Winning Progressive

(By NCrissie B)

This week I’ve been discussing Michael Grunwald’s The New New Deal: The Hidden Story of Change in the Obama Era. First, we saw the challenges of drafting and passing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Today we look at the challenges of making the stimulus bill work. Next, I’ll interview Michael Grunwald and see how the ARRA’s successes became ‘The Greatest Story Never Told’ … until now.

Michael Grunwald is a senior national correspondent for Time magazine. Before joining Time, Grunwald was a congressional correspondent, New York bureau chief, and investigative reporter for the Washington Post, and a local and national reporter at the Boston Globe. He has received the George Polk Award for national reporting, the Worth Bingham Prize for investigative reporting, the Society of Environmental Journalists award for in-depth reporting, and numerous other journalism awards.

A $10,000 shopping list and a 10-cent stick of gum

Imagine sending someone to out prepare your home or business for an approaching Category 5 hurricane. You give them a shopping list and $10,000, with instructions to buy only necessities. At the end of the day, they return with $9,999.90 in hurricane supplies – enough to minimize the storm’s damage – and one 10-cent stick of gum.

In economic terms, the 2008 meltdown was a Category 5 hurricane. In the fourth quarter of 2008, the economy was collapsing at an annual rate of 6.3%. The downturn was already underway in January of 2008, and between September 2008 and August 2009 over 5,131,000 Americans lost their jobs. But this was no act of nature. As we discussed earlier this month the collapse was a man-made disaster caused by blind faith in an economic myth, and outright financial looting.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was a $770 billion shopping list to minimize the damage from that disaster. Grunwald reports that economists, using data from other large government and corporate projects, expected about 5% to be lost in fraud. Instead auditors found only $7.2 million in fraudulent claims. That’s 0.001% … one 10-cent stick of gum from a $10,000 shopping list.

Transparency at work

That astonishingly tiny level of fraud was due, in part, to President Obama’s commitment to transparency. The Recovery Act website, online immediately after the landmark bill was enacted, details every project funded by the ARRA, and every grant and contract awarded. President Obama assigned Vice President Joe Biden monitor the ARRA, and Grunwald reports that the Recovery Oversight Board used state-of-the-art software to not only detect fraud but to identify and preempt likely offenders before they got their hands in the till.

The transparency came with a price, Grunwald reports. With so much data being made public, media watchdogs made hay with “Gotcha!” stories like contracts and grants going to non-existent congressional districts. Those were, of course, typos made by clerks hurrying to post data in almost real-time as reports arrived at the oversight offices. Grunwald cites stories grousing that too many weatherproofing grants were going to hot-weather climates and – weeks later, by the same reporters – that too many weatherproofing grants were going to cold-weather climates.

Prompted by the lure of being the next Woodward or Bernstein, in a media culture focused on government failure, fed by often outlandish Republican claims, Grunwald writes that thousands of reporters began acting as special prosecutors. Fraud that didn’t happen, and grants and contracts for projects that made sense and were done on time and within budget, were as interesting to report and as likely to make headlines as stories about planes that land safely and pets that don’t get lost.

Yet even the incessant, exaggerated, and often false stories about fraud had a silver lining. With so much data so so public, being picked over by so many, fraudsters may have stayed away. As an Oversight Board member told Grunwald, “It would be stupid to try to scam here.”

Change You Can Believe In

The “Recovery” part of the ARRA could not stop the economic hurricane, and Republicans have made hay on President Obama’s over-optimistic prediction that the bill would hold unemployment under 8%. In fact, unemployment was passing that mark when he made that prediction, although the horrific January-March data wouldn’t reveal that for several weeks. Still, the Congressional Budget Office and other independent analysts estimate that Recovery Act projects created or saved at least 2,300,000 jobs. Despite the unemployment and increase in poverty, homelessness actually declined during the Great Recession, due to Recovery Act projects like the Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program Recovery Plan. A 2010 First Focus report found that the Recovery Act provided “a lifeline for low-income families” whose children might otherwise have gone hungry.

