New Economic Perspectives has the article The Peterson Foundation Sings the Same Old Song.

I post about this article here to try to help disabuse you of the idea that the Peterson Foundation has even a shred of credibility which even some Democrats think it has.

I also post a much larger selection of excerpts than I normally would, because it is really important for you to read this material.  I know many people don’t follow the link to the underlying article in my blog posts.  If I am lucky they do read what I put directly into the post.

Also, keep in mind that the Chief Economist for the minority on the Senate Budget Committee, Stephanie Kelton, used to be the editor of New Economic Perspectives until she became the Chief Economist.  I have high hopes that she and Senator Bernie Sanders, who appointed her, can start to educate the public and other politicians to the reality of how sovereign currency works, and the policy opportunities it unlocks.

Now for the excerpts from the article The Peterson Foundation Sings the Same Old Song.

He thinks the debt is a long-term problem that we have to start to solve now. I think there is, literally, no public finance-related debt problem for a fiat sovereign like the U.S., and that the problem that exists is not a debt problem, but a political problem created by Peterson and his allies across the political spectrum who have propagandized the view that there is a debt crisis since the mid-1970s, with increasing success since the 1990s.
.
.
.
But apart from CBO’s efforts at science fiction, this sentence clearly implies that higher deficits are a bad thing, that the lower deficits we’ve been having currently are an improvement over what we had before, and that our fiscal situation will be getting worse again soon in the precise sense that we will be running higher deficits. So, this one sentence shows that The Peterson Foundation has no idea what the government deficit really is.
,
,
,
So, the lower deficit Peterson approves of is close to or past putting the private sector into an aggregate annual loss position. And, in advocating for further deficit reduction, what Peterson is doing is advocating for placing the private sector into a much deeper and unsustainable loss position over a period of years. Doesn’t Peterson know that government deficits add to private sector aggregate net financial assets? Doesn’t he know that budgetary austerity will cause the private sector to lose financial wealth? Doesn’t he know that the deficit doesn’t harm the government’s capability to spend, but that cutting it does harm the private sector’s capability to spend by destroying private sector wealth over time?
.
.
.
They would take money from us, our children and our grandchildren today, preventing us from investing in that future, because they say that the Government is like a household and has to run small deficits or surpluses to safeguard its future capacity to spend. But the federal government is the monopoly issuer of the currency, and when it uses that power to deficit spend it generally contributes net financial assets to the private sector and makes it stronger, while when it runs surpluses it doesn’t increase its capacity spend, but only decreases the private sector’s ability to generate economic activity and new investments.
.
.
.
These very views are today largely responsible for the disasters we see in Greece, Spain, Portugal, and increasingly in Italy. It is long past time to end their fiscal reign of terror, by giving them no further credence.

We can do that in the United States, by making everyone understand that there is nothing to the gospel of deficit reductions, surplus budgets, and fiscal austerity except human misery, and making them understand also that the time is long passed to embrace a doctrine of real fiscal responsibility that tells us to evaluate fiscal policy proposals in fiat sovereign nations by their likely real world results without regard to their implications for the public interest-bearing debt.

In comments on a previous post, 47 Traitors! Biden, Others Rip GOP Senators Over Iran Letter, Marden Seavy introduced the following video clip of Jon Stewart on the Daily Show.

As Stewart really lays into the Republicans at the beginning of the video, I thought that Mardy had really found the clip to put the nail in the coffin of the Republicans. Unfortunately, I watched the clip to the end. In a seemingly even-handed way, Stewart points out the history of Democrats speaking to foreign leaders at which Republicans and Republican Presidents were annoyed. Jon Stewart has the nasty habit of pointing out the foibles of both sides.

I decided to research one such incident. This was the visit by Nancy Pelosi to Bashar al-Assad of Syria. President Bush was trying to isolate al-Assad at the time.

Of course the devil is in the details of the comparison. The New York Times had an article at the time, Pelosi Meets With Syrian Leader. The article points out the negatives and some possible positives of the trip from various points of view. You’ll really have to read it yourself, and make your own judgment.

I have been reading about the Logan Act of 1799, last amended in 1994. It is not clear if the words WikiPedia gives us are the original act or the act as amended.

The paper Conducting Foreign Relations Without Authority: The Logan Act by the Congressional Research Service settles the matter.

As amended, the Act states:

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects

Was Nancy Pelosi trying to defeat some measures of the United States in the same way that the Republicans were? Or is there an actual difference. Now it is up to you to decide if there really is a moral equivalence with what Nancy Pelosi did and what the 47 Republican Senators did.

By the way, the WikiPedia article says:

Despite the apparent success of Logan’s mission, his activities aroused the opposition of the Federalist Party in Congress, who were resentful of the praise showered on Logan by oppositional Democratic-Republican newspapers. Secretary of State Timothy Pickering, also of Pennsylvania, responded by suggesting that Congress “act to curb the temerity and impudence of individuals affecting to interfere in public affairs between France and the United States.”

