HALF-FULL REPORT 10/08/10

Is this a bug, or a feature?

Nearly a million workers won’t get a consumer protection in the U.S. health reform law meant to cap insurance costs because the government exempted their employers.

Thirty companies and organizations, including McDonald’s (MCD) and Jack in the Box (JACK), won’t be required to raise the minimum annual benefit included in low-cost health plans, which are often used to cover part-time or low-wage employees.

The Department of Health and Human Services, which provided a list of exemptions, said it granted waivers in late September so workers with such plans wouldn’t lose coverage from employers who might choose instead to drop health insurance altogether.

Without waivers, companies would have had to provide a minimum of $750,000 in coverage next year, increasing to $1.25 million in 2012, $2 million in 2013 and unlimited in 2014.

Most people think the Department of Health and Human Services is backing and filling to mitigate an unintended consequence of the Obamacare bill, to prevent stories of tens of thousands of workers – mostly low income workers – losing their health insurance, thanks to Obamacare.  I’m inclined to believe that, too.

But whether intended or not, this is a big blow to the rule of law, a big step further toward gangster government, toward fascism.  Instead of having one clear rule that applies to all similarly situated businesses, corporations have to go hat in hand to HHS to seek waivers, which can be granted arbitrarily and capriciously.

Discretion may be the better part of valor, but it’s not something businesses can rely on for planning purposes. Corporations are already hunkered down because of (take your pick) weak demand, hurt feelings as a result of presidential persecution, or uncertainty over future health-care costs and tax rates. It won’t help business confidence to learn the HHS secretary can make and break rules on a case-by-case basis.

Peter Wehner thinks: CLICK HERE 

This action highlights one of the great dangers of ObamaCare, which is that every health-care decision now has to run through the federal government. Private companies have to bow before its throne, asking for waivers and massively complicating their own lives. The federal government is now in a much stronger position to pick winners and losers and rig the game. This is the kind of expansion of federal power that many people feared and warned about – and it’s happening within weeks of the law taking effect.

Will HHS demand a quid pro quo in exchange for a waiver.  Will firms the administration doesn’t like, such as Koch industries, be denied waivers, while political allies receive them?

The biggest single waiver, for 351,000 people, was for the United Federation of Teachers Welfare Fund, a New York union providing coverage for city teachers.

In the et tu, Brute? department, Harry Reid’s son says Obamacare could hurt Nevada.

The Labor department said today the economy shed 95,000 jobs in September.  The official unemployment rate remained at 9.6 per cent, but Gallup said it really is 10.1 percent.

Could uncertainty about tax rates and Obamacare have something to do with this?  James Madison thought so: CLICK HERE

It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow. Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed?

The want of confidence in the public councils damps every useful undertaking, the success and profit of which may depend on a continuance of existing arrangements. What prudent merchant will hazard his fortunes in any new branch of commerce when he knows not but that his plans may be rendered unlawful before they can be executed? What farmer or manufacturer will lay himself out for the encouragement given to any particular cultivation or establishment, when he can have no assurance that his preparatory labors and advances will not render him a victim to an inconstant government?

Destroying all those jobs is hard work.  Our poor president is beat, and needs another vacation: CLICK HERE

It’s often remarked that President Obama has enjoyed a number of getaways, vacations, and mini-vacations during his 20 months in office. But at a Democratic fundraiser Thursday night, the president said, "I’d appreciate a little break."

The fund raiser was held at the Washington, D.C. home of John Phillips and Linda Douglass, the former journalist.

According to the pool report, Obama thanked Phillips for the work he and his wife have done for Team Obama. Then the president mentioned that Phillips and Douglass have an opulent place in Italy and wondered why there had been no invitation to visit. "I’d appreciate a little break and some Tuscan sun," the president said, according to the pool report. "Some pasta. I can use it."

Former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel began his campaign for mayor of Chicago by releasing a “Glad to be home” video.

Heartwarming, isn’t it?

The video was shot in Washington, D.C. What I love most about Democrats is their honesty and sincerity.

It remains to be seen how much damage the Stuxnet worm will do to Iran’s nuclear weapons program.  But it sure has gotten into the heads of the mullahs:

TEHRAN — Iran has arrested an unspecified number of “nuclear spies” in connection with a damaging worm that has infected computers in its nuclear program, the intelligence minister, Heydar Moslehi, said Saturday.

The arrests are causing panic among the Russian scientists who have been working on the program, says Debka.

debkafile’s intelligence sources report from Iran that dozens of Russian nuclear engineers, technicians and contractors are hurriedly departing Iran for home since local intelligence authorities began rounding up their compatriots as suspects of planting the Stuxnet malworm into their nuclear program.

One of the Russian nuclear staffers, questioned in Moscow Sunday, Oct. 3 by Western sources, confirmed that many of his Russian colleagues had decided to leave with their families after team members were detained for questioning at the beginning of last week.

Here’s an ad from a politician I like:

And here’s a good one about a politician I don’t like:

Our “allies” in Pakistan are urging the Taliban to keep on killing American soldiers.

Members of Pakistan’s spy agency are pressing Taliban field commanders to fight the U.S. and its allies in Afghanistan, some U.S. officials and Afghan militants say, a development that undercuts a key element of the Pentagon’s strategy for ending the war.

The explosive accusation is the strongest yet in a series of U.S. criticisms of Pakistan, and shows a deteriorating relationship with an essential ally in the Afghan campaign. The U.S. has provided billions of dollars in military and development aid to Pakistan for its support.