Beyond simply easing the pain, the “Reinvestment” part of the ARRA laid the groundwork for a sustainable, 21st Century economy. Grunwald reports countless examples of “Change You Can Believe In,” including:

• The world’s largest wind farm is now being built in Oregon, primarily with American-made components.
• Total U.S. wind power generation went from 25 gigawatts in 2008 to 50 gigawatts in 2012, a level forecasters said we would not reach for decades.
• Weatherproofing programs have saved the equivalent of 21 coal-fired power plants in energy.
• The U.S. solar energy industry went from “death’s door” in 2008 to a net exporter in 2012.
• Advanced biofuel companies can now create jet fuel from algae, with minimal CO2 emissions.
• Programs underway to reach zero-net energy consumption within 20 years in office complexes, malls, government buildings, and military bases.
• Total U.S. CO2 emissions are now 20% lower than in 1994.
• Many parts of the U.S. now have a long-needed “smart grid” that provides real-time monitoring of electricity production, transmission, and usage, to reduce our energy needs and prevent and minimize blackouts.

And that’s just in energy. The Reinvestment Act has also destroyed hundreds of obsolete dams, renovated thousands of roads, bridges, tunnels, and utility lines, helped to modernize schools, brought broadband internet access to millions of businesses and families, computerized millions of health records, and funded research comparing the effectiveness of prescription drugs, surgeries, and other treatment options.

That “Change We Can Believe In” is already happening, improving our lives and our grandchildren’s futures, even as we struggle with the lingering damage caused by the Great Recession. And, contrary to Republican claims, President Obama has limited federal spending better than any president since Dwight D. Eisenhower.

That’s a very big, very effective shopping list … and next we’ll discuss with Michael Grunwald why the media narrative has been all about that one piece of gum.

(Crossposted from Blogistan Polytechnic Institute (BPICampus.com))

By Josh Marks

Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman’s new book “End This Depression Now!” has made him a popular progressive. His Keynesian ideas are as refreshing as mountain air after years of conservative deficit hawks punishing the American people and holding back the economic recovery with draconian cuts to the public sector. But while it is empowering to hear Krugman talk about how to really create jobs and grow the economy through government spending, many of us have been waiting for President Obama to go on the offensive and back the radical right-wing Republicans into a corner.

If his recent weekly address is any indication, Obama is getting the message. He is starting to pound away at the obstructionist Republicans for blocking his jobs legislation that would put a million teachers, firefighters and police officers back to work; and would put countless construction workers back on the job rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure — roads, bridges, rail, runways, broadband, piping, etc…

It’s working. In response, Mitt Romney actually came out against federal aid to state and local governments so they can hire back teachers, firefighters and police officers. Romney says “it’s time for us to cut back on government” by laying off more firefighters, police officers and teachers. And this isn’t just election year talk to appeal to the radical right-wing Republican base. Romney has a proven record of cutting the public sector and destroying jobs while governor of Massachusetts. In fact, when he left office the Bay State was 47th out of 50 states in job growth.

Krugman and other progressives need to keep the pressure on the Obama campaign to stay on the offensive about how public sector cuts are hurting the economic recovery. In turn, Obama can be emboldened knowing the people are behind him to box the obstructionist, do-nothing House Republicans and Romney into a corner and put them on the defensive for rejecting the majority of the $447 billion American Jobs Act proposed last September that would have put millions of Americans back to work and put us on a path to a more robust recovery. Last September, the President gave a speech to a joint session of Congress in which he mentioned “jobs” 38 times and repeatedly implored Congress to pass the bill right away.

And what was in the American Jobs Act?

– $50 billion on infrastructure projects and establishment of National Infrastructure Bank

– $35 billion to prevent more teachers, firefighters and police officers from being laid off

– $30 billion to modernize public schools and community colleges

– $15 billion for construction workers to rehabilitate foreclosed homes and businesses

– Expanding access to high-speed wireless service to at least 98% of Americans

– Funding Pathways Back to Work program for low-income youth and adults

Obama is right to go after the Republicans for rejecting the American Jobs Act. Pounding away at the GOP’s obstruction of this job creation legislation and telling the American people how public sector cuts are hurting the overall economy is the right thing to do politically and the right thing to do for the country.

Here is Obama in his own words in his weekly address last Saturday. This is the kind of message not just progressives, but all Americans can and should get behind:

Over the last few weeks, I’ve been talking a lot about America’s economic future. I’ve told you how I believe we should go about creating strong, sustained growth; how we should pay down our long-term debt in a balanced way; and most of all, what we should do right now to create good, middle-class jobs, so people who work hard can get ahead.

This isn’t some abstract debate or trivial argument. I’ve said that this is the defining issue of our time, and I mean it. I’ve said that this is a make-or-break moment for the middle class, and I believe it. The decisions we make over the next few years will have an enormous impact on the country we live in, and the one we pass on to our children.

Right now, we’re still fighting our way back from the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. The economy is growing again, but it’s not growing fast enough. Our businesses have created 4.3 million new jobs over the last 27 months, but we’re not creating them fast enough. And we’re facing some pretty serious headwinds – from the effects of the recent spike in gas prices, to the financial crisis in Europe.

But here’s the thing. We have the answers to these problems. We have plenty of big ideas and technical solutions from both sides of the aisle. That’s not what’s holding us back. What’s holding us back is a stalemate in Washington.

Last September, I sent Congress a jobs bill full of the kinds of bipartisan ideas that could have put over a million Americans back to work and helped bolster our economy against outside shocks. I sent them a plan that would have reduced our deficit by $4 trillion in a balanced way that pays for the investments we need by cutting unnecessary spending and asking the wealthiest Americans to pay a little bit more in taxes.

Since then, Congress has passed a few parts of that jobs bill, like a tax cut that’s allowing working Americans to keep more of your paycheck every week. But on most of the ideas that would create jobs and grow our economy, Republicans in Congress haven’t lifted a finger. They’d rather wait until after the election in November. Just this past week, one of them said, “Why not wait for the reinforcements?” That’s a quote. And you can bet plenty of his colleagues are thinking the same thing.

I think that’s wrong. This isn’t about who wins or loses in Washington. This is about your jobs, your paychecks, your children’s future. There’s no excuse for Congress to stand by and do nothing while so many families are struggling. None.

Right now, Congress should pass a bill to help states put thousands of teachers, firefighters and police officers back on the job. They should have passed a bill a long time ago to put thousands of construction workers back to work rebuilding our roads and bridges and runways. And instead of just talking about job creators, they should give small-business owners a tax break for hiring more workers and paying them higher wages.

Right now, Congress should give every responsible homeowner the opportunity to save an average of $3,000 a year by refinancing their mortgage. They should extend tax credits for clean energy manufacturers so we don’t walk away from 40,000 good jobs. And instead of giving tax breaks to companies who ship jobs overseas, Congress should take that money and use it to cover moving expenses for companies that are bringing jobs back to America. There’s no reason to wait.

Every problem we face is within our power to solve. What’s lacking is our politics. Remind your Members of Congress why you sent them to Washington in the first place. Tell them to stop worrying about the next election and start worrying about the next generation. I’m ready to work with anyone – Republican, Democrat, or Independent – who is serious about moving this country forward. And I hope Members of Congress will join me.

Thanks, and have a great weekend.

(By NCrissie B)

This is the last of three posts looking at Brian Miller and Mike Lapham’s new book The Self-Made Myth. In the first post, we considered how the “self-made man” myth of the Horatio Alger stories morphed into the “makers vs. takers” meme of Ayn Rand and her followers. Then we saw stories that illustrate what Miller and Lapham call “The Built-Together Reality.” Today we conclude with how “The Build-Together Reality” calls for different policies to support innovation and entrepreneurship.

Brian Miller is the executive director of United for a Fair Economy. Over the past 20 years, Miller has worked to build cross-class alliances of citizens from all walks of life – business leaders, workers, family farmers, seniors, students, and others – to work together for change, promoting healthy communities and an economy that works for all Americans.
 Mike Lapham is the founding director of Responsible Wealth, a project of United for a Fair Economy. Responsible Wealth amplifies the voices of more than 700 progressive business leaders and other affluent individuals in public policy debates to promote progressive tax policy and greater corporate accountability in Congress, in the media, and in corporate boardrooms.

Motivational Speaker Syndrome

Google {keys to success} and you’ll get over 32 million hits, including many books and lectures by motivational speakers. Many are sincere and based on interviews with successful people, such as ABC’s 20/20 episode titled Who Wants to be a Billionaire? 20 Keys to Success from the Superrich. Miller and Lapham quote a simpler version by J. Paul Getty: “Formula for Success: rise early, work hard, strike oil.” In terms of personal motivation, such bromides are useful. They encourage us to find what we do well, learn to do it as well as we can, look past immediate satisfaction to long-term goals, and other success-enabling attitudes and behaviors. It’s easy to ‘get’ that doing these things will improve our chances to succeed, and that’s why the Self-Made Myth is so attractive.

But not all successful people rise early and work hard, nor do all of them practice all 20 of the keys offered by the billionaires on 20/20. Far more important, tens of millions of other people in the U.S. and around the world do rise early and work hard – and practice those 20 keys – yet never achieve financial success. The Self-Made Myth may be useful for personal motivation, but it’s still a myth and when we base policy on that myth, we fall for what I’ll call Motivational Speaker Syndrome: focusing on individual attitudes and behaviors as if improving those were enough to ensure prosperity.

The Wealth of the Commons

While Miller and Lapham acknowledge that successful entrepreneurs do work hard and make sacrifices, they also recognize that:

Try as we may, it is simply impossible to completely untangle the contributions of the individual from those of society in making individual success possible. The entrepreneurs and the business leaders profiled in this book have all benefited, both personally and in their business activities, from the investments and structures made possible through governmental action. The personal testimonies of these successful individuals are a powerful rejection of the self-made myth in the United States.
[...]
In addition to the central role of government, there are nongovernmental actors that contribute to individual success. Images of community barn raisings come to mind as do the supports that many receive through our deep and rich network of nonprofit organizations. Even these nonprofit organizations, however, are supported in part by special provisions of the U.S. tax code. Any comprehensive understanding of individual success must take these societal contributions into account.

As we saw in the previous post in this series, well-regulated markets account for 30-50% of a publicly-owned company’s value, as measured both by what happens when a privately-held company goes public and by what happens when key regulations are repealed or ignored and the market confidence fails. Add the value of other hard and soft infrastructure – roads, ports, utilities, law enforcement and emergency services, education, scientific research, intellectual property and contract law, and of course the internet – and most of the wealth in the United States is created by the commons: shared resources and institutions created and/or maintained primarily by government.

Qui Bono?

That Latin phrase translates to “for the benefit of whom,” and it’s an important question to ask about the commons. As Miller and Lapham note, while no individual created or maintains the commons, those shared resources and institutions do not benefit everyone equally. For much of our nation’s history, women and non-whites were excluded from many of those benefits and the authors acknowledge that “Race, gender, class, birthright, and other factors still weigh heavily on one’s prospects in life.” They add that “Even though the story of the self-made man is a myth, we should not cease striving to create the conditions under which every American has a real opportunity to succeed in this world, free of the societal barriers that privilege some groups over others.”

Miller and Lapham also recognize the role of luck:

For every successful business person who rose early and worked hard, there are thousands of others who rose equally early and worked equally hard, but their work did not pay off with the same level of success due to factors beyond their control. An awareness of the randomness of luck should give us pause when we elevate some above others, as though their relative success and wealth is a measure of their work ethic, risk taking and inventiveness and somehow suggests a lack of effort on the part of others.

And they add the issue of historical timing, which can seem like another form of luck:

Unlike true luck, however, timing is often a reflection of public policies of the era. Those who came of age during the economic boom of the 1950s and 1960s – when unions were strong and the government was making massive investments in the United States and its citizens – had significantly more economic opportunity (provided they were white and male) than those entering the workforce now, amidst the Great Recession and a significantly weakened public sector following 30 years of tax cutting for the wealthy.

To argue that fairness is defined by market outcomes, as Mitt Romney does, is to ignore the structures that allow a privileged few to capture most of the benefits from the vast wealth of the commons.

And Many Wealthy People Agree

Although opt-in online polls are weak evidence, one such survey conducted by the Spectrem Group found that 68% of millionaires support tax increases for those earning more than $1 million per year. United for a Fair Economy’s Responsible Wealth project is:

[A] network of over 700 business leaders and wealthy individuals in the top five percent of income and/or wealth in the U.S. As beneficiaries of economic policies tilted in their favor, these individuals advocate for fair taxes and corporate accountability. Their message is simple, and surprising to some: we can afford to pay more; we don’t need any more tax breaks.

Members of Responsible Wealth recognize that their own prosperity and success would not be possible without the foundation of a strong public education system, an effective transportation network, a strong legal system and more. RW members are bound by their commitment to supporting the public investments from which they have greatly benefited.