So I come to the conclusion that if you want to do seemingly outrageous things, you can certainly take the risk of doing them (as in starting a war with Iraq under false premises). If you turn out to be right in what you did, you will be deemed a hero. By the same token, if you turn out to be wrong, you will be the goat, and deservedly so. If you end up being the goat, you have no one to blame but yourself.

MSNBC has the article Kerry teaches Rubio the basics about the Middle East by Steve Benen

At the recent CPAC gathering, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), a likely Republican presidential candidate, seemed to stumble on one of the basic facts of the Middle East. “The reason Obama hasn’t put in place a military strategy to defeat ISIS is because he doesn’t want to upset Iran,” the Florida Republican said.

The senator seemed confused. In reality, President Obama has put an anti-ISIS military strategy in place, and that’s fine with Iran, since Iran and ISIS are enemies.

Now you may or may not want to hear an opinion from Steve Benen, but the video with Kerry is eye opening for anyone who still has eyelid muscles that can open their eyes.

One wonders if any Republican in Congress is capable of seeing and listening. I certainly have my doubts about anything getting beyond Rubio’s preconceived notions.

Beyond racism, what people really don’t like about Obama is that he knows more about what is going on than they do. He was even smart enough to finally rid himself of the war mongering Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, and get someone like John Kerry. (Not that Kerry doesn’t have to play up a little to the war mongers in our country.)

By, the way, this YouTube video ought to work because I am not using the usual cookie suppressing mode that YouTube has recently broken and has promised that they are feverishly trying to fix.

Naked Capitalism has the story Fracking Industry Conspiring To Cover Up Oklahoma Earthquake Evidence?.

Yves here. It’s one thing to suspect that evidence that fracking causes earthquakes is being suppressed. It’s quite another to be able to name the parties behind the cover up.

To which I replied:

My blog post “EPA to natural gas companies: Give details on ‘fracking’ chemicals” of December 30, 2010 has an excerpt from a USGS.gov page that says:

“In 1961, a 12,000-foot well was drilled at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal, northeast of Denver, for disposing of waste fluids from Arsenal operations. Injection was commenced March 1962, and an unusual series of earthquakes erupted in the area shortly after.
…

“During 1968, ten slight shocks were felt in Colorado. Only one, on July 15, caused minor damage at Commerce City. In September of that year, the Army began removing fluid from the Arsenal well at a very slow rate, in hope that earthquake activity would lessen. The program consisted of four tests between September 3 and October 26. Many slight shocks occurred near the well during this period. ”

So the connection between earthquakes and injection of waste has been known for at least 47 years.

If You Only News has the story 47 Traitors! Biden, Others Rip GOP Senators Over Iran Letter.

Here is what Democratic leader Harry Reid, and Illinois Senator Dick Durbin, had to say about the letter, on the floor of the Senate, via C-SPAN:

Yeah, what they said!!!

I guess they couldn’t bring up the October Surprise conspiracy theory about Ronald Reagan because at least even he was smart enough to cover his tracks sufficiently so that there was at least some doubt in some peoples’ minds that he actually did it. Besides, you can’t tie what Reagan did to an entire party.

The Daily Beast has the article Republicans Admit: That Iran Letter Was a Dumb Idea.

But even among Republicans whose offices have signed the letter, there is some trepidation that the Iran letter injects partisanship into the Iran negotiations, shifting the narrative from the content of the deal to whether Republicans are unfairly trying to undercut the president.

Gee, do ya think the letter injects partisanship?  How much trepidation will they feel when they realize that they might be facing 3 years in prison?

Republican aides were taken aback by what they thought was a light-hearted attempt to signal to Iran and the public that Congress should have a role in the ongoing nuclear discussions. Two GOP aides separately described their letter as a “cheeky” reminder of the Congressional branch’s prerogatives.

“The administration has no sense of humor when it comes to how weakly they have been handling these negotiations,” said a top GOP Senate aide.

No, I have no sense of humor when it comes to negotiating about nuclear weapons and war in the Middle East.  Maybe Dzhokhar Tsarnaev should use as a defense that we just have no sense of humor about terrorist acts.

The Republicans and these stupid aides would be better off shutting the ef up and going back to their little hidey holes until the FBI comes a-knocking.

These Republicans call other people names, but they are dumber than a door post.

March 10, 2015

I forgot to add this quote from the article.

Supporters of the White House’s ongoing negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program pushed back hard against the letter, with some even citing a law written in the 18th century (and not applied since 1803) to say that the senators engaged in illegal conduct by communicating with a foreign government to undermine the U.S. government’s foreign policy.