Pray for Lt. Brandon Wheeler and our other servicemen and women over there.  They deserve better than this.

The political news continues to be more than Half Full.  The most surprising news this week is a poll indicating that Rep. John Dingell – who has held his seat since Christ was a corporal – is trailing his GOP opponent.

In what is probably the most surprising poll of this cycle so far, a joint effort by the Democratic-oriented Rossman Group and the Republican-oriented Team TelCom for the Detroit News finds that 27-term Democrat John Dingell of Michigan trails his Republican opponent Rob Steele by four points, 43.8 percent to 39.5 percent.

A Dingell has represented Michigan in Congress since 1932, when John Dingell, Sr., defeated Republican Charles Bowles in the newly-created 15th district, centered in Dearborn.

There will be lots and lots of polls between now and Nov. 2.  Some judiciousness is needed to interpret them.  With less than a month to go, generic ballot preferences matter less than actual polls in head to head races.

Polling in head to head races will oscillate, chiefly depending on who is advertising.  Incumbents Patty Murray in Washington state and Barbara Boxer of California opened up leads on their GOP challengers when they were spending a lot of money on television, and the Republicans weren’t.  Now that Dino Rossi and Carly Fiorina are back up on the air, the margin has narrowed.  (In the most recent poll, Rossi has overtaken Murray.)

Here’s an example of how Dino Rossi is spending his money:

As of today (10/8), RealClear Politics projects, on the basis of its average of polls, a 50-50 senate.  That assumes the Democrats win in Washington state and California.  I think that’s probably right about Fiorina, but wrong about Rossi.

Linda McMahon is probably not going to win her race in Connecticut, but she really nailed Richard Blumenthal here:

The House is a lot harder to judge, because House races break later, and because much less polling data is available, and much of what is is sketchy.  As of today, RealClear Politics says Democrats lead for 186 seats, Republicans lead for 210, and 39 are tossups.  218 are needed for control.

House races break late mostly because, in many instances, voters are not familiar with the challenger until late in the campaign.  A good rule of the thumb to follow is that, with less than a month to go, if the incumbent is below 45 percent in a two way race, he or she is likely to lose.  If the incumbent is below 40 percent, he or she is toast.

Democrats are pursuing a base mobilization strategy to hold down their losses in the midterms.  This makes sense, because it’s about the only way to play the hand they’ve dealt themselves.

But it won’t work.  Ann Kim of the left of center group Third Way explains why.

In 2008, Obama won 20 percent of conservatives, 60 percent of moderates and 89 percent of liberals nationwide—a stellar performance compared to recent Democratic presidential candidates.

However, liberals have always been the smallest segment of the electorate. In no state do liberals make up a majority—or even a plurality. Even in states like California, liberals are outnumbered, according to Gallup, by both independent moderates and conservatives. Twenty-three percent of Californians call themselves “liberal,” versus 39 percent who say they are “moderate” and 33 percent who are “conservative.”

Second, a variety of polls show a national “red shift” since 2008. Gallup measured a 5-point gain in conservatives as a share of the population from 2008 to 2010. According to their research , 42 percent of Americans now consider themselves “conservative” (compared to 37 percent in 2008), 35 percent see themselves as “moderate” (down from 35 percent in 2008) and 20 percent think of themselves as “liberal” (down from 22 percent in 2008).
Conservatives make up a plurality in 31 states, including Colorado, Indiana, Missouri and Florida. They comprise a majority of the population in four states—Wyoming, Mississippi, Utah and South Dakota.

The combination of a relatively small liberal base and a shift toward conservatism nationwide means that, for many candidates, matching Obama’s performance in 2008 is not enough to secure victory.

As Ms. Kim notes, the fundamental problem with a base mobilization strategy is that there are roughly twice as many self-identified conservatives in the country as there are self-identified liberals.

The second problem with a base mobilization strategy is that most of what appeals to the Democrat base browns off moderate voters even more.

The third problem with a base mobilization strategy is that the largest elements of that base – young people and minorities – are the groups least likely to turn out for the midterms.

The fourth problem with a base mobilization strategy is that the base is largely concentrated in inner cities and “gentry liberal” districts built around university towns.  This doesn’t matter in statewide races.  But it means the base will be of little help in most congressional districts.

But if base mobilization is the only card you have to play, play it with gusto.  But President Obama and his sidekick, the buffoon, are playing it oddly.  Zero thinks he can get the base to turn out by lecturing it and criticizing it.

The president warned fellow Democrats against "losing sight of that long game, and we start sulking and sitting back and not doing everything we can do to make sure our folks turn out."

The buffoon – aka Vice President Joe Biden – went further:

“We want to reward people who manufacture things in the United States, in Wisconsin, not to take them overseas to China and to other countries!” he said to a silent room at the event for Democratic gubernatorial nominee Tom Barrett, according to a White House pool report.

He continued, saying, “You’re the dullest audience I’ve ever spoken to,” at which point he got applause and laughs. “Do you realize how many jobs Wisconsin lost? It’s staggering!”

Voters are used to being courted, not hectored.  It’ll be fascinating to see how this works out.

Democratic strategist Donna Brazile doesn’t think it will:

These attacks are becoming a nuisance. Stop it," she tweeted, adding, "I consider myself a fiscally sane progressive, but the attacks on ‘Liberals’ or the ‘professional left’ will not turn out the vote."

If you thought I’d let this week go by without pimping for the fat Reagan, you were mistaken.  Here is Gov. Chris Christie explaining why he won’t pour billions of dollars more into a tunnel under the Hudson: