A View From D. C.

The Real Battle Begins

2011-08-12T18:31:00.003-04:00

Living through the dog days of August 2011 entails more than enduring heat and humidity. This is the period of congressional recess where advocates have a full month to lobby Members of Congress on issues of importance to them.

With the focus on the Super Committee’s mandate to tackle entitlements and tax reform per the debt ceiling agreement, local community groups will need to bring their “A” game to preserve funding for their priority programs. It will not be easy. Now that the committee has been named, the focus will be on the individuals appointed to the panel. There will be tremendous pressure for them to reach consensus on a deal.

Because of what is at stake, they will ultimately reach a deal. Neither side wants to trigger the across the board cuts which will occur if an agreement isn’t reached. At the end of this process neither side is going to be completely happy with the results.

To help maximize your lobbying efforts, here are suggestions to consider:

• A new, more personal message has to be crafted to resonate with voters. The decision by Republicans to propose cuts to Medicare backfired because it affected people, both Republicans and Democrats, personally. In these tough economic times, your message has to resonate with the self-interest of the voter.

• Go outside of the box to deliver your message. The use of Twitter, Facebook, and the other social media outlets are important; however, programs like Ellen, The View, etc., have audiences that respond to emotional messages. Their producers look for stories for their principals to discuss and occasionally invite a guest to appear on a show. For example, seek stories which highlight individuals in various communities are being helped by programs which are in jeopardy of being eliminated by Congress.

• Be realistic in your expectations. Know what you want, but be realistic about what you can get. Cuts are unavoidable. It is ridiculous to think otherwise.

• Use the House budget numbers as the baseline in determining potential cuts. The House numbers are driving the debate. The administration and Senate Democrats have failed to coalesce around an alternative to the House budget proposal. Consequently, use these numbers in calculating potential cuts to your program to help with your advocacy efforts. It will also help prepare you for the programmatic and administrative changes you may face in the near future.

• Accurately assess the current political environment. The anti-Washington, DC sentiment throughout the United States is very intense across the political spectrum but that does not necessarily mean widespread dissatisfaction with specific programs. The uproar over potential cuts to Medicare and Social Security reminded everyone how sensitive the voting public can be when faced with specific options. However, budget changes will drive how Washington functions in the future. There will be changes in the way Washington funds and administers programs.

• Think of ways to be proactive with the coming changes. Be proactive in embracing the change to the benefit of the programs you support. Is this an opportunity to pursue programmatic, administrative or regulatory changes? This is always an opportunity in the midst of a challenge.

• Embrace tax reform. This is a bipartisan initiative which can raise revenue and create a more equitable tax structure for all income groups. It may also protect some programs from deep cuts or elimination.

Interesting Read

Whole Foods versus Cracker Barrel: How Americans Are Self-Sorting
By Charlie Cook
The Cook Report

Republicans Set Sights on Balanced Budget Amendment
By Jennifer Steinhauer
The New York Times

Panetta Warns Against ‘Doomsday’ Cuts of $600 Billion in Defense Spending
By Jason Ukman
The Washington Post

Debt-limit Deal Triggers Lobbying Campaign from Health-Care and Defense Industries
By Dan Eggen
The Washington Post

Two Parties Pray to the Same God, But Different Economists
By Michael Gerson
The Washington Post

End Political Gridlock: Put a Millennial in Charge
By Laura Sessions Stepp
Special to CNN

Are Millennials Cut Out for this Job Market?
By Ruben Navarrette, Jr.
CNN Contributor

Origins of the Debt Showdown
By Brady Dennis, Alec MacGillis and Lori Montgomery
The Washington Post

Fewer Dinners Mean Meaner Politics
By Lea Berman
The Washington Post

In Economic Turmoil, U.S. Needs a Leader Like Churchill
By David Gergen
CNN Senior Political Analyst

The American Dream hangs in the balance
By Joe Scarborough
Politico

We Can't Even Cut Programs That Don't Work
By Steven Malanga
Real Clear Politics

Postal Service proposes cutting 120,000 jobs, pulling out of health-care plan
By Joe Davidson
The Washington Post

Navigating the Presidential Politics of 2012 Begins Now!

2011-08-03T17:12:00.001-04:00

The race for the presidency has begun. The debt ceiling agreement and its plan to reduce federal spending was the first salvo in the battle to claim the White House. Presidential politics is the order of the day between now and next November.

While many media outlets have identified winners and losers in the debt ceiling debate, it is more important to understand the lessons learned from the last few months. In this post, we will look at lessons we should have learned from this debate (or debacle depending on your perspective):

The nation’s fiscal situation has changed the nation’s political dynamics and community groups must adjust to this new reality. The new reality is more complicated than simply choosing between a more conservative Republican versus liberal Democratic approach to governance. The unwillingness to compromise at all costs by factions in both parties will make it difficult to find solutions to the pressing issues facing the nation.

The country needs to get its financial house in order, the international consequences are enormous. We simply cannot continue to carry the debt we currently hold and must reach some consensus on the escalating costs for entitlements, domestic and defense spending. Throughout the deficit reduction discussion the members of the president’s deficit commission were the only individuals made an honest, non-partisan, non-judgmental attempt to address those concerns. Their deliberations should be the model used for future discussions.

Balancing our nation’s budget is more complicated than solving a family’s finances. Comparing how our nation handles its finances to a family’s attempt to balance its budget is a good sound bite but that’s all. It is apples and oranges. Republicans discovered this immediately when they attempted to reform Medicare. The public, including Republican supporters, expressed opposition to entitlement reform. Republicans paid a political price and backed away.

Ideology, not practical governance, is driving politics. It is refreshing to see elected officials, the so-called Tea Party group, who are unconcerned with winning their next election. However, their desire to complete their mission at all cost could have crippled the world. That is frightening; however, their success and frustration during this debate will drive the debates between now and next November. What is obvious to one is a revelation to others. The ideological quandary afflicts both parties. Republicans placed theirs on full display in this debate.

Washington is now more about ideology and politics than governance. Governance issues get addressed as a byproduct of politics and ideology. There was a time when ideological differences did not prevent political leaders from bridging differences to reach a compromise on major issues facing the country. Even when the scion of conservatives, Ronald Reagan, was in office politics and ideology met in the middle. Those days are over in the foreseeable future.

Of all of the political leaders involved in the negotiations Vice President Joe Biden and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) emerged stronger politically while Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) saw their credibility weaken. Cantor brazenly took every opportunity to undermine Boehner at different times during negotiations displaying an ugly rift within the party. It helped to create the impression that Republicans are unfit to govern.

President Obama is still learning how to use the bully pulpit of the presidency. He appeared weak at times during these negotiations. The contempt and disrespect some Republicans have for him were on full display during these negotiations. He seems more comfortable as the candidate than as the president which will serve him well going into next year. He will have to reassert himself next year. It is hard to view the president favorably during these discussions. He did not use his bully pulpit as effectively as he could have. He capitulated to Republican demands that an increase in the debt limit must include corresponding cuts to the federal budget and no new taxes. This made him appear weak at times but the Republicans – in the House in particular – helped him appear to be more reasonable than they appeared. There are some report that the scheduled expiration of the Bush era tax cuts in 2012 will give him the leverage needed to extract revenue increases and was one consideration for agreeing to this deal.

Local advocates relying on public funds need to understand things are going to get worse before they get better. There will probably be no further extensions for unemployment insurance, some changes in Medicare and Medicaid payments, cuts to defense, housing, education, etc. Simply taxing the rich will not get us out of this financial mess.

We need tax reform. Simply opposing tax increases or insisting on taxing the wealthy is a simplistic approach to addressing a fundamental problem: we live in a country which tends to punish individuals and families for the income they earn. A more reasonable tax code which closes some loopholes and balances out the tax rates – along the lines of the deficit commission – will help tremendously.