The policies advocated by Responsible Wealth members include a more progressive income tax, taxing capital gains and dividends as earned income, extending the estate tax, and ensuring that corporations pay their fair share. United for a Fair Economy and Responsible Wealth also advocate investment in rebuilding our infrastructure, both hard infrastructure such as roads, bridges, ports, and utilities and soft infrastructure such as support for public education and scientific research.

And they recognize that social safety nets and an economic floor, rather than the “moral hazard” argued by conservatives, help encourage the entrepreneurship and innovation our nation needs:

One fact that may surprise many readers is that Europe, with its more expansive welfare state and universal health care, has a much higher rate of small business ownership than does the United States. Only about 7% of Americans are self-employed, compared with 9% of French, 12% of Germans, and 26% of Italians. Even when measured by small (fewer than 20 employees) and medium-sized (fewer than 500 employees) firms, the United States is at or near last among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development nations.

Finally, Miller and Lapham write:

If you are a progressive activist or community leader, challenge those in your group who may instinctively, and mistakenly, assume that all business leaders are against you. Some are, but many others are not. Seek out the business leaders in your community with an open mind and foster cross-class alliances that build greater political power and, ultimately, help better all of our communities. When you see local business leaders speaking out in favor of funding important public services, let them know they are not alone. Applaud their leadership and build new relationships where you can.

A fairer economy is not about “class warfare.” It’s about recognizing that most of our nation’s wealth is created by the commons, and advocating policies that maintain and build that commonly-created wealth to benefit all of “We the People.”

(Crossposted from Blogistan Polytechnic Institute (BPICampus.com))

For this weekend’s reading list, we have articles on public support for cuts to military spending, the growing number of children in foster care after their parents were deported, the continued strength of Social Security, how public-private partnerships on infrastructure projects are too often a rip off of taxpayers, and the continued privatization of education in Philadelphia and other urban school districts.

If you have any feedback on any of these articles, or would like to recommend an article for next weekend’s reading list, please let us know in the comments section below or at the Winning Progressive Facebook page.

Public Overwhelmingly Supports Large Defense Spending Cuts – An in-depth survey of public opinion shows that the public favors cutting an average of $103 billion per year from military spending, which is far larger than either political party is currently proposing.

Shattered Families – a report on how there are currently at least 5,100 children in foster care in the US because their parents have been deported, and how increasingly aggressive deportation efforts could increase that number to 20,000 within five years.

What the 2012 Trustee’s Report Shows About Social Security – an in-depth review of the Social Security Board of Trustee’s 2012 report on the status of Social Security.  The report confirms that Social Security remains fully solvent until 2033, would be able to continue paying 75% of benefits after that, and can remain fully solvent until for the next 75 years with only relatively minor changes.

The Wall Street Racket Looting Your City, One Block At a Time – how the “public-private partnerships” that are frequently used to finance infrastructure projects are far too often end up sapping away needed public resources so that the private investors can continue to profit.

The Remaking of Philadelphia Public Schools: Privatization or Bust – a critical look at the City of Philadelphia’s plan to close 64 of its public schools over the next five years and to funnel at least 40% of the system’s students into charter schools, which seems to be part of a growing privatization of education in urban school districts.

Suppose you are a Democratic President of the United States.  The voters sent you to the White House with a large electoral college victory and large Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.  Two years later, the voters rebuked your party in mid-term Congressional elections, creating a divided government in which Republicans control at least one house of Congress.  As President, you are now gearing up for your re-election campaign and are preparing to offer your State of the Union speech that is perhaps the best opportunity to frame the debate in re-election battle.   What would you do – triangulate or offer a progressive vision?

If you were President Clinton, the answer was to triangulate between the conservative Republicans and more progressive Democrats in Congress by offering a State of the Union speech filled with mostly conservative themes and small bore ideas.  President Clinton offered a few progressive proposals, such as raising the minimum wage, ratifying the START II anti-nuclear proliferation treaty, and protecting Medicare and Medicaid.  But the overarching theme of the speech was that “the era of big government is over,” which Clinton said three times during the speech.  The three biggest proposals in the speech were balancing the budget, welfare reform, and cracking down on illegal immigration.  And the rest of the speech was filled with minor ideas like requiring V-chips in TV sets, school uniforms, and voucherizing job training programs.

