Visual Source: Newseum
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO USE AS AN OPEN THREAD
Hartford Courant:
Gov. Dannel P. Malloy proposed nearly 5,500 layoffs and the elimination of another 1,000 unfilled positions Tuesday at a time when the state's unemployment rate is 9.1 percent.
The budget-cutting proposal is part of an overall plan to close a projected deficit of about $700 million in the new fiscal year that was created when the state employee unions rejected a consession and savings plan that union leaders had reached with Malloy.
The state legislature is scheduled to meet Thursday in special session to vote on Malloy's plans before the new fiscal year starts on Friday.
Besides layoffs and program cuts, the plan includes reducing aid to the state's 169 cities and towns by a combined $54 million per year for two years. That translates into a cut of 2.4 percent in the state's formula grants to cities and towns.
Whatever happens, it's not going to be pretty.
McClatchy:
Only 36 percent of registered voters say they'd definitely vote for President Barack Obama next year - but he still tops all Republican challengers in one-on-one matchups, according to a new McClatchy-Marist poll.
The survey also found that Republicans and Republican-leaning independents remain highly uncertain about who they want to face Obama. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney leads the field, but with only 19 percent...
None would beat Obama today.
Romney comes closest, losing 46-42 percent, but he has lost some ground; in April, Obama led Romney, 46-45.
In other matchups, Obama beats Giuliani 48-41 percent; Bachmann 49-37 percent; Perry 48-39 percent; Pawlenty 47-33 percent; and Palin 56-30 percent.
and
The poll suggests that the "tea party," the grassroots conservative movement that helped elect dozens of Republicans to Congress last year, has limited influence. Only 8 percent of registered voters said they strongly support the movement and 16 percent said they support it. Among Republicans, 45 percent said they supported the tea party, while 39 percent didn't and 15 percent were unsure.
Here's a post from the periodical
E: the environmental magazine on the environmental policy of Mitt Romney, the first in a series on the presidential candidates (written by my son):
This approach can be seen as helping the environmental and scientific communities by finally acknowledging that the earth’s climate is indeed warming, and that we’re all partly responsible. But, New Hampshire aside, the reluctance within the GOP to advocate real action on climate change—often due to ideological resistance among the Republican base and particularly within the Tea Party—has left candidates like Mitt Romney with little room to develop and push for strong legislative solutions.
Speaking of tea party, from the
NY Times:
Many Tea Party groups oppose the bill because it does not establish universal school choice, and call it a bailout of failing schools. They accuse those who support it — who are backed by a powerful Washington group that has helped cultivate the Tea Party — of selling out to the kind of politics-as-usual approach that the movement was founded to oppose. Supporters say those opponents do not understand that compromise is part of politics.
The disagreement resonates beyond the local particulars. It offers a microcosm of the Tea Party’s struggle as it tries to turn the potency it showed in the midterm elections into influence in legislative battles and the 2012 presidential campaign. Having been brought together primarily by what they oppose, Tea Party groups have had difficulty agreeing on what they stand for. Just saying “Tea Party” strikes fear in many Republicans in Washington and state capitols. But in practice, the Tea Party is often fractious and undefined.
Jeff Shesol:
It is hardly scandalous that justices are more likely to speak to friendly audiences than hostile ones. The court’s history, moreover, is filled with political machinations, like Justice William O. Douglas’s attempts to lead or at least join the Democratic presidential ticket; justices’ back-channel consultations with presidents, from F.D.R. to L.B.J.; and speechmaking about subjects far and (sometimes too) wide.
Yet there are few, if any, precedents for the involvement of Justices Thomas and Scalia with the fund-raising efforts of the Koch brothers. In an invitation to a meeting earlier this year in Palm Springs, Calif., Charles Koch cautioned financial contributors that “our ultimate goal is not ‘fun in the sun.’ This is a gathering of doers.” The meeting’s objective was “to review strategies for combating the multitude of public policies that threaten to destroy America as we know it.” Last summer’s sessions included “Framing the Debate on Spending” and “Mobilizing Citizens for November.” The invitation listed Justices Scalia and Thomas first among the “notable leaders” who had attended past meetings...
The public’s faith in the rule of law depends, to no small degree, on the idea that judges try, as best they can, to maintain a judicial temperament — that they keep a certain distance from public and even private events that appear, in the truest sense of the word, partisan, and that they maintain an open mind. Not a blank mind, devoid of a judicial philosophy, but an open mind — a certain receptiveness to reason, argument and fact. It’s not that we need justices without political impulses; we need justices who can keep them in check. “We need to believe in Santa Claus a little bit,” said a former Supreme Court clerk, “and these guys aren’t making it easy.”
Harold Meyerson:
Do I really think those things can happen here? Unless America undergoes changes that I can’t readily imagine, I don’t. I suppose the closest we came to those kinds of changes in how we do business was the UAW’s 1946 strike at General Motors, when UAW Vice President (soon to become president) Walter Reuther demanded that GM deliver a fair wage increase — its fairness to be determined by GM making its finances privy to the union and public representatives. The UAW won its wage increase, but GM adamantly refused to let the union in on the kind of management-only information that is routinely shared by companies under Germany’s system of co-determination, as the joint membership on German corporate boards is called. And if America’s strongest union at a time when union strength in America was at its apogee couldn’t win this kind of arrangement, it’s inconceivable that it could happen today — or anytime soon.
Maggie Fox/National Journal:
To the Kalleys, of Troy, Mich., it’s simply a case of bureaucrats taking away options from cancer patients, and they have plenty of platforms to voice their opinions, including his organization, Freedom of Access to Medicines.
Dr. Milton Wolf, a radiologist who writes columns for the conservative Washington Times newspaper, called the FDA committee a “death panel” last week.
Of course, it’s the FDA’s job to do precisely what it is doing--decide which drugs are safe and effective enough to use and which are not. FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg will make the decision on Avastin after reviewing the evidence presented at the meeting on Tuesday and Wednesday.
Strong evidence shows that while Avastin can have remarkable effects on some tumors of the colon, brain, and elsewhere, it doesn’t help breast cancer patients live any longer, and it can in fact kill some people. It is the world’s best-selling cancer drug, but it also has side effects ranging from internal bleeding to high blood pressure.