Poll after poll has indicated the American public was disgusted with the actions of its elected officials in Washington. The focus of blame was slanted based on the respondent’s ideology. However, the public must accept it share of blame for the gridlock in Washington. For the most part, Members of Congress’s actions reflected the desires of the people who elected them to office. It is far too easy to point fingers at Congress or the President and forget who put them there.

Interesting Read

Spending Cuts: Here Comes the Hard Part
By Charles Riley
CNN Money

In Debt Deal, The Triumph of the Old Washington
By David A. Fahrenthold, Lori Montgomery and Paul Kane
The Washington Post

Eric Cantor: Obama 'in over his head'
By Jennifer Epstein
Politico

GOP Ponders a Rick Perry 2012 Candidacy
By Alexander Burns & Maggie Haberman
Politico

Obama Should Leave the Table

2011-07-14T09:49:00.004-04:00

President Barack Obama needs to end negotiations immediately. The time for talk is over. It is time to get a deal done and it is clear these individuals can’t get agree on anything. We are at a point where saving face is as important as getting a credible deal done. It is time to move on.

When everyone convenes Thursday, the president should tell all in attendance that he appreciates their effort, but there is not enough time to put together a deal that addresses the deficit and inflicts the least amount of pain on Americans. He should say he will only accept an unconditional increase in the debt ceiling.

He should say after he receives this authority, he will submit the findings of his deficit commission to Congress in legislative form. The recommendations provide for a balanced approach to the deficit everyone seeks. The recommendations enjoyed bipartisan support and will then be the starting point for new negotiations

He should then publicly announce his decision and instruct his staff to prepare for the United States to default if Republicans reject him.

It is not the perfect solution but everybody wins in the end.

Interesting Read

Top Republicans Clash over Debt-Limit Plan
By Paul Kane and Lori Montgomery
The Washington Post

With no Debt Deal, Obama Would Face Tough Choices Aug. 3 About What Bills to Pay
By Zachary A. Goldfarb
The Washington Post

Warning to Washington: Don’t Mess with the Debt Ceiling
By Bill Gross
The Washington Post

Debt talks blow up: The August debt ceiling showdown breaks along two fronts: the political forces of 2010 vs. 2012.
By: David Rogers
Politico

GOP lacks a lead Messenger : Republicans are searching for a national figure who can go toe to toe with Barack Obama.
By: Jake Sherman
Politico

Cantor risks overplaying hand: He faces consequences both if debt negotiations fail or if he cuts a soft deal with the president.
By: Jonathan Allen
Politico

Danger Lurking as Deficit Drama Continues

2011-07-13T20:37:00.005-04:00

The drama surrounding the deficit reduction talks is not a good sign for domestic programs. With Republicans dug against tax increases the underlying question in the current stalemate is: who will blink first?

For supporters of domestic spending it doesn’t matter. In the end, domestic programs, including housing, will take it on the chin. How serious a blow these programs will receive won’t be resolved until the deficit discussion is completed. Until an agreement is reached, all discussions on a FY 2012 budget are in hold.

Therefore, it is not a surprise that the House Transportation-HUD Appropriations Subcommittee cancelled this week’s mark-up of a FY 2012 appropriations bill. After the deficit reduction numbers are agreed to, the real budget will be determined. While the devil is in the details, the parameters of deficit deal are unlikely to favor domestic programs.

By standing firm in their commitment to no new taxes Republicans have put themselves in a no-win situation. They seem to believe they have the leverage and that President Barack Obama is going to blink and accede to their demands before the deadline arrives.

The substance of a potential deal and its political subplot will one day make a writer rich! House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) is clearly not in charge of the House Republicans. Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) has positioned himself as the real power in the House. His actions are reminding the Speaker his hold on the speaker’s chair is a tenuous one. Cantor is a fiscal hawk who is championing efforts to reduce federal spending.

The president has looked weak at times appearing to bow to Republican demands. He has made extraordinary concessions by offering to reduce federal domestic spending and making significant cuts and changes to Medicare and Social Security. While these concessions are fiscally necessary, they seem to have strengthened the resolve of Republicans. He has become more assertive with Republicans accept some tax increases; however, it may be too little too late.

For housing providers, regulatory relief provides the only reasonable course of action to weather this fiscal storm. However, if it occurs, it will happen too late to have a reasonable impact on day-to-day operations. Public housing organizations are seeking both regulatory relief from Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations and increased flexibility in the structure and use of housing vouchers. While there is some support in Congress for these measures, the pace is not happening quickly enough.

Additionally, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is using it administrative authority to reduce the reserve accounts of PHAs. PHAs use these reserve funds for operating expenses and, in some cases, to offset debt on capital expenditure. As much as agencies and their representative may disagree with HUD’s action, as long as they are dependent on the Federal government for funding, they have little recourse available to them.

These tough fiscal times should force all federally dependent groups to reevaluate what they are doing and how they are funded. Innovation will be the key in determining who survives in the future.

Chamber of Commerce Releases Survey Results

The United States Chamber of Commerce released the results of its second quarterly Small Business Survey which found that small business owners rank economic uncertainty as their number one concern.

Over 1,400 business owners were asked to identify their most pressing challenges and economic uncertainty topped the list followed by debt and deficit reduction, the health care law which was passed and over-regulation. A copy of the report can be found here.

Survey Points to Some Good/Bad Signs in Local Communities

The National League of Cities released a survey which shows progress in some sectors of local communities during the recession although residential property values continue to fall.

NLC recently released the responses to the Local Economic Conditions survey which tracks the impact of the recession on local communities. The survey is the first in a multi-year tracking effort on how the recession has affected local communities and to identify areas which mirror national indicators. The purpose of the survey series is to provide a parallel track to NLC’s 25-year survey on City Fiscal Conditions.

Among the findings:

• 45 percent of the respondents report the retail sector improving.
• 28 percent report that business permits and licenses are improving.
• 35 percent report increased investments in infrastructure and capital projects in the last six months.
• 51 percent report that residential property values have worsened.
• 44 percent report commercial property values have fallen.
• 41 percent report demand for survival services such as food banks and shelters has worsened.

The following areas were identified as most important to generate economic growth:

• small business development (54 percent);
• transportation infrastructure (49 percent);
• education/workforce training (31 percent); and,
• Housing and neighborhood development (25 percent).

A copy of the report can be found here.

HUD Releases Study of Fair Housing Initiative

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) released the findings of a study of its Fair Housing Initiative Program (FHIP). The study, the first of its kind in the 15 years of the program, found that the program is successful in reducing the burden of governments at all levels in investigating complaints and that complaints filtered through the program are more likely to result in a binding legal resolution, conciliation or cause finding. The study can be found here.

Interesting Read

House GOP Not Ready to Blink on Debt
Quite Simply There is No Deficit-Reduction Proposal on the Table That Will Satisfy House Republicans.
By: Jake Sherman and Jonathan Allen
Politico

Obama Exploits Boehner-Cantor Rift
The President Has Managed to Exploit the Fragile Relationship that Exists Between the Two GOPers.
By: Jonathan Allen and Jake Sherman
Politico

In Senate, politics trump substance
By: Manu Raju
Politico

Why Obama's pushing for a mega-deal
By David Gergen
CNN

As Easy as ABC
Moving on from Mitch McConnell.
By William Kristol
The Weekly Standard

Debt-Limit Harakiri
Mitch McConnell isn't selling out Republicans
The Wall Street Journal

The President's Jobs Plan (Not)
By Robert Reich
The Huffington Post

Waiting for the Enemy to Blink on the Debt Limit
By Wesley Pruden
The Washington Times

Small Business Needs Big Boost
By Scott Brown
The Boston Herald

How Kevin McCarthy Wrangles the Tea Party in Washington
By Robert Draper
The New York Times

Pressure Heating Up on Deficit Talks

2011-06-30T12:17:00.005-04:00

Now that President Barack Obama is more directly involved in the discussions to negotiate an agreement on deficit reduction, the pressure is building on all sides to bend before the nation’s debt ceiling needs to be lifted more than a month from now.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-VA) decision to abruptly pull out of the talks in objection to potential tax increases does more to absolve him of any responsibility for an agreement he and his conservative allies oppose than it does to bring both parties closer together. Cantor can read the writing on the wall. House and Senate Republicans have expressed a willingness to explore the elimination of corporate tax loopholes and cuts to defense spending in order to reach a compromise with the president and Democrats.