President Clinton’s 1996 State of the Union speech was not horrible. But at a time of strong economic growth and low deficits, President Clinton had the opportunity to set forth a strongly progressive vision for reducing poverty, making health care more affordable, rebuilding our cities, improving the environment, and shoring up Medicare and Medicaid.  Instead, he decided to tack to the center, criticize government, and offer small bore proposals like V-chips and school uniforms. Some of the individual ideas may have been worthwhile, but President Clinton certainly did not offer the type of strong defense of progressive governance that we should expect by a Democratic President.

By contrast, President Obama’s 2012 State of the Union speech offered a far more progressive vision to launch his re-election campaign.  Sounding some of the same themes that were in his December 2011 speech in Osawatomie, Kansas, President Obama focused largely on economic fairness and how it can be achieved, starting by posing the following choice:

We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by.  Or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules.

After outlining how financial shenanigans and deregulation caused the economic collapse of 2008, President Obama noted that he would not go back to those failed policies:

But I intend to fight obstruction with action, and I will oppose any effort to return to the very same policies that brought on this economic crisis in the first place.  No, we will not go back to an economy weakened by outsourcing, bad debt, and phony financial profits.

Next, President Obama proposed to help stop jobs and tax revenues from going overseas by, among other things, proposing a basic minimum tax for multinational corporations:

First, if you’re a business that wants to outsource jobs, you shouldn’t get a tax deduction for doing it.  That money should be used to cover moving expenses for companies like Master Lock that decide to bring jobs home. Second, no American company should be able to avoid paying its fair share of taxes by moving jobs and profits overseas.  From now on, every multinational company should have to pay a basic minimum tax.  And every penny should go towards lowering taxes for companies that choose to stay here and hire here.

Our President also reiterated his call for the DREAM Act and comprehensive immigration reform that helps law-abiding immigrants get on a path to citizenship:

Let’s also remember that hundreds of thousands of talented, hardworking students in this country face another challenge:  The fact that they aren’t yet American citizens.  Many were brought here as small children, are American through and through, yet they live every day with the threat of deportation.  Others came more recently, to study business and science and engineering, but as soon as they get their degree, we send them home to invent new products and create new jobs somewhere else.

That doesn’t make sense.. . . . We should be working on comprehensive immigration reform right now.   But if election-year politics keeps Congress from acting on a comprehensive plan, let’s at least agree to stop expelling responsible young people who want to staff our labs, start new businesses, and defend this country.  Send me a law that gives them the chance to earn their citizenship.  I will sign it right away.

Pushing back on the largely baseless conservative attacks about government loans for the Solyndra solar company, Obama next offered a defense of renewable energy investments and called for paying them by eliminating tax breaks for the oil industry:

I will not cede the wind or solar or battery industry to China or Germany because we refuse to make the same commitment here.  We have subsidized oil companies for a century.  That’s long enough.  It’s time to end the taxpayer giveaways to an industry that’s rarely been more profitable, and double-down on a clean energy industry that’s never been more promising.   Pass clean energy tax credits and create these jobs.

Noting the significant amount of spending we are avoiding by ending the war in Iraq and gradually winding down the war in Afghanistan, the President proposed to use half of that money to invest in infrastructure here in the US:

Take the money we’re no longer spending at war, use half of it to pay down our debt, and use the rest to do some nation-building right here at home.

President Obama then offered a lengthy defense of smart federal regulations and calling for an increased enforcement effort against abusive financial practices:

We’ve all paid the price for lenders who sold mortgages to people who couldn’t afford them, and buyers who knew they couldn’t afford them.  That’s why we need smart regulations to prevent irresponsible behavior.  Rules to prevent financial fraud, or toxic dumping, or faulty medical devices, don’t destroy the free market.  They make the free market work better.

There is no question that some regulations are outdated, unnecessary, or too costly.  In fact, I’ve approved fewer regulations in the first three years of my presidency than my Republican predecessor did in his.  I’ve ordered every federal agency to eliminate rules that don’t make sense.  We’ve already announced over 500 reforms, and just a fraction of them will save business and citizens more than $10 billion over the next five years.  We got rid of one rule from 40 years ago that could have forced some dairy farmers to spend $10,000 a year proving that they could contain a spill – because milk was somehow classified as an oil.  With a rule like that, I guess it was worth crying over spilled milk.

