state lands, roads and other infrastructure.

Sixty percent of the revenue generated would go to environmental protection and local communities where the drilling is taking place, distributed as follows:

· 32 percent to the Environmental Stewardship Fund.

· 16 percent to the Local Government Services Fund.

· 1.6 percent to the Hazardous Sites Cleanup Fund.

· 2.4 percent to the Conservation District Fund.

· 1.6 percent to the Pennsylvania Game Commission.

· 1.4 percent to the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission.

· 1.6 percent to the Department of Public Welfare to provide cash and crisis grants to low-income households under the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program.

· 1.6 percent to the Oil and Gas Environmental Disaster Recovery Account.

· 0.8 percent to the Department of Environmental Protection for state dam removal, restoration and repair projects.

· 1 percent for the operation and administration of the Environmental Hearing Board.

This help for the environment is the reason why such well-respected environmental groups like the Sierra Club and Penn Future support this bill. Santarsiero added that, "the revenue generated that would go to the General Fund will also help us increase funding for the Department of Environmental Protection to help ensure that gas fracking process does not harm the environment."

Santarsiero said the plan would include a tax rate that gives a fair and appropriate benefit to Pennsylvania's taxpayers, and ensure that the highly profitable oil and gas drillers pay their fair share of taxes in Pennsylvania. More importantly, he said, the would plan strike a reasonable balance between providing adequate funding for Pennsylvania's very real environmental concerns and the budget deficits Pennsylvania could face over the next few years.

Santarsiero said contrary to assertions by some, the bill would not establish the highest drilling tax in the country. The rate under the bill is the same as in New Mexico (7.3 percent) and lower than the rate in Montana (7.5 percent). It is also lower than the effective rate in Wyoming (10.2 percent), when one considers that Wyoming also levies a property tax on gas reserves – something that Pennsylvania does not do.

"Pennsylvania is currently the only natural-gas producing state that does not tax big oil and big natural gas companies on the natural gas they extract from the ground," Santarsiero said. "A drilling tax would help us hold these companies accountable for their operations in Pennsylvania and provide money to our local communities that are being negatively impacted by this industry's activities.

"A drilling tax would also provide money for critical environmental groups to help ensure that this industry keeps the public safety and the environment as a top priority," he added.

Santarsiero said the plan would tax the natural gas extracted by these companies at a rate of 39 cents per 1,000 cubic feet severed at the wellhead. This rate would be adjusted annually by the New York Mercantile Exchange Henry Hub Index price, with a floor of 39 cents per 1,000 cubic feet.

In total, this plan would generate more than $300 million in tax revenues in 2011-12.

In addition to providing for environmental concerns as a result of the gas drilling industry, this plan also would put Pennsylvania's working families first by investing in job creation and job training strategies so Pennsylvania workers benefit from this growing industry.

Santarsiero said the plan includes a new Job Creation Tax Credit specific to the natural Gas industry, which would provide an incentive for these companies to hire Pennsylvania workers.

Pittsburgh Bank to Receive Funding

from the inbox:

Following through on a commitment to provide support to Main Street banks, thrifts, and credit unions that lend to small businesses and families in underserved communities, the U.S. Department of the Treasury today announced the completion of funding under its Community Development Capital Initiative (CDCI). Overall, that program has invested $570 million in 84 Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) in 26 states, the District of Columbia, and Guam. (A full state-by-state listing of institutions receiving CDCI investments is included below.)

On February 3, 2010, the Obama Administration announced the creation of the CDCI program under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). The CDCI program, which is closing today ahead of the October 3 expiration of TARP purchasing authority, invests lower-cost capital in Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs). CDFIs are institutions that target at least 60 percent of their lending and other economic development activities in areas underserved by traditional financial institutions.

“It’s a common misconception that TARP funds only went to large Wall Street firms, but the CDCI program is yet another example of how TARP is providing critical assistance to Main Street financial institutions,” said Herbert Allison, Treasury Assistant Secretary for Financial Stability. “In communities across our country, CDCI funding is helping to strengthen local financial institutions and deliver credit to small businesses and families.”

“Community development financial institutions have been at the forefront of the efforts to fight the economic recession in our nation’s low-income communities,” said Donna J. Gambrell, Director of Treasury’s Community Development Financial Institutions Fund. “At a time when many financial institutions have pulled back, CDFIs have actually increased their lending and investments in underserved communities. These CDCI investments will enable community banks, thrifts, and credit unions to spur economic development in the communities that have been hit hardest by the economic downturn.”

As part of the overall $570 million in CDCI investments made since the inception of that program, Treasury today completed a final round of CDCI investments, which provided $312 million in funds to 38 CDFIs.

