LyrArc Article Gist
Bond and derivative deals made between U.S. banks and Jefferson County in Alabama have resulted in steep losses and higher taxes to pay for the losses. Spencer Bachus represents Jefferson County in the U.S. Congress. He also received $7.1 million from financial companies, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. J.P. Morgan Chase which arranged the deal for Jefferson County, is also the largest contributor for the political campaign donations to Bachus.

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ cites several surveys showing Hillary Clinton's large lead among voters less than 35 years is declining. This is the reason WSJ says that the overall lead of Clinton among all voters has declined to about 2-4 points. In Michigan for example a Detroit Free Press survey showing a 24 point lead for Clinton declines to 7 points among voters under 35 years, and causes a overall 11 point lead to fall to 4 points. Some of the support has gone to third party candidate Gary Johnson. In the 2012 election president Obama won the votes of about 60% of voters under 30 years, an important part of Obama's coalition. Of the 66 million votes cast 22% were from voters under 30 years age. As a result First Lady Michelle Obama will campaign on a college campus in Virgina. Senator Bernie Sanders will also campaign to attract the younger voters that made his campaign so strong, and Elizabeth Warren will speak at two Ohio universities in coming days. Sanders will stress the importance of Clinton's proposal for debt free college and funding more programs with higher taxes on the wealthiest Americans, and ask young voters to look further than mere personality to what they can expect to improve the lives of students and young people. This is happening 6 weeks before the election. A look back at 2012 about 7 weeks prior to the election in Lyrarc shows Obama with a 6 point lead, but only even with Romney when it came to handling of the economy because of the long recession. This shows how each election presents its own different set of circumstances and challenges. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
By July 2013 only about 40% of the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation rules were completed, 60% of deadlines were missed, according to law firm Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP. A singular aspect of the Dodd-Frank legislation was that rule making was left to regulators in different agencies and open to lobbying by the financial industry. This has the effect of delaying the rule making until a consensus is reached, diluting some of the original intent as financial firms jockey for advantage, and making it voluminous in many cases because of the wording designed to achieve consensus and account for objections by various interests. Reform legislators such as Barney Frank openly said they had no interest in learning enough about the financial industry to do the rule making, and may have left an excessive amount of the rule making to regulators in the future. A consumer protection agency was established under the new law and derivatives are required to be traded on exchanges. The Volcker Rule to separate investment banking from deposit taking and a requirement that banks hold onto a portion of mortgage securities marketed are not completed. The S.E.C. has to write the rule on how much money brokerages must set aside for losses on swap trades. Another bubble in financial markets would leave the U.S. and European economies vulnerable to problems similiar to the global financial crisis of 2008, which is why the U.S. Federal Reserve, the Bank of England and the European regulatory authorites are requiring large banks to set aside more capital reserves. The S.E.C. under its new chief is also taking a more active role in overseeing the banks for violations of securities laws, including a series of actions taken against JP Morgan Chase bank in 2013. This has a deterrent effect as the huge monetary easing by the U.S. Federal Reserve to reduce unemployment also creates bubble conditions in financial markets, according to Fed governor, Jeremy Stein. Former FDIC chief, Sheila Bair, says the lack of leadership in this area is simply astonishing....

LyrArc Article Gist
Most Americans pay less in taxes, including state, local and federal taxes, today than in 1980 in inflation adjusted dollars. The taxes have gone down by 2-3% for incomes in the range of $50,000 to $150,000, and gone down by 3-4% for incomes between $150,000 and $350,000. Taxes have gone down over 7% for incomes above $350,000. The main reason is the decline in federal income taxes.Tax rates increased in the period to 1990 and declined from 1990 to 2010. The Democratic party and president Obama are pushing for increase in taxes for incomes above $250,000. Republicans are resisting the changes citing disincentives to investment and growth for small business which generates a large proportion of new jobs created in the U.S. economy. The New York Times study shows the percent of the U.S. population that makes between $200,000 and $350,000 almost doubling in the period 1980-2010 and at the same time its share of the U.S. income remaining the same - many small business owners who hire employees would fall into this income category. Republican's response is for tax reforms that reduce loopholes, deductions and other tax expeditures that disproportionately help the wealthy. Democrats say this cannot create enough revenues to address the deficit, when mortgage deductions, charitable deductions are excluded. The back and forth is leading to stalemate but also opening up discussion for the first time on whether the mortgage and charitable deductions make sense in today's environment. A significant portion of revenues lost in the mortgage deduction goes to affluent households, subsidizing larger borrowings to build larger homes than otherwise, according to the Brookings Institution. Politicians have resisted changes that would go against powerful lobyying groups in the past, yet the impasse has opened up new thinking outside the box because of the pressing need to come up with a solution....