I’m confident a farmer can contain a milk spill without a federal agency looking over his shoulder.  But I will not back down from making sure an oil company can contain the kind of oil spill we saw in the Gulf two years ago.  I will not back down from protecting our kids from mercury pollution, or making sure that our food is safe and our water is clean.  I will not go back to the days when health insurance companies had unchecked power to cancel your policy, deny you coverage, or charge women differently from men.

And I will not go back to the days when Wall Street was allowed to play by its own set of rules.  The new rules we passed restore what should be any financial system’s core purpose:  Getting funding to entrepreneurs with the best ideas, and getting loans to responsible families who want to buy a home, start a business, or send a kid to college.

So if you’re a big bank or financial institution, you are no longer allowed to make risky bets with your customers’ deposits.  You’re required to write out a “living will” that details exactly how you’ll pay the bills if you fail – because the rest of us aren’t bailing you out ever again.  And if you’re a mortgage lender or a payday lender or a credit card company, the days of signing people up for products they can’t afford with confusing forms and deceptive practices are over.  Today, American consumers finally have a watchdog in Richard Cordray with one job: To look out for them.

We will also establish a Financial Crimes Unit of highly trained investigators to crack down on large-scale fraud and protect people’s investments.  Some financial firms violate major anti-fraud laws because there’s no real penalty for being a repeat offender.  That’s bad for consumers, and it’s bad for the vast majority of bankers and financial service professionals who do the right thing.  So pass legislation that makes the penalties for fraud count.

And tonight, I am asking my Attorney General to create a special unit of federal prosecutors and leading state attorneys general to expand our investigations into the abusive lending and packaging of risky mortgages that led to the housing crisis. This new unit will hold accountable those who broke the law, speed assistance to homeowners, and help turn the page on an era of recklessness that hurt so many Americans.

Finally, President Obama called for the wealthy to begin paying their fair share again by ending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and instituting a Buffett Rule that ensures that millionaires pay a tax rate of at least 30%.  While Obama’s accompanying proposal to rein in the long term costs of Medicare and Medicaid could create some peril, it is important to keep in mind that we can and should rein in such costs by rationalizing health care spending rather than by cutting benefits:

I’m prepared to make more reforms that rein in the long term costs of Medicare and Medicaid, and strengthen Social Security, so long as those programs remain a guarantee of security for seniors.

But in return, we need to change our tax code so that people like me, and an awful lot of Members of Congress, pay our fair share of taxes.  Tax reform should follow the Buffett rule:  If you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30 percent in taxes.  And my Republican friend Tom Coburn is right:  Washington should stop subsidizing millionaires.  In fact, if you’re earning a million dollars a year, you shouldn’t get special tax subsidies or deductions.  On the other hand, if you make under $250,000 a year, like 98 percent of American families, your taxes shouldn’t go up.  You’re the ones struggling with rising costs and stagnant wages.  You’re the ones who need relief.

Now, you can call this class warfare all you want.  But asking a billionaire to pay at least as much as his secretary in taxes?  Most Americans would call that common sense.

President Obama’s speech did include a few conservative ideas that we aren’t excited by such as opening up more than 75% of our potential offshore oil and gas areas to drilling.  But the clear focus of President Obama’s speech was an aggressive presentation of a progressive vision of economic fairness, smart regulations, the wealthy paying their fair share, clean energy development, immigration, and infrastructure investment.  The contrast with President Clinton’s 1996 triangulation could hardly be clearer.

While President Obama’s speech provides us progressives with an opportunity, it also presents a risk.  Clinton’s triangulation was harmful to the progressive cause as a matter of policy, but it succeeded in what it was intended to do – get President Clinton re-elected. With President Obama taking a far more progressive approach in a fairly similar political situation, we progressives must do what we can to make sure that Obama is re-elected with a Democratic Congress (and then hold their feet to the fire in 2013) so that we can show that the progressive vision is a better approach not only as a matter of policy but also as a matter of politics.

To do your part, write a letter to your local newspaper editor in support of the proposed Buffett Rule and sign up to volunteer for Obama’s re-election campaign.

President Obama yesterday traveled to Detroit (sometimes referred to as ”The 313″ after the area code for the city) to give a Labor Day speech that also served as a preview of Thursday’s announcement of the President’s new agenda for promoting job growth.  Yesterday’s speech was music to the ears of folks looking for President Obama to be aggressive in standing up for progressive values and fighting back against the GOP, as the President presented a strong defense of workers’ right to organize and made clear that he intends to call the GOP’s bluff when they fail to put country before party in the upcoming jobs fight. 