Is the Daily Beast out of its mind?  Are they somehow trying to subtly justify what the Republicans did by saying how old the law is and how long it has been since their has been an application?  Maybe there hasn’t been a good example against which to apply the law since 1803 because there hasn’t been anyone since then who was so stupid as to break the law so blatantly. At least when Ronald Reagan broke the law, and kept the Iran hostages in captivity longer than they would have been held otherwise, he tried to keep it secret from the American public.  These modern Republicans haven’t got the sense that a President with incipient Alzheimer’s disease had.

These are the people that some in our country want to trust to have their fingers on the nuclear button.  What will it take for people to realize how dangerous these Republicans are?  This is no game.  These are life and death decisions.

The Daily Kos has the article Chuck Todd comes clean on Obamacare and kinda exposes failed Republican governance.

The article could have mentioned that Todd’s closing remarks did uncover his disingenuous ass hattery.  He called the ACA “one of the most unpopular laws in recent history” without indicating that he was even aware of his own contribution to whatever unpopularity it may have.  Nor does he admit to stating as fact something that is probably not true.

Robert Reich has the Facebook post Republicans jeopardizing the safety and security of the United States.  The headline is mine, however, all  but one word can be found as a phrase in Reich’s post.

For the first time in American diplomatic history, one political party is devising its own foreign policy with its own entreaties to foreign governments.

His post asked my opinion, so this is what I wrote.

Prosecute under the Logan Act. If we don’t stop this Republican escalation of flaunting the law, who knows where this might end. The President took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. Could he be impeached if he fails to act?

How might the Senators react if the President at least asked the FBI to interview each of the 47 Senators to get them to admit or deny that they authorized their signatures to be put on the letter.

Could Mitch McConnell still be majority leader if 47 of his Senators were in jail?

Call on President Obama to protect and defend our Constitution or face the consequences.

The Daily Banter has the article 47 Republicans May Have Just Broken the Law By Writing An Outrageous Letter To Iran.  I particularly like the opening paragraph of the article.

Just when you thought congressional Republicans couldn’t look any more like a troupe of treacherous clowns hellbent on circus-ifying anything President Obama tries to do, they pull another bag of tricks from the trunk of their tiny car.

The Daily Banter has a related article Why the White House Won’t Pursue GOP Senators’ Iran Letter As Logan Act Violation.

However, such an uphill fight would not be worth the gamble, politically, and under the current set of facts, the White House is getting the best of both words.

I agree that the Whitehouse might see it this way, but I completely disagree that this attitude is correct.

As I said in my previous post 47 Senators Charged With Violating Logan Act,

I would like to see Obama have FBI agents record interviews with each one of these Senators to verify that they approved adding their names to the letter.  If they did approve, then they can be charged.  If they say they didn’t approve, but it can be proved that they did, then they can also be charged with lying to the FBI.  It would be fun to see if Mitch McConnell can maintain his position of majority leader in the Senate if 47 of his Senators are taken away to jail.

There comes point when the President has to say enough is enough.  He follows a dangerous path if he fails to act against these Senators.

Please sign the Whitehouse petition mentioned in my previous post Senator Tom Cotton’s letter to Iran is a direct violation of the Logan Act and should be prosecuted.  The least we can do to try to regain some control over our government is to sign a petition.  It is even easier than dragging yourself to the polls to vote.

Your might have heard of this right that you have:

the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

In this age of the internet, you don’t even have to physically assemble.

The United States Insititute of Peace has the article Part II: Iran Responds to GOP Letter.

Foreign Minister Zarif added that “I should bring one important point to the attention of the authors and that is, the world is not the United States, and the conduct of inter-state relations is governed by international law, and not by US domestic law. The authors may not fully understand that in international law, governments represent the entirety of their respective states, are responsible for the conduct of foreign affairs, are required to fulfil the obligations they undertake with other states and may not invoke their internal law as justification for failure to perform their international obligations.”

Thanks to Nancy Weinberg for posting this on Facebook.

The Iran Primer Blog has all the pieces to this series nicely arranged on their web site. In case this presentation gets altered, I will give you links to the various pieces that exist as of the writing of my post.

Part I: GOP Letter on Iran

Part II: Iran Responds to GOP Letter

Part III: White House and Democrats Respond to GOP Letter

Vice President Joe Biden

Around the world, America’s influence depends on its ability to honor its commitments. Some of these are made in international agreements approved by Congress. However, as the authors of this letter must know, the vast majority of our international commitments take effect without Congressional approval. And that will be the case should the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, and Germany reach an understanding with Iran.

Well, at least the America public is getting lessons in our government. Perhaps some Senators might learn a lesson or two. Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif seems to be much more knowledgeable about our Constitution and International Law than our Republicans. Is America embarrassed at all about the nincompoops we elect?