CDCI investments are made at a dividend rate of 2 percent. To encourage repayment, while recognizing the unique circumstances facing CDFIs, the dividend rate under CDCI will increase to 9 percent after eight years.

There is one Pennsylvania bank on the list:

Hill District Federal Credit Union / Pittsburgh / $100,000

Lentz Introduces Florida Loophole Bill

from the inbox:

The House will consider a proposal offered by state Rep. Bryan R. Lentz that would prohibit an individual to carry a gun with an out-of-state permit if he or she was denied a gun permit in Pennsylvania.

Lentz, D-Delaware, will offer his legislation (H.B. 2536) as an amendment to a proposal known as the Castle Doctrine bill, which offers protections to homeowners who shoot intruders who enter their residence. The bill and amendment are scheduled to run Monday.

"Gun owners are rallying around the Castle Doctrine because they want the right to defend their family when an intruder enters their private home," Lentz said. "It gives them a sense of security against criminals. My bill does that too. It makes sure that people who are prone to violence don't abuse a technicality in the law to harm others. Furthermore, if we are going to expand a person's right to use lethal force on another human being, then we better make sure they should be carrying a weapon in the first place."

Lentz explained that current Pennsylvania law allows a person to carry a firearm if he or she possesses a valid license or permit issued by another state. That allows some Pennsylvania residents to legally carry a firearm in the Commonwealth even when they have been denied or revoked a license to carry by Pennsylvania authorities.

"People who have had their license revoked in Pennsylvania can go online and, without ever stepping a foot out of their home, apply for a gun permit in a state like Florida," Lentz said. "Law-abiding citizens don't circumvent the law like that. Dangerous criminals do. A law-abiding gun owner should understand that individuals who exploit the permit system for criminal intentions are a disservice to people who wish to carry for legal and legitimate reasons."

Lentz emphasized his proposal would not affect gun ownership rights or prevent people from having multiple out-of-state permits.

Lentz added that the legislature should pass his measure to help police retain control over the permit process and ensure that Pennsylvania residents who are granted a license to carry have met the standards of our state and not those of another state.

He said that a shooting earlier in September highlights the need for his legislation. Philadelphia Deputy Police Commissioner William Blackburn said Marquis Hill will be charged with murder for allegedly shooting 18-year-old Irving Santana 13 times. Lentz said Hill's Philadelphia gun permit was revoked in 2005 because he was charged with attempted murder, and subsequent to the revocation, he was even charged with assaulting a police officer. He explained he was still able obtain a Florida gun permit in 2009, even though he has no ties to that state.

MarcellusMoney

Check this out:

MarcellusMoney.org, a project of Common Cause PA and Conservation Voters of Pennsylvania, tracks the more than $3 million that the natural gas industry has spent on campaign contributions and $5 million spent on lobbying efforts in the Commonwealth.

Yesterday, by a vote of 104 to 94, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives voted in favor of SB 1155, a bill to establish a tax on drilling companies that extract gas from Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale. Though a victory for environmental protection, yesterday’s vote reveals just how insidious natural gas money has become.

The 104 who voted for the bill have taken an average of $824 from the natural gas industry, while the 94 legislators who voted against the bill took an average of $2,900 from the gas industry, or 3.5 times as much as those in favor of a severance tax. The vote split largely along party lines, with Democrats generally in favor, Republicans generally against. The vote count and accompanying data can be downloaded here: http://bit.ly/an3N18

A Note on SB 1399

from the inbox:

Today Pennsylvanians for Choice, a statewide coalition of pro-choice organizations, denounced proposed legislation that would severely restrict access to abortion care in Pennsylvania. Senate Bill 1399, introduced by Senator Don White (R-11) would ban private insurance plans sold in Pennsylvania’s state exchange, created under health care reform, from covering even medically necessary abortion procedures.

“Today, most private insurance plans cover abortion care,” said Susan Frietsche, Senior Staff Attorney at the Women’s Law Project. “Senator White’s proposal would leave women worse off than they were before health care reform began.” Under Senator White’s bill, no abortion plan that contracts with the state exchange would be permitted to cover abortion except in the narrowest circumstances.

With an estimated 80% of private insurance plans currently covering abortion procedures, coalition spokespeople said that a ban of this magnitude would have a devastating effect on Pennsylvania women.

"Aside from having some of the oldest and most stringent abortion laws in the nation, Pennsylvania, like every other state, is bound by the Nelson abortion provision to the federal health care law,” said Sari Stevens, Executive Director of the Harrisburg-based Planned Parenthood Pennsylvania Advocates. Under the Nelson abortion provision, any health insurance plan that contracts with the exchange is required to implement a complex system of segregation to ensure no federal funds are used for abortion coverage - including the collection of two separate payments from the beneficiary, one for abortion coverage and one for all other health care coverage.