The President started with a recognition of everything that unions have done to build America’s middle class:

I also want to talk about the work you’ve been doing for decades:  Work to make sure that folks get an honest day’s pay for an honest day’s work.  Work to make sure that families get a fair shake.  The work you’ve done that helped build the greatest middle class the world has ever known. I’m talking about the work that got us a 40-hour workweek and weekends, and paid leave and pensions, and the minimum wage and health insurance, and Social Security and  Medicare — the cornerstones of middle-class security.  That’s because of your work. 

If you want to know who helped lay these cornerstones of an American middle class you just have to look for the union label.

That’s the bedrock this country is built on.  Hard work.  Responsibility.  Sacrifice.  Looking out for one another.  Giving everybody a shot, everybody a chance to share in America’s prosperity, from the factory floor to the boardroom.  That’s what unions are all about.

  Next, the President highlighted the work that his Administration did to successfully rescue the US auto industry:

And here’s what else we said, Detroit.  We said that American autoworkers could once again build the best cars in the world.  So we stood by the auto industry.  And we made some tough choices that were necessary to make it succeed.  And now, the Big Three are turning a profit and hiring new workers, and building the best cars in the world right here in Detroit, right here in the Midwest, right here in the United States of America. 

President Obama then provided a preview of his upcoming jobs agenda, identifying infrastructure investments and an extension of the payroll tax cut as core elements of that agenda:

We’ve got roads and bridges across this country that need rebuilding.  We’ve got private companies with the equipment and the manpower to do the building.  We’ve got more than 1 million unemployed construction workers ready to get dirty right now.  There is work to be done and there are workers ready to do it.  Labor is on board.  Business is on board.  We just need Congress to get on board.  Let’s put America back to work. 

Last year, we worked together, Republicans and Democrats, to pass a payroll tax cut.  And because of that, this year the average family has an extra $1,000 in their pocket because of it.   But that’s going to expire in a few months if we don’t come together to extend it.  And I think putting money back in the pockets of working families is the best way to get demand rising, because that then means business is hiring, and that means the government — that means that the economy is growing. 

Our President then made clear that while he would like to work with folks on both sides of the aisle to promote job growth, he is not going to wait around for the GOP or put up with them distracting the discussion with manufactured crises or petty games:

So I’m going to propose ways to put America back to work that both parties can agree to, because I still believe both parties can work together to solve our problems.  And given the urgency of this moment, given the hardship that many people are facing, folks have got to get together.

But we’re not going to wait for them. We’re going to see if we’ve got some straight shooters in Congress.  We’re going to see if congressional Republicans will put country before party.  We’ll give them a plan, and then we’ll say, do you want to create jobs?  Then put our construction workers back to work rebuilding America. Do you want to help our companies succeed?  Open up new markets for them to sell their products.  You want — you say you’re the party of tax cuts?  Well then, prove you’ll fight just as hard for tax cuts for middle-class families as you do for oil companies and the most affluent Americans.  Show us what you got. 

The time for Washington games is over. The time for action is now.  No more manufactured crises.  No more games.  Now is not the time for the people you sent to Washington to worry about their jobs; now is the time for them to worry about your jobs. 

President Obama then harkened back to President Harry Truman and vowed to fight for collective bargaining rights for as long as he is in office:

What was true back in 1948 is true in 2011.  When working families are doing well, when they’re getting a decent wage and they’re getting decent benefits, that means they’re good customers for businesses. That means they can buy the cars that you build. That means that you can buy the food from the farmers.  That means you can buy from Silicon Valley.  You are creating prosperity when you share in prosperity. 

So when I hear some of these folks trying to take collective bargaining rights away, trying to pass so-called “right to work” laws for private sector workers that really mean the right to work for less and less and less — when I hear some of this talk I know this is not about economics.  This is about politics.

And I want everybody here to know, as long as I’m in the White House I’m going to stand up for collective bargaining

Winning Progressive hopes that yesterday’s speech was just a preview of the fighting spirit that President Obama will bring to the jobs agenda this fall and through next year.  But the President cannot do this alone.  Instead, we progressives all need to help echo the President’s message by writing letters to our local newspaper editor and calling our Congresspeople in support of a pro-jobs, pro-labor agenda that invests in infrastructure and protects workers’ right to collectively bargain.