LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ looks at how the relationship between Joe Biden and Kamala Harris evolved. From the faltering start when Harris was contesting for the presidential nomination and made sharp debate comments on segregationist senators and Biden, to her entry into the White House as Vice President dissolving her political action committees and not bringing her election people to the White House. The first assignment was on immigration and the White House asking Harris to tell Central Americans not to come to the US border did not exactly work out. Guatemala was in the middle of a drought affecting its agriculture and sending more people from the affected regions to the US Border. That message did not work and Harris came under criticism. There was less contact with Biden during the years 2020 and 2021 because of the pandemic.   Gradually though the president came to listen to Harris and set up a weekly lunch meeting. When Supreme Court nominations were to be made Biden relied on Harris's advice. Ketanji Jackson nomination to the Supreme Court came out of these talks with Harris. Then came Roe and Wade and the president who was not outspoken on this issue realized that Harris was better at communicating a common vision of what America stood for and the importance of reproductive freedoms. When Hamas attacked Israel, the response of Netanyahu was leading to an humanitarian disaster. President Biden listened to Harris describe the need for a Palestinian state and it building peace with Israel as the only real solution to the crisis. Biden sent Harris three times to the Munich Security Conference, and each year she met Mr. Zelensky and discussed the Ukraine issues with European leaders. Then came the debate performance and Democrats questioning Biden's health. Harris remained steadfast in her support till the end and on July 23 after announcing his withdrawal the previous day Biden told Kamala as he addressed Wilmington headquarters staff- "I'm watching you kid. I love ya." And Harris said "I love you." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Karl Rove, advisor to President George W. Bush, and organizer behind American Crossroads political action committee, says the election will be decided by the higher support for Romney among independents and the high turnout of Republican voters. The prediction for the voter turnout among Republicans is 36% Republican vs. 35% Democratic, according to Gallup. This compares with the 39% Republican and 37% Democratic in 2004, and 39% Democratic 29% Republican in 2008. The early and absente ballot voting advantage has significantly gone down almost by half for Democrats as more Republicans cast early votes in swing states like Ohio. Closing statements and crowds also appear to confirm this trend. Rove sees this as 51% to 48% favoring the Republicans. The addition of swing states - Michigan, Minnesota and Pennsylvania also appears to suggest that a broader movement is underway that is happening right now in the final week before the election on Nov. 6, 2012. Rove focusses on the numbers. A behavioural assessment shows the importance in this campaign of the centrist position adopted by Romney in the closing months of the campaign; the selection of Ryan which gave Romney support from the Republican conservative base so that he could talk freely about his record in the liberal state of Massachusetts to independent voters and women, and most important the clear message to voters focussed on a five point plan to get the economy recovery were critical in shaping these numbers....

LyrArc Article Gist
Samuelson warns that turning seniors into a protected class making no sacrifices whatsoever, will mean shrinking all other social programs, defense and investments in education and infrastructure. This is the reality of the budget deficits facing the U.S. He cites the Congressional Budget Office projections that even with cutting defense and non defense discretionary spending by a third, the U.S. risks a deficit in 2023 of about 6.75% of the economy or gross domestic product (GDP). To cover this would require $1 trillion in higher taxes, an increase of a third above the 1970-2011 average. He says Democrats are using demagoguery and intimidation on this issue, and ironically even Paul Ryan's proposal reflects a desire not to touch seniors benefits and willingness to pass on the costs to the young to pay for these programs. Social Security and Medicare are a critical part of the American fabric, and no one wants to dismantle them, it is about modernizing them to reflect higher life expectancy and larger wealth accumulated by the elderly compared to previous generations, and to reduce the burden on the young. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Laurent Berger, head of the French Confederation of Labor, C.F.D.T., is a moderating force in France as president Macron leads an effort to make a revision to France's labor code. With a large parliamentary majority president Macron is expected to push for a shift to a Scandinavian version of "flexible security," that allows companies and the economy to adjust the work force, introduce retraining and create flexibility so that new jobs can be created. His union is now the largest, after surpassing the militant General Confederation of Labor. Issues in labor changes proposed by president Macron are- direct negotiations between management and employees bypassing unions, and a cap to compensation in unfair dismissal cases. Berger's view is that though the interests of labor and management conflict, there has to be dialogue instead of constant confrontation. He is willing to see some jobs lost if business creates new jobs with improvement in the economy. Macron has summoned labor leaders for marathon talks. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Congressional Budget Office report in 2011 shows after tax resource flow that a family has to pay for consumption, a better approach to measuring the growth in incomes since 1970 including government help to lower income people and gains in the stock market for upper class Americans. This report shows after tax resource flow for the top 1% in the U.S. tripled from 1970 to 2011. For the middle fifth of the distribution families experienced real net income gains of 36 percent, and the bottom fifth of the distribution real net income gain of 50 percent.This suggests gains of about 10 percent a year if averaged over 30 years for the top 1 percent compared to 1% a year for the middle fifth and 1.5% for the bottom fifth. The report was done in 2011 and this could skew the results. Between 2011 and 2015 the stock market recovered and this would suggest a much higher gain for the top 1% of incomes and the top 10%, while also providing improvement in incomes for the middle fifth and the bottom fifth as unemployment decreased. Working class and minimum wage slowly recovered, and interest income on savings extremely low, with large student and other household debt, so that even at 10-12% gains per year for the top 1%, and 1-2% for the middle fifth of the distribution and 1.5-2% for the bottom fifth the last three decades have not been good for working class and middle income Americans compared to the the period 1950-1970 early postwar period recovery....

LyrArc Article Gist
Michael Getler describes the missed opportunity under President Obama for using one of America's most talented diplomats to engineer a peace agreement between the warring factions in Afghanistan- the U.S., the Pakistan army, the ISI and its support in the army, the Taliban, and the other parties such as the Haqqani faction and the Afghan government of Karzai. Holbrooke had used his experience for another President, with the same force of his larger than life personality, when he helped bring about the Dayton Accords in a similiar area of stubborn ethnic strife. Could Obama have tapped Holbrooke's skills and set aside the distractions of his personality as coming from an American with unique gifts, talent and achievement, is the question Getler asks. And is this a comment on the nature of the Obama Presidency and America's poorly invested hopes.

LyrArc Article Gist
Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman's view of Afghnistan differs significantly from New York Times correspondent Filkins understanding from years of reporting going back about a decade. Filkins sees the complexities of Pastun country inside Afghnistan and Pakistan and the military and ISI's involvement, and other correspondents have pointed to the narcotics trade and corruption. Kerry's simplistic view is that the Taliban do not enjoy much support, when actually Americans are seen on the ground as foreign occupiers. These correspondents in the field point to this as an everpresent danger, which would tilt support to those fighting foreigners, with nationalist and Muslim sentiment prevailing over everything else. And Kerry appears to be too willing to dismiss allegations of narcotics involvement of the Karzai administration with the "show me" comment. For critics of the Bush administration this is simply astounding, when so much is at stake. Does patient mean digging in one's heels slowly? But that is how the Vietnam intervention ran into trouble, without public sentiment in support of the plans....