“Poll after poll shows that Pennsylvanians are not interested in reopening the debate around abortion. I urge Pennsylvania lawmakers to follow the lead of their constituents and support measures to prevent unintended pregnancy in the first place,” added Stevens. The insurance exchanges, slated to be available for enrollment in 2014, will serve those who do not have access to employer-based health plans including the unemployed and small business employees.

The proposed ban would deny insurance plans participating in the exchange from covering abortion care except in cases where the pregnancy was caused by rape or incest, or where the life of the woman is in danger. Frietsche pointed out that “in the Medicaid context, Pennsylvania courts have already ruled that it’s unconstitutional to make rape survivors jump through the kind of insulting and burdensome hoops this bill would create.” The bill would require rape survivors to “personally” report the crime and identify the assailant, if known, within 72 hours in order for their health insurance to cover an abortion procedure.

“The White bill is a throwback to the days when society blamed rape victims for somehow being responsible for the violence that was done to them,” Frietsche commented. “Pennsylvania lawmakers really should have moved beyond these gender stereotypes by now.”

“Instead of denying Pennsylvania women access to fundamental reproductive health care services, politicians should be working to protect and advance women’s health,” concluded Rebecca Foley of the Philadelphia-based nonprofit WOMEN’S WAY. “This proposed ban will leave many Pennsylvania women without coverage for safe, legal, and critical care.”

Pennsylvanians for Choice is a coalition of pro-choice organizations and their allies whose mission is to protect and enhance reproductive health care for all Pennsylvanians. Member organizations include: the Women’s Law Project, Planned Parenthood Pennsylvania Advocates, the American Civil Liberties Union, WOMEN’S WAY, the Women’s Medical Fund, CHOICE, and Pennsylvania NOW, Inc.

Quick Look at the Women Who Would be First Lady

The candidates for governor have started to show up a lot in the media: commercials, newspaper articles, and all those ghastly blog posts (!). So we are learning about them. But what about the prospective first ladies? Who are the women behind the men?

Let’s take a quick look.

Shelly Onorato, wife of Democratic candidate Dan Onorato, is from Mountaintop, Luzerne County. She has a graduate degree in the health field and works part time as a dental hygienist and health care consultant. Mrs. Onorato has concentrated her energies on raising the couple’s three children.

Susan M. Corbett has played a much more public role. She worked at the Carnegie Institute, then the Carnegie Library. In 1993 she shifted to the Pittsburgh Arts and Lecture Series and in 1999 became director of the program. (This series was sometimes called the Three Rivers Lecture Series and the Drue Heinz Lectures) In 2005 she was named one of the top 50 creative forces in Pittsburgh. After her husband Tom was elected Attorney General of Pennsylvania in 2004 she looked for a job closer to Harrisburg and in 2006 joined the Gettysburg Foundation and is now a vice president for programming, membership and development.. According to their website (www.gettysburgfoundation.org), “The Gettysburg Foundation is a private, nonprofit educational organization working in partnership with the National Park Service to enhance the preservation and understanding of the heritage and lasting significance of Gettysburg.” Mrs. Corbett is also a trustee of the Carnegie Museum and was appointed by Gov. Rendell to the Pennsylvania Council on the Arts. In 2008 2007 her Gettysburg Foundation salary was $81,054. [blogger’s note: According to public documents her salary in 2009 was $117,865.]. Update: apologies -- I used the date of the source article's publication (2008) not the year of the data (2007).

Mrs. Onorato could probably continue to work part-time as a dental hygienist but Mrs. Corbett might run into some problems working as a fundraiser while serving as the state’s first lady, although I will confess a great deal of ignorance on the rules surrounding this.

Sources:

Onorato:

Infield, Tom, “Onorato reports his 2009 family income,” Philadelphia Inquirer April 9, 2010

McNulty, Timothy, “Chief executive candidate Onorato not known for backing off quietly little posing, lots of passion,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette 10/19/2003.

Corbett

Gettysburg Foundation (www.gettysburgfoundation.org)

Hoover, Bob, “Lecture series leader leaving,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette March 22, 2006.

James, Erin, “Following battlefield center’s cash,” Evening Sun, Sept. 17, 2008.

“The top 50 creative forces in Pittsburgh,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette June 5, 2005.

IssuesPA Re-launched

Our friends at the Pennsylvania Economy League have re-launched IssuesPA.org. According to the site:

In addition to original articles, issues scorecards, and dissemination of pertinent studies and reports, IssuesPA.org will identify the key issues and frame questions necessary for those elected in this cycle to address.