LyrArc Article Gist
Defense spending under the new Obama 2012-2013 budget for the fiscal year starting Oct. 1, 2012, is $525 billion, and an additional $88 billion for Afghanistan. This is $6 billon below the $531 billion budget for the 2011-2012 budget of $531 billion approved by Congress, $22 billion less than the Obama administration's proposed budget. An additional $115.1 billion was for Afghanistan. In a move to bring financial discipline to additional appropriations for foreign conflicts, the Obama administration is proposing in the 2012-2013 budget proposal a limit to "overseas contingency operations" appropriations. The total proposed is $450 billion for fiscal 2013 to 2021.

LyrArc Article Gist
Hagel did exactly what the White House expected him to do, say experts, including not coming up with any large ideas on the defense forces, tackling the budget cuts, working with the rank and file in the military, and implementing the administration's policy of reducing involvement in foreign military conflicts. Hagel's role was limited by micromanagement by NSC officials and Hagel was seen as deferential to the military chiefs and generals who had different views of the conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan- some generals seeing the administration's response as hamstrung by keeping resource committment to the minimum in Syria and others saying not enough resources were there to extend involvement to places such as Aleppo in Syria. Hagel resigned after pressure from White House officials who realized the inadequate nature of the very things that the White House expected of Hagel- following what the public sees as failures in the Middle East.

LyrArc Article Gist
Fomer Defense Secretary Leon Panetta says America needs to take up a vigorous foreign policy in his book "Worthy Fights." Both Panetta and Hillary Clinton, and Gen. Dempsey of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Petraeus of the CIA, supported U.S. taking a strong stand in Syria by supporting Syrian opposition forces in the summer of 2011 and were overruled by president Obama and his election advisers because of the approaching 2012 election. Here Mark Landler provides more insights into Hillary Clinton's deeply held belief shared with Panetta that the U.S. had to take strong action where necessary to deter foes, to get into the ring to use Panetta's expression. The U.S. support for action in Libya to support Britain and France comes from the efforts of Clinton, and any lack of followup one of president Obama's errors in foreign policy. In April 2016 president Obama said that he considered his failure to followup in Libya to help the new Libyan government his biggest mistake in his presidency. Here Mark Landler looks at Hillary Clinton's entire career as showing a conviction and belief on the need for action where necessary in the U.S. global engagement. Compared to the bluster of the candidates Trump, Cruz and Sanders, with little experience to back this up in their careers in real estate, law or the Senate , Landler says Clinton is the last remaining hawk. Here he describes Hillary Clinton's contact and empathy for the troops from her trip to the American base in Tuzla, Bosnia, in March 1996. In fact many have forgotten that Yugoslavia is what it is today after the Milosevic years and the ethnic wars with Slovenia, Croatia, Montenegro, members of the EU and Serbia negotiating to enter EU, because of the bombing campaign taken by Bill Clinton through NATO in 1999 to prevent ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, and peacemaking following the Bosnian War using diplomat Holbrooke to negotiate the 1995 Dayton Accords. Here Landler describes the meetings with Gen. Keane who pushed for the troop surge that worked in Iraq under president George W. Bush. Clinton supported Keane's proposal made in April 2015, for a no-fly-zone in Syria that would help opposition forces till a settlement could be negotiated. Keane pointed out to Clinton that there was a flaw in Obama's policies- that negotiation would work only if the no-fly-zone was used to support opposition forces. By the end of 2015 Hillary Clinton publicly adopted this position. During a period when Americans are weary of foreign entanglements but understand the need to provide leadership where needed, Hillary Clinton, provides a balance between the pendulum swinging too sharply in one direction in the Bush years and in another direction in the Obama years, says Landler. A view also articulated by Leon Panetta, who was chief of staff for President Clinton during the Bosnian conflict and the Dayton Accords, where the U.S. showed strength of purpose in war and also in negotiating the peace without major entanglements....

LyrArc Article Gist
Krauthammer cites Congressional Budget Office numbers that show the Obama U.S. health care law continues the spiralling costs of health care with new government mandates at a time of severe budget cuts in education and other areas- for 2013-2022 the costs come to $1.76 trillion. The initial Obama administration figures of 10 year costs of $938 billion announced in 2010 reflected the fact that the new U.S. health care law would take 4 years to fully go into effect. Costs after 2021 are shown to be $250 billion each year in the CBO figures. The law is now before the Supreme Court in 2012, which has to decide on the basis of the limits of the Commerce Clause.