Cantor fancies himself as a leader of the House conservative movement. As the point person for the House in these talks, he cannot be perceived as compromising on the no tax increase pledge. By agreeing, or even the perception he has agreed to, anything which looks like a tax increase could damage his credibility among conservatives. Cantor certainly has aspirations to become Speaker of the House one day and would prefer to have the current Speaker, John Boehner (R-OH), take the fall.

While there are many Republicans who would be happy to allow the federal government to default, they cannot afford to be seen as the cause for the failure to reach an agreement. Republicans are more concerned about scoring political points than reaching a reasonable compromise. Such a position is selfish and irresponsible. A reasonable deficit reduction plan cannot be achieved by simply reducing domestic programs and making adjustments to Medicare and Social Security. A balanced approach is required.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) must also be careful. He can ill afford to lose any Republican votes in the Senate. Reasonable minds will eventually prevail. It is hard to believe anyone will actually allow the government to default on its obligations.

Those seeking to preserve domestic spending should be encouraged by the inclusion of defense cuts in the mix. Cuts to the defense budget may limit the depth of reductions to domestic programs and could pave the way for an agreement. However, it doesn’t lessen the impact cuts will have on domestic programs. It does, however, illustrate how serious both sides of the aisle are in finding ways to reduce the federal deficit.

States Seek Ways to Respond to Stagnant Economy and Reduce Federal Aid

The United State Chamber of Commerce released its second study looking at ways in which states are seeking to create policies and practices which help businesses, stimulates job growth and increase state revenue.

Enterprising States 2011 Recovery and Renewal for the 21st Century, looks at ways in which states are responding to the new economic environment. While the specific actions vary from state-to-state, the report finds that states are redesigning themselves, reducing spending, and revising their tax codes and policies. The report also pointed out that have fared best have fostered a “business-friendly” environment. These states also invested in new infrastructure and in education and training.

Mayors Release Report on U.S. Metro Economies

The United States Conference of Mayors and the Council for the New American City released a report during their recently completed conference in Baltimore, MD which highlighted the bleak economic forecast within the nation’s urban settings. The report, U.S. Metro Economies Report: 2011, was completed by Global Insight. The key findings to mayor's report covers a range of issues. The mayors are hoping the reduction in military operations in Afghanistan will translate into increased spending for local economies.

Interesting Read

Obama enters debt talks
By Paul Kane and and Rosalind S. Helderman
The Washington Post

The Politics of the Debt Ceiling Are Too Tempting
By Stuart Rothenberg
Roll Call Contributing Writer

Debt ceiling talks turn to taxes - higher taxes!
By Charles Riley
CNNMoney

Revenue vs. cuts in debt debate
By: David Rogers
Politico

GOP compromise on debt: Cut military spending?
By Lori Montgomery and Paul Kane,
The Washington Post

Debt ceiling deal's ticking clock creates pessimism
By David Rogers
Politico

GOP boosts push for balanced-budget amendment
By Sean Lengell
The Washington Times

House GOP living up to 'Pledge to America'
By Jake Sherman
Politico

Politics

Obama’s 2012 Game Plan
How can the president rev up and mobilize his demoralized liberal base?
by Michael Tomasky
Newsweek Magazine

Hispanics' Ascent Drives Early Moves in 2012 Race
The Wall Street Journal

Why Michele Bachmann is no Sarah Palin
By Chris Cillizza
The Washington Post

Michele Bachmann, evangelical feminist?
By Dan Gilgoff
CNN.com Religion Editor

Housing and Community Development

In Many Cities, Jobs Recovery Could be a Decade Away
By Stephen Gandel

If baby boomers stay in suburbia, analysts predict cultural shift
By Carol Morello
The Washington Post

In California's Rich Farm Country, How the Poor May Get Poorer
By Jens Erik Gould
Time Magazine

Deficit Drama Continues, Impact on Budget Still Uncertain

2011-06-24T14:59:00.005-04:00

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s decision to abruptly leave the deficit reduction talks throws another wrench into bipartisan efforts to reach a compromise on reducing federal spending. Republicans hard line on any tax increases or elimination of tax loopholes will make it extremely difficult to reach an agreement before the deadline to raise the nation’s debt limit.

If the Republicans are successful, domestic programs, including affordable housing programs are at risk of deep reductions over the next several years. Talks seemed to be progressing to the point where budget parameters for the next few years were coming into sharper focus. However, Cantor’s action and the Republican’s insistence on receiving a pledge from the president pretty much ensures an agreement will not be reached by the deadline.

The fact that some Members of Congress have expressed an interest in passing a temporary extension is an indication both parties realize while there is some progress being made, and that more time is needed. As budget pressures build, don’t be surprised if fewer groups express a reasonable position on deficit reduction like the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP). AARP stated they would accept reductions in benefits for future retirees until they received push back from Democrats and others.

There simply are too many competing and powerful interests groups yielding too much influence on negotiators. The pressure is squarely on the president. He is feeling the heat from Republicans and Democrats to submit a deficit reduction plan as a condition to having the ceiling raised. He needs to take the lead but not appear to be to pressure from Republic ans.

Republicans are operating from a position of strength For affordable housing programs, this is not a good sign for a number of reasons:

First, federal affordable housing programs have broad but shallow support in Congress and very little support among the general public. Public housing and the Section 8 voucher programs are not popular in local communities. In this political and economic environment, unpopular government programs will be the first targets of budget hawks. Even within the affordable housing community, it will be hard for broad coalitions to stick together when decisions are made about cutting programmatic budgets. At some point, self-interest will take over and the least popular programs will suffer.

Second, any efforts to spruce up the housing market will be targeted to homeownership. While it is becoming harder to own a home with tightening purchasing requirements, homeownership is still a strong indicator of economic progress. If the economy falters, housing production falters, if housing production falters fewer jobs and less upward mobility. In the eyes of too many important people, homeownership is more important to the overall economy than rental housing. When decisions are made about funding housing initiatives, homeownership initiatives will receive priority.

Third, the traditional message which said programs such as the Public Housing Capital Fund, HOME or CDBG are job creators, while technically correct, does not carry the same weight as it did in the past. Local governments are so overwhelmed job creation is only one concern. Cities and counties are getting squeezed top to bottom. From the top they are losing federal funds to address specific concerns. The economy has had negative consequences on families which means local politicians risk losing elections if they raise local taxes. There is not enough revenue to preserve existing jobs, create new ones and meet an array of fiscal obligations. At the United States Conference of Mayors (USCM) meeting in Baltimore, the mayors called for an end to the wars and a redistribution of those resources to local governments. It is not going to happen. Local governments will be squeezed further and in most communities public housing will suffer the most.

The message needs to change dramatically. In 1995, the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO) did, in fact, change the discussion on affordable housing in a dramatic way. The organization called for block granting housing programs and eliminating the Brooke Amendment. NAHRO’s bold step jolted the affordable housing community. By taking the position and calling for the restructuring of housing programs, the decision broadened NAHRO’s political support across both sides of the aisle while forcing legislators, administrators and advocates to rethink how these programs are structured and administered.

NAHRO’s proposals were controversial but the subsequent discussion led to the passage of the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998. Unfortunately, the Clinton Administration used its regulatory powers to neuter some of the flexibility provided housing administrators that was in the legislation. Nevertheless, NAHRO’s action is an example of the kind of initiative needed to reshape debate on public housing and do so in a constructive way.

Affordable housing groups need to hire a public relations firm that has the pulse on what Americans will support. Housing programs are slow, expensive and in no-win situations. If the property looks too nice, citizens feel it is a waste of taxpayer dollars on “undeserving” families. If it is not properly maintained, it is a waste of taxpayer dollars. The message must be about people not places. Many years ago NAHRO had ads in its magazine which highlighted the people served in public housing. A variation of that message needs to be the foundation of advocacy efforts.

Without a change in message, affordable housing is facing deep cuts from which some programs may never recover. Look at the groups screaming the loudest: farmer subsidy supporters, defense hawks, protectors of food and children nutritional and food programs. Housing groups cannot compete with them without a compelling argument which puts them, at minimum, at the table when decisions are made.

Interesting Read

Debt talks: Democrat Kent Conrad, Senate budget chair, says $2 trillion not enough
By Lori Montgomery and Rosalind S. Helderman
The Washington Post

Deficit talks in danger as Eric Cantor bails
By David Rogers
Politico

GOP's bold gamble on deficit talks
By David Rogers
Politico

Can Boehner play dealmaker on debt talks?
By Jake Sherman and John Bresnahan
Politico

Obama’s dilemma on the debt-limit talks
The Washington Post
By Michael Gerson

Democrats fret over White House dealmaking
By Jake Sherman and John Bresnahan
Politico

CBO: Debt could grow to double GDP
By David Rogers
Politico

AARP expects Social Security benefit cuts
By Jeanne Sahad
CNN Money

AARP Move on Social Security Could Help Avoid a Train Wreck
By David Gergen
CNN

Conservatives’ spending pledge
By Emily Miller
The Washington Times

Housing and Community Development

White House’s Daley seeks balance in outreach meeting with manufacturers
By Peter Wallsten and and Jia Lynn Yang
The Washington Post

The Indiana Exception? Yes, but...
By Michael Powell and Monica Davey
The New York Times

Eclipsed
Why the white working class is the most alienated and pessimistic group in American society.
by Ronald Brownstein
The National Journal

Interesting Reading to Start Your Week

2011-05-31T10:01:00.002-04:00

Housing and Community Development

Housing Market Suffers Biggest Decline in 16 Months
By Ben Terris
The National Journal

What, Me Worry? (Part 1)
Main Street: We’ve Got Bigger Problems
By Jim Tankersley
The National Journal

EDITORIAL: Unemployment reform
House to vote on easing 99-week benefit requirement
The Washington Times

Pro-Obama Media Always Shocked by Bad Economic News
By Michael Barone
Washington Examiner

Politics

NY-26: Big impact on deficit fights
By David Gergen
CNN

How the GOP could rescue Medicare reform
By Michael Gerson
The Washington Post

Republicans brace for tough 2012 fight against Obama in unlikely place — N.C.
By Amy Gardner
The Washington Post

Just who is Herman Cain? And what does his presidential run mean for the GOP?
By Jason Horowitz
The Washington Post

The 2012 Republican Battle Test
Why it's a good thing there's no obvious GOP front-runner.
The Wall Street Journal

For the real GOP field, wait until after Labor Day
By Roland Martin
CNN

The Cook Report: Room for One More
Watch for Michele Bachmann or Rick Perry to try to fill a void in the GOP presidential race.
By Charlie Cook
National Journal

The Road to Reelection Got Smoother for Obama

2011-05-26T11:12:00.003-04:00

Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels’ decision to forego a White House bid has increased the likelihood President Barack Obama will be reelected for a second term. Recognizing a lot can occur between now and November 2012, it appears the only thing that can truly sink the president’s reelection bid is a down economy.

Each of the remaining high-profile candidates mentioned - New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, Texas Governor Rick Perry and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush - may attract Republican support but will have a difficult time unseating the president if the economy is on the upswing. None of the current candidates or prospective candidates generates excitement among the party faithful. If they have difficulty energizing their own party faithful, it is hard to imagine they will win the hearts and mind of independents and other voters.

The president must take advantage of the mistake made by Republicans who proposed cuts to Medicare without fully vetting the public’s appetite for such reductions. The cuts to Medicare proposed by House Budget Chair Paul Ryan (R-WI) have not been well received and have put Republicans on the defensive. Now is the time for the president to push aggressively for a budget which preserves his priority programs while painting the Republicans as out of step with everyday Americans.

By not offering the recommendations of the deficit commission, the president has allowed himself to enter the partisan fray. He must step back and appear “presidential” as he did during the lame duck session last year. The pressure is not on Obama but on Republicans to come up with a reasonable number for a budget agreement.

Republicans will continue to paint the president as a “big-spending, socialist”; however, they realize how vulnerable they will be in 2012 with an uninspiring candidate, a proposal to radically change Medicare (which even Tea Party faithful do not want to see cut) and possibly being held responsible for the nation defaulting on its obligations if an agreement is not reached in extending the debt limit.

The budget discussions are the foundation for next year’s elections. A bi-partisan budget agreement does not help Republicans next year. Republicans need issues like the economy and Federal spending to be the focus of voter’s attention not the president himself. Focusing on specific issues versus the president will eliminate any risk of appearing overtly or covertly racist. Donald Trump’s unsuccessful attempt to question the president’s academic credentials is a prime example of how attacks on the president can quickly deteriorate.

If a reasonable budget agreement is reached, the president stays above the political fray, the economy shows signs of life and all other things being equal, Obama will be hard to defeat.

NLC Releases Financial Tool Kit for Elected Officials

The National League of Cities released a tool kit for municipal officials to assist families which are “unbanked” and “underbanked” to access traditional financial institutions. The toolkit is part of NLC’s Bank On Cities Campaign which is designed to help local leaders connect low- and moderate-income residents to mainstream financial services to avoid high-cost check-cashers, predatory lenders and other costly alternative financial services.

Interesting Read

Parties are still $1T apart on domestic spending
By David Rogers
Politico

Have Democrats cracked the code for 2012?
By Alexander Burns
Politico

Gang of 5/6 tries to salvage work
By Meredith Shiner
Politico

Will Republicans learn the lesson of NY-26 loss?
By Dan Balz
The Washington Post

The Wish List: Taking a Hard Look at Republicans Not in the Presidential Scrum
By Alex Roarty
National Journal

Stimulus price tag once again lurches higher
By Stephen Dinan
The Washington Times

Stimulus recipients found to be tax cheats
By Stephen Dinan
The Washington Times

The Elephant in the Green Room
By Gabriel Sherman
New York Magazine

If I Take Down Fox, Is All Forgiven?
By Jason Zengerle
New York Magazine

Deficit Talks Not Good for Housing

2011-05-20T15:58:00.003-04:00

Sen. Tom Coburn’s decision to withdraw from talks by the “Gang of Six” does not bode well for advocates hoping to stall cuts to federal housing programs. Coburn was part of a group of senators hoping to reach bipartisan agreement on a deficit reduction plan that could win broad congressional approval. Coburn’s decision to remove himself from those discussions makes reaching an agreement harder. As a result, the politics of deficit reduction will overshadow any substantive discussion that could occur.

President Barack Obama’s decision not to accept the recommendations of the deficit commission he empaneled as the starting point for these discussions has led to a more complicated, highly political process leaving Federal programs ripe for attacks. The deficit commission recommendations were easily approved in a bipartisan fashion after sparing no program from assuming a portion of the responsibility to reduce the federal deficit. This gave every politician in Washington the political version of a flak jacket when approaching sensitive issues like tax increases, cuts to entitlement programs and the defense budget. The commission members understood the need for broad action to reign in Federal spending. Their support for a series of hard choices demonstrated a bipartisan consensus on difficult issues could be reached.

Obama unwisely went in a different direction. The result was a contentious debate on the FY 2011 budget that went down to the wire and a more difficult set of negotiations with catastrophic consequences if an agreement is not reached. The more contentious these discussions the more likely “poorly administered” agencies will bear the brunt of cuts.