LyrArc Article Gist
New York Times readers respond to Drew Western's article in Sunday Review, NYT of August 7, 2011. Readers express disappointment with President Obama's lack of courage and initiative.

LyrArc Article Gist
The FDIC acknowledges that it has not been able to get banks interested in a pilot program called the Legacy Loans Program. That program was designed to give the banks an opportunity to sell off $1 billion of troubled mortgages. Since November with the efforts of the Troubled Asset Program under Secretary Paulson to have the banks sell off these assets in an auction or some other way, the whole issue of getting the toxic or troubled assets off the books of the banks has been effectively shelved. The Obama administration's version of this was the Geithner Public Private Partnership program, but this like Paulson's TARP never really got off the ground. Instead several things have happened that have enabled banks to show higher profits and improve stock prices. The period from March 2009 to June 2009, a period of several months has seen bank stock prices recover and banks are now able to raise capital on their own from investors. The government's "stress tests" gave the banks credibility with investors and they were designed not to be so stringent as to affect confidence. The mark to market rule has also been relaxed so that banks are no longer required to show these toxic assets at prices that reflect large losses. Bank executives also are wary of the new executive compensation rules of the government. All of these things have combined to create asituation where some confidence has been restored, but at the same time experts are pointing out that the underlying problems of an estimated $1 trillion in troubled assets remains. Banks are even less likely to want to part with these assets at lower prices now that some semblence of confidence is returning, as they would then have to show large losses. What this implies is that if the economy suffered a setback, these problems would return and be just as intractable as ever....

LyrArc Article Gist
The truth is very different from the rhetoric coming from the Obama administration about helping Main Street America and ordinary workers against "fat-cat bankers," says Goldfarb. Under the Obama administration banks have grown larger and gained more influence over administration decisions. No conditions were made part of the agreement that would require banks to lend a portion of the money handed out to the banks to ordinary borrowers. And not much of significance was done to help homeowners under water, which would enable a faster recovery. In this respect the policies slanted in favor of banks of the Obama administration worsened the prospects of an economic recovery. Experts from Reagan advisor Martin Feldstein- who as early as 2008 advocated serious help to homeowners under water to reduce principal and interest- to the FDIC's Sheila Bair and Princeton Prof. Krugman, across the ideological spectrum, perceived this being in the national interest. Feldstein's first op-ed on his plan appeared in the Wall Street Journal on 3/7/2008, followed by ones on 4/15/2008, 10/4/2008, 1/20/2010/ 10/12/2011 in WSJ, and a oped on 10/30/2008 in the Washington Post, repeating the call for siginificant debt reduction to homeowners. Banks had extraordinary influence on successive administrations in the U.S., both Republican and Democratic- the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations- so that policy actions could be distorted from what would otherwise take place. A study by two University of Michigan professors shows that banks did not increase lending after receiving government money. Instead taxpayer money was used to invest in risky securities for profits from short term price movements, resulting in gains of about 10% in investment returns. Ran Duchin, one of the two professors, says helping ordinary borrowers was not the most profitable use of capital for banks. Without the necessary conditions from the Obama administration, the banks depolyed capital in ways that did not help the economy. Similiarly when banks needed to be restructured no preparatory action was taken because of resistance within the administration- a request by President Obama to Treasury Secretary Geithner for preparing a plan for the restructuring of Citigroup was ignored, according to a report by Goldfarb and Wallsten on 9/17/2011 in the Washington Post....

LyrArc Article Gist
Prof. Calomiris of Columbia University, says the U.S. Federal Reserve should increase the cash reserve requirement for U.S. banks to prevent a surge in inflation. He points out that excesss reserves at banks stand at about $1.5 trillion. He suggests the Fed should take early action to prevent a jump in lending and credit creation- a pattern seen in the past after several years of dampened credit and lending.

LyrArc Article Gist
The State Budget Crisis Task Force is co-chaired by former Fed chairman Paul Volcker and Richard Ravitch, a former lieutenant governor of New York. The Report of the Task Force says rising pension expenses and healthcare costs for public sector employees and Medicaid costs are severely reducing the ability of states in the U.S. to fund essential infrastructure improvements, education for low income students and other services. The report said there were six major threats to the fiscal situation of states- including Medicaid spending, underfunding of retirement, "budgetary gimmicks" to address the short term needs, and uncertain tax revenues. Ravitch told a news conderence: "It will be a hell of a lot more expensive to deal with theses problems in five or ten years than to deal with them now." The report focussed on California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Virginia and Texas. It was funded by the foundation of Blackstone Group co-founder Peter Peterson, and George Soros's Open Society Foundation....