Anticipating cuts to its programs as a result of the discussions, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is beginning to distance itself from some of the local decision-making within local agencies. First, it is going make the salaries of housing agency directors more accessible to the public. These records are already a matter of public record but highlighting these salaries only adds fuel to the public’s discontent with government workers. It will lead to calls to reduce spending and salaries for public officials.

Second, HUD’s response to a series of articles in The Washington Post which questioned the management of funds administered through the HOME Investment Partnership program was to blame local decision-making. HUD said it has no control over how funds are administered. Mercedes Marquez, HUD’s assistant secretary for community planning and development, told The Washington Post, “this is what comes with having the flexibility of a block grant, where you respect local decisions.”

Now Members of Congress are calling for a review of HUD’s program. It does not come at a good time. The House Appropriations Committee releases its funding parameters for FY 2012 and housing programs are facing an overall reduction of 14 percent. Denial is the safest card for the department to play. If Republicans target HUD for deeper cuts, department officials can point to poor programmatic local decision-making as the culprit.

Republicans have aggressively argued additional cuts must accompany any increase to the nation’s debt limit. While no one truly expects Congress to allow the U.S. government to default on its obligations, the hard-line tactics worked effectively before an agreement on a FY 2011 budget was reached and a government shutdown was averted. The stakes are much greater now and the consequences too catastrophic for some to contemplate; however, there is a segment within congressional Republicans who would be happy to allow the deadline to pass without an agreement.

The seriousness posed by defaulting gives the president the slight edge in these negotiations. As long as he submits modest cuts during these negotiations, he places the burden on Republicans to move from their hardline stance or cause calamity. The increased scrutiny of HUD and the local officials will continue to put housing agencies on the defensive.

Interesting Read

Members of Congress call for probe of HUD’s HOME affordable-housing program
By Debbie Cenziper
The Washington Post

A trail of stalled or abandoned HUD projects
By Debbie Cenziper and Jonathan Mummolo
The Washington Post

Speculators score, District loses in affordable-housing deal
By Debbie Cenziper
The Washington Post

US: Philly housing agency overpaid for shoddy work; audit questions $127M in stimulus spending
By Associated Press
The Washington Post

Budget surplus to deficit: How we got here
By David Rogers
Politico

Can loan modification fix housing?
By Christipher Papagianis
Politico

Neo-Voodoo Economics
By Jim Tankersley and Michael Hirsh
The National Journal

New Strategy Required

2011-05-06T15:54:00.002-04:00

Congress returns from its spring recess to begin further discussions on a FY 2012 budget that includes concrete provisions to reduce Federal spending. In exchange for support for increasing the debt limit, Members of Congress from both parties are pressuring the White House and congressional leadership to agree to a spending plan that addresses deficit reduction in a real way.

For local housing providers receiving Federal funds, both the politics and the economics of the deficit reduction discussions means fewer funds in spite of efforts to garner congressional support for Federal programs. During the congressional recess, national groups have galvanized their members to express dismay over the cuts approved in the FY 2011 budget agreement and their opposition to further cuts in the FY 2012 budget. While these efforts are necessary they will prove fruitless and frustrating.

The White House and the congressional leadership of both parties have already conceptually agreed Federal spending should be reduced. Vice President Joe Biden has begun the first of a series of meetings with congressional Republicans and Democrats designed to reach an accord on deficit spending prior to the deadline to raise the debt limit. The decision by the House Republican leadership not to pursue changes to Medicare increases the likelihood that the framework of an agreement can be reached.

Meeting parallel to the Biden group is the “Gang of Six” – a bipartisan collection of senators committed to reaching an agreement on deficit reduction that could serve as a template for all parties to support. This group comprises Democrats Dick Durbin of Illinois, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, and Mark Warner of Virginia and Republicans Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, and Mike Crapo of Idaho.

Why does this matter? The bipartisan effort to reduce spending leaves housing advocates with few “back room” supporters to champion their concerns. The cuts to programs are inevitable. There are two fundamental questions housing providers need to determine: how deep will the cuts be? How to respond to these cuts?

It is difficult to answer for certainty the first question; however, one can look to the cuts agreed to in the FY 2011 budget to get an idea of what programs will be targeted. For example, public housing was cut more deeply than other programs within the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) while tenant-based vouchers received an increase. Vouchers have received strong support because it gives the recipient an opportunity to “choose” where to live. As discussions for next year’s budget proceed, it is safe to estimate public housing funds will remain static at best or bear the brunt of further reductions.

This leads to the second question: how to respond to these cuts? It is in the industry’s best interest to more aggressively pursue regulatory and legislative changes to fundamentally change how public housing is funding and administered. There are efforts to reduce the administrative and regulatory burden of small agencies (those with less than 500 units) being pursued by the Public Housing Authorities Directors Association (PHADA) and the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO). They are joined by the Council of Large Public Housing Agencies (CLPHA) to expand the Moving-to-work program which allows housing authorities to combine their funding allocation and dispense the resources in a way which meets local need. These groups are also in discussion with HUD to identify regulatory and administrative changes to ease the burden on local agencies.

All of these efforts are important but they will only succeed if advocates for these program confront the political and economic reality – cuts combined with spending freezes means there must be out-of-the-box thinking if these programs are going to continue to provide a service to those in need.

Multigenerational Housing Increasing

The American Association of Retired People (AARP) Public Policy Institute recently released a report which showed an increase in the number of multigenerational households residing in the United States. The number increased from 6.2 million in 2008 to 7.1 million in 2010. There were 5 million multigenerational households in 2000.

The report cites an analysis by the Pew Research Center which states that one in five adults between the ages of 25 to 34 live in multigenerational households. Hispanics, African-Americans and Asians are more likely to live in multigenerational households than whites.

Interesting Read

Medicare fight exposes House GOP’s internal rifts
By David Rogers
Politico

Lawmaker Proposes Federal Hiring Freeze
By Emily Long
GovExec.com

Waiting Game
By Charlie Cook
National Journal

The Cook Report: Taking On Obama
By Charlie Cook
National Journal

Failure to Lead

2011-04-21T11:11:00.002-04:00

President Barack Obama and congressional leaders have demonstrated a failure to lead in their respective approaches to tackling the budget. Both the president and the Republican leadership are more concerned with positioning themselves favorably with the public than they are in reaching a bipartisan solution to our mounting deficit.

The president’s decision to present a deficit reduction plan was opportunistic, simply to distinguish himself from the proposal presented by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI). Ryan’s plan was approved by the House of Representatives along party lines. While a clever move it only occurred because Obama has an eye on reelection which would be in jeopardy if he appears disinterested in tackling such a thorny issue.

He passed on a leadership moment when he decided not to endorse the recommendations submitted by the Deficit Reduction Commission which he created. The bipartisan commission members demonstrated tremendous leadership by submitting a set of recommendations which left nothing off of the table: cuts to politically popular programs affecting all segments of society and even proposing tax increases.

Ryan’s plan avoids serious discussion about defense spending and tax increases. Republicans insist that the cure to our problems is to eliminate domestic spending and let the free market reign. Since it didn’t work in the housing market why should anyone expect it to cure our budget problem. Republicans need to be honest and admit their decisions to enact tax cuts, Medicare Part D, and pay for two wars with no regard for the deficit helped create the problem we are facing. Like it or not, they need to recognize that tax reform, even if it means tax increases, must be part of the deficit reduction plan.

Republicans today are acting like the Democrats did before welfare reform was enacted. Democrats knew the problems inherit in the welfare programs and did nothing about them when given the opportunity. They could not accept that the program created a level of dependency that was ruining communities. Republicans took control of Congress and passed legislation changing the program as it had been structured for generations.

The deficit is the Republican version of welfare reform. They (Republicans) know it needs to be addressed but are unwilling to sacrifice ideology (no tax increases) to agree to part of the solution (tax increases) most experts agree must occur.

The politics of the Federal budget tends to force our elected officials to shy away from making hard decisions. The thought of reducing benefits to the elderly, the poor and the ill or cutting defense spending is not pleasant. The truth is the 800 pound gorilla called the trillion dollar deficit needs to be cut down to size. It will be bloody and leave behind many wounded. Leadership isn’t made, it is found. Hopefully, the nation will become stronger because of the debate and we find the leaders we are lacking.

Interesting Read

GOP escalates debt-limit demands
By Jake Sherman & Jonathan Allen
Politico

Tax the rich! OK, but then what, Mr. President?
CNN Money

Sorry, GOP: Tax revenue needs to go up
CNN Money

Death Wish? Republicans pushing to revamp Medicare could find themselves voted out of office in the next election.
By Charlie Cook
National Journal

Obama’s Young Mother Abroad
By Janny Scott
New York Times Magazine

The Crystal Ball’s First 2011 Take on 2012’s Electoral College
By Larry Sabato
Crystal Ball

Florida may be do-or-die for 2012ers
By Alexander Burns
Politico

Time to Rethink Federal Housing Programs

2011-04-13T00:21:00.001-04:00

Now that a deal appears to be in place for the balance of FY 2011, the discussion will now turn to FY 2012. As President Obama prepares to outline his deficit reduction plan, further cuts to Federal housing programs are to be expected. As a result, families will have to find a way to pay more of their housing costs as local providers struggle to offset budget losses with lay-offs, reduced services and deferred maintenance.

The budget agreement reached last week is expected to receive bipartisan support and is expected to pass. The cuts included in this agreement will be a precursor for what is expected to be deeper cuts in FY 2012. House Republicans released a deficit reduction plan for FY 2012which is expected to reduce funding for the public housing and voucher programs.

To offset these reductions, the structure and funding for federal housing programs need to change in order to survive. Public housing has proven to be a vehicle which has provided low-income families to have a “decent, safe and affordable home.” Former President Jimmy Carter, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Starbucks founder Howard Schultz, and comedienne Whoopi Goldberg are among the millions who spent part of their lives growing up in the “projects”.

To preserve this resource for poor families dramatic changes must occur:

HUD needs to be Re-evaluated

Serious consideration needs to be given to restructure the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). First, its mission needs to be re-evaluated. The department was created in 1965 as part of the Great Society programs founded by President Lyndon Johnson’s administration. According to its website, the department’s mission “…is to create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable homes for all. HUD is working to strengthen the housing market to bolster the economy and protect consumers; meet the need for quality affordable rental homes: utilize housing as a platform for improving quality of life; build inclusive and sustainable communities free from discrimination; and transform the way HUD does business.”

It is time to reconsider the department’s role in meeting local needs. As the department approaches 50-years old in 2015, the current budget situation provides an opportune time to look how best to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the department and act accordingly.

Second, the federal entity overseeing housing should have a governing structure modeled after the Federal Reserve Board. Each member of the Board receives a 14-appointment after going through a vetting process. The chairman is appointed by the president to a four year term. This type of governing structure allows for long-term planning, minimizes policy changes which create havoc locally, and minimizes the politics of board appointments. This approach has tremendous political, practical and policy implications and should be carefully thought out. There are many competing forces pulling the department in different directions. A “tenured” HUD secretary can be more effective in bringing these various actors together to work on a sustainable housing agenda.

Change the Narrative

Federal housing programs have an image problem. The public housing and Section 8 programs are considered poorly run programs of little value to the surrounding community. These programs are considered housing of last resort. According to HUD, there are more than 3,000 housing authorities and less than 200 are considered troubled. The vast majority are providing appropriate services to the poor. Unfortunately, perception is reality. The narrative must change.

Public housing has a rich history of providing working families with an affordable dwelling while in pursuit of the American Dream. Advocates have failed to put a “face” to these programs which demonstrate the role it plays in the socioeconomic fabric in society. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor is the latest of thousands of former public housing residents who are making significant contributions to society. Their stories need to be the message of public housing.

New Media Strategy

In the age of 24-hour cable and internet the media strategy is different, difficult and complicated. Traditional forms of media to influence policy-makers, i.e., editorial pages and policy television programs have given way to Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rachael Maddow, Steve Colbert and Oprah Winfrey. In order to survive organizations need to understand which news forms are influencing policy and adjust accordingly. While organizations are using various forms of the new media to reach their members and supporters, it is unclear how effective they are in influencing.

Now is the time for the competing housing advocacy organizations to unite behind a single media initiative-- share the costs of an integrated campaign, broadcast nationally via traditional network television, cable television and the Internet. The effort should choose an individual or group of individuals to speak on behalf of public housing. This person should be recognizable and appreciated by both Republicans and Democrats. To be sure that the message resonates with the public, the campaign must be centered on a short catchy slogan that captures the key realities of what public housing means to America.

Lessons Learned from the Budget Debate

2011-02-24T11:02:00.002-05:00

Now that the House has approved a continuing resolution for the balance of FY2011, here is one writer’s take on seven lessons learned from the debate which will influence future funding discussions:

1. While unorthodox by Washington standards, the decision by the Speaker to open the floor to amendments allowed Members of Congress to actually do the work expected of them: propose, debate and vote on issues affecting the nation. It is encouraging to see Congressmen and women actually voting on legislation versus sniping at each other. Look for this free flowing form of debate to continue.

2. To both of the political parties’ credit, members took votes that did not fall along party line. There were Republicans and Democrats uniting to defeat spending measures deemed unnecessary. There were odd mixes of liberals, moderates and conservatives teaming up on legislation, which offers a glimmer of hope that bipartisanship can occur in some instances this year.

3. The Tea Party deserves credit for ushering in a group of individuals who are not toting the party line on issues. They are actually forcing the leadership, and the House as a whole, to make hard, substantive, and politically risky decisions.

4. Even Democrats realize the need to rein in government spending. While it is easy to paint Republicans as heartless, the truth is no reasonably intelligent person could believe the country can sustain its current level of Federal government spending.

5. For the remainder of this fiscal year and the next, the president’s proposed FY2012 budget is the ceiling and the House version of FY 2011 funding bill is now the floor for Federal programs. Constituencies from both parties will feel the effects of cuts regardless of the outcome in the Senate.

6. Constituencies will have to devise new, creative strategies to preserve funding for their programs. It will not be enough to indicate the impact on individuals, families and communities. No one will be immune; therefore, the message must be distinct, simple and compelling.

7. Give credit where credit is due: the president’s deficit commission had the guts to call for cuts to ALL programs in order to seriously address the bulging deficit. Not including entitlement programs and defense in the list of cuts demonstrated a lack of leadership in Congress and the White House. The commission members were the only individuals willing to recognize the seriousness of our nation’s fiscal problem and offer a tangible, albeit unpopular, solution.

Interesting Read

How a government shutdown could happen
By Jonathan Allen & Carrie Budoff Brown
Politico

Republicans float $2 billion a week in cuts
By Jonathan Allen
Politico

Town hall 'rage' over spending
By Marin Cogan
Politico

House GOP spares no pet projects in trimming budget
By Philip Rucker
The Washington Post

Budget deadlock points to government shutdown
By Kara Rowland
The Washington Times

Lawmakers Play Down Shutdown, But Solution Is Elusive
By Humberto Sanchez
The National Journal

What might happen if federal government shuts down again
By Ed O'Keefe
The Washington Post

The Wrong Fight
By Ronald Brownstein
The National Journal

The Cook Report: Hang On Tight
By Charlie Cook
The National Journal

Senate Momentum Builds for a Deficit-Cutting Deal
By Steven T. Dennis
Roll Call

Republican governors strike at heart of Democratic Party
By Jonathan Martin & Ben Smith
Politico

Economy poll: African Americans, Hispanics were hit hardest but are most optimistic
By Michael A. Fletcher and Jon Cohen
The Washington Post

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has history of going up against unions
By Brady Dennis
The Washington Post

GOP lawmaker probes HUD’s non-disclose pact
By Chris Frates
Politico

Bingaman Exit Gives GOP an Opening in a Toss-Up Race
By Jennifer Duffy
National Journal

Incumbents, Beware
By Charlie Cook
The National Journal

The End of Fannie and Freddie?
Closing the troubled housing agencies is not the only mortgage market fix we need.
By Arnold Kling
The Weekly Standard

Deep Cuts to Housing Programs on the Way

2011-02-13T22:23:00.002-05:00

Housing programs will join the list of other Federal programs subject to reductions when the president submits his FY 2012 budget Valentine’s Day. While President Barack Obama is proposing “painful” cuts to key programs in the next fiscal year in an effort to reduce the deficit, his proposal pales in comparison to the cuts proposed by House Republicans for the balance of the current fiscal year. Their proposal calls for close to $6 billion in cuts to housing programs as part of $100 billion in cuts to Federal programs.

Anticipating negative reaction to the Obama budget proposal, the president’s staff has contacted supporters of various programs to provide them with a heads up to pending cuts. In a New York Times editorial Jack Lew, Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), stated the president is proposing a budget which reflects the need to reduce the deficit and the fact that hard choices will need to be made. Included in the Obama proposal will be a cut to the community development block grant (CDBG) program by seven and one half percent or $300 million. To administrators of the program, this is a significant to communities which count on these funds to provide local services but it is less than total elimination of the program as proposed by the Republican Study Committee.

According to Housing Affairs Letters, which provides daily coverage of housing and community development news, public housing will take hits to its key programs including $1.1 billion in cuts to the public housing operating fund; funding for tenant-based vouchers for the remaining seven months of FY 2011; and, a $300 million cut to the public housing capital fund. The administration seems to want to use some of the housing programs to help pay for a passenger rail plan.

While the administration will argue their proposed cuts across the board are part of the shared pain all must endure, their budget proposal is sure to set off anguish cries from the various interest groups with a claim to federal funds. It will not cause the same consternation as the cuts proposed by Republicans. In fact, Democrats and the Administration should be thankful that Republicans were offering such drastic cuts. To the general public, Obama’s FY 2012 proposal will seem modest in comparison.

The defense industry, homeland security and programs benefiting veterans have been deemed untouchable. While Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are considered sacred cows, there will be attempts to curb spending for those programs at another point in time in the process. For now, non-entitlement domestic programs will bear the brunt of the proposed cuts this year. It is safe to assume the president’s proposed budget is the best case scenario for funding for FY2012 given the disparity between the president and Republicans on how to achieve deficit reduction.

The president’s 2012 budget proposal will come three weeks before the continuing resolution for FY2011 expires March 4. As reported in last week’s post, it is not unreasonable to expect a temporary shutdown of the government. Republicans on the House side are seeking significant cuts to Federal programs Democrats and the administration will simply not agree to. Senate Republicans are supportive of their House counterparts and can apply enough pressure to slow the appropriations process in their chamber increasing the likelihood of a temporary shutdown.

Republicans Seek Cuts Now

As the president released his FY2012 budget, Republicans were calling for deep cuts to housing programs for the remainder of FY2011 including the virtual elimination of the CDBG program, $1.5 billion in cuts to housing vouchers, $616 million in cuts to the capital fund, $340 million to HOPE VI (essentially gutting the program), and $203 million to the public housing operating fund. The Republican proposal includes $350million in cuts to the Transforming Rental Assistance initiative which is designed to replace HOPE VI.

President’s Budget Likely Dead on Arrival

Expect the president’s FY 2012 budget to be dead on arrival to Republicans when it is released on Valentine’s Day. Republicans will simply dismiss it as they pursue the more dramatic cuts for the remainder of this fiscal year. History may repeat itself. In the mid-nineties Republicans swept into office believing they had a mandate from the American people to cut spending and forced a government shutdown. The level of cuts proposed by Republicans is so deep it is difficult to see them reaching a compromise with the president before the current continuing resolution expires in early March.

Democrats should feel ecstatic about the Republican proposal. A recent poll has shown that Americans are concerned about increased federal spending but are less supportive of reducing these funds when specific programs are identified. Democrats would prefer to extend the current CR for the balance of the fiscal year. Now they can paint Republicans as being out of touch with the American people which may strengthen their hand in the ensuing negotiations. However, the Republican proposed cuts are so deep the likelihood of a government shutdown has increased.

MacArthur Foundation Announces Housing Research Grants

The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation announced February 7 the awarding of nine grants totaling $5.6 million for research to explore the role housing plays in the long-term health and well-being of children, families, and communities.

The nine projects, selected through a competitive process from a pool of 150, were awarded as part of the Foundation's $25 million initiative on How Housing Matters to Families and Communities. The initiative is based on the premise that stable, affordable housing is an essential platform that promotes positive outcomes in education, employment, and physical health by helping to ensure a greater return from other social and public investments. The goal is to help policy makers better direct increasingly scarce public resources to enhance housing outcomes and to achieve broader goals of healthier, better educated, and more successful families and communities.

The nine grant recipients are a mix of studies on the relationship between housing and a series of social and economic concerns including education, health, and economic opportunity:

* Mayor's Fund to Advance New York City -- $1 million to study the role subsidized housing plays in the education and financial and physical health of children and families;

* Boston College -- $900,000 to study the impact of low-income families' housing decisions on children's well-being;

* New York University -- $800,000 to study the impact of housing instability due to foreclosure on school performance;

* The University of Maryland -- $700,000 to model the impact of housing subsidies on children's future participation in the labor force;

* RAND Corporation -- $600,000 to study whether social networks are a key pathway through which low-income residents realize the social and economic benefits of living in mixed-income housing or neighborhoods;

* University of Wisconsin-Madison -- $600,000 to study the effects of federal and state income support policies on homeownership stability and child maltreatment;

* Brown University -- $500,000 to support a study on the relationship between compulsory savings and homeownership in Mexico and on the effects of homeownership on formal labor market participation;

* Harvard University -- $300,000 to study the long-term social, psychological, and economic implications of eviction; and

* University of Chicago -- $200,000 for a study on the impact of childhood housing instability on long-term health and education outcomes.

Interesting Read

Fewer Want Spending to Grow but Most Cuts Remain Unpopular
Changing Views of Federal Spending
Pew Research Center for the People & the Press

Obama to propose spending cuts in budget plan aimed at countering conservatives
By Shailagh Murray and Lori Montgomery
The Washington Post

Senate Democrats, House GOP clash over shutdown threat
By Sean Lengell
The Washington Times

The fierce urgency of David Plouffe
By Glenn Thrush
Politico

Is the GOP overreaching on budget?
By David Rogers
Politico

After hard week, GOP has 'group hug'
By Jake Sherman
Politico

Obama report on Fannie, Freddie plan may boost mortgage rates
By Zachary A. Goldfarb and Brady Dennis
The Washington Post

Brace for a Government Shutdown

2011-02-02T23:01:00.002-05:00

The likelihood of a government shutdown increased when House Republicans passed a resolution calling for approximately $60 billion in cuts to non-defense spending for the balance of the FY 2011. Approved primarily along party lines just before the president delivered his State of the Union address, the resolution underscores the commitment of House Republicans to reduce federal spending.

The resolution (H. Res. 38) establishes the starting point for Republican negotiations with the White House and Democrats in funding the federal government for the remainder of the current fiscal year. Given the two other fiscal issues to be debated this year – increasing the federal debt limit and passage of a FY 2012 budget – how funding for FY2011 is resolved will impact the debate on the other two issues.

FY 2011

During the lame-duck session, Congress averted a shutdown of the Federal government by passing a short-term continuing resolution (CR) to keep the government functioning until March 4. The short-term CR was a victory for Republicans who wanted to pursue a strategy to reduce non-defense discretionary spending immediately. Republicans are going to insist that funding for the remainder of this fiscal must include deep cuts to programs. Analysts estimate the $60 billion cut proposed in the resolution could mean a 20 percent cut to programs.

Democrats will be hard pressed to prevent the Republicans from approving an appropriations bill with significant cuts to federal spending. Some version of House Republicans’ bill will be approved by that chamber. In the House, it is easier for the majority to approve bills it favors; therefore, a proposed budget for the balance of FY 2011 emanating from that chamber will include deep cuts. However, Senate Democrats will not allow the cuts to be approved in their chamber. They will probably prefer a continuation of the current CR. Once the Senate passes a measure they must negotiate a compromise with the House on a final spending bill for 2011.

The political maneuvering that accompanies this effort to reach a compromise will cause a likely government shutdown. There are too many activists within the Republican Party calling for an aggressive, and if necessary, protracted fight with the president. They are prepared to risk the fall out of a shutdown to leverage deep cuts. There could be another CR passed with modest reductions in funding or a hard commitment to ensure there are deeper cuts in the FY2012 budget. Given the desire to hold the line on spending, there is a real possibility the Federal government will be shut down for a short period of time

FY 2012

When the president submits his FY2012 budget next week it will be dead on arrival in the House before the last copy is submitted to Congress. While the President Barack Obama’s State of the Union speech called for “investments” in infrastructure and education to keep America competitive, Republicans believe he is simply seeking another opportunity to increase federal spending. They, in turn, are determined to prevent that from happening.

The political dynamics of the FY2011 bill will repeat itself for the FY2012 bill. Republicans in the House will simply pass a version of the FY2012 appropriations bill with cuts totaling as much as $100 billion. In that scenario, the Senate will once again need to approve a spending bill that does not include such large cuts. Expect Republicans to become more aggressive in pursuing cuts in FY2012. Another shutdown in October is not out of the question. Anger and frustration over the outcome of negotiations with the White House and Democrats over funding levels could cause Republicans to be willing to risk another shutdown.

Debt Ceiling

The debt ceiling is the biggest issue. Sandwiched between the two funding discussions will be a vote to raise the debt ceiling to allow the government to borrow to pay for its obligations. The limit has been raised every year without fanfare; however, this year Republicans hope to use it as leverage for deep spending cuts. Some Republicans are willing to risk the US defaulting on its’ obligations (which can have dramatic world-wide implications, according to some experts) and shutting down the government.

As bad as a government shut-down would be, it pales in comparison to a national default. The impact on the value of the dollar and other considerations would be spectacular. It is absolutely unthinkable that new members of Congress would play around with this issue. If they want to truly wreck the economy, not just America's but that of much of the western world, failing to increase the U.S. debt limit would do it.

The Seeds of a Shutdown Exist

The seeds of a shutdown are in place. The presidential election of 2012 is the 800 pound gorilla driving everything that goes on in Washington. The desire to win the election at all cost is strong. Each party’s strategic decisions are being weighed with the presidential election in mind. Some events, such as the situation in Egypt, complicate decision-making as it relates to the next election. However, one misstep could damage an individual’s and party’s presidential aspirations.

This group of Republicans is very different from the one which swept into office after the historic election of 1994. That group was unified by a Contract with America which was drafted by the Republican leadership. Its subsequent strategy was orchestrated by the same people. Republicans voted into office in November do not have the allegiance to the leadership but to the Tea Party activists. Some of them have pledged to shut the government down if necessary as part of their campaign and are committed to fulfilling that pledge.

These seeds could germinate and be the cause, individually or in some form of combination, of a shutdown:

The recession has heightened fear, anger and frustration causing people to lose faith in the prospects of a secure future. This resulted in voters lashing out at anything that appears to be the cause of these emotions. The current target is the “government”.
The Tea Party has created a structure to some of the voices expressing frustration and feelings of being ostracized and unappreciated. This structure is separate from the established Republican Party making it less likely Members of Congress with allegiance to this group will be easily co-opted by the party elders.
The Republican victories on the congressional and state levels have deepened the resolve of fiscal conservatives to draw a line in the sand on federal spending.
The internet has allowed people to express themselves free from filters and accountability. Coupled with the 24 hour cable news cycle, issues never die a natural death and individuals can be mobilized quickly.
It is naïve to think that racism doesn’t play a role in some of the discontent with President Obama. Some of it is masked, some of it is out in the open but the president has been demonized, painted as a Muslim extremist, and viewed as a socialist. The residual effects of ensuring his failure due to his race will play some role in what takes place this year.

Who to watch

As the year progresses, keep an eye on how these individuals react to budget proposals. They could decide what types of funding cuts are approved this year:

Tea Party Faithful: There are many Tea Party faithful who rely on Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare. If Republicans like Ryan are serious and proposed cuts to the benefits of these three programs, it will be interesting to see who among the Tea Party are adversely affected by the cuts and how they react to it.

The business community: Specifically, those who are dependent on government contracts and those who receive subsidies. It is hard to believe they will sit on the sideline and allow their source of money to dry up.

State and local government officials: State and local governments rely on federal funds for a variety of projects meeting a variety of needs from infrastructure to education. They will be the first to bear the brunt of any cuts and will be forced to make harder decisions within their own budgets without federal assistance.

Interesting Read

Senate Dems give in on earmark ban
By Scott Wong
Politico

Poll: GOP should listen to tea party
By Jennifer Epstein
Politico

With 2012 looming, Obama focuses on economy
By Peter Wallsten
The Washington Post

Mitch McConnell: A Senate obstructionist could turn into a man of action
By Karen Tumulty
The Washington Post

Obama challenges the nation - and Republicans
By Dan Balz
The Washington Post

Fact Checking Ryan and Bachmann: the stimulus
By Glenn Kessler
The Washington Post

Analysis: President, GOP lawmakers agree on austerity, but will it create jobs?
By Lori Montgomery
The Washington Post

Against the Grain
By Josh Kraushaar
The National Journal

The Right Direction
By Charlie Cook
The National Journal

The Senate vs. the future
By Ezra Klein
The Washington Post

Orrin Hatch plays ball with tea party
By Manu Raju
Politico

Conservatives lay out $2.5 trillion in cuts
By Richard E. Cohen & Simmi Aujla
Politico

Campaign 2012

Political Blogs Ready to Flood Campaign Trail
By Jeremy W. Peters
The New York Times

The early-state scramble: It's on!
By Molly Ball
Politico

2012 kickoff could come as early as February
By Alexander Burns
Politico

A big warning sign for Romney
By: Jonathan Martin
Politico

Obama could survive some bumps on road to 2012 reelection
By Chris Cillizza
The Washington Post

New Lines Complicate 2012 House Campaigns
By Tricia Miller
Roll Call

Housing and Community Development

Governors, unions brace for battle
By Melissa Maynard
Stateline

Health-care law: Arizona tries new approach to get by federal Medicaid rules
By N.C. Aizenman
The Washington Post

The West Wing, Season II
By John Heilemann
New York Magazine

When Talk Radio Talks, Congress Listens
By Christina Bellantoni
Roll Call

Retailers offer financial services to 'unbanked'
By Ylan Q. Mui
The Washington Post

A New Congress, Politics, Challenges and Opportunities

2011-01-03T16:22:00.002-05:00

When the new Congress convenes this week the bipartisanship of December’s lame duck session will be a distant memory. President Barack Obama, Republicans and Democrats will enter into a new environment without the “luxury” of a deadline to force all parties to compromise for the good of the country. While there are some from across the political spectrum who believe the deals fashioned were not in the country’s best interest; nonetheless, the deals struck offer a glimmer of hope entering the new congressional season.

Challenges will begin immediately as the incoming House Republicans initiate a series of new rules designed to make the congressional process more transparent and to regularly have the Constitution read to emphasize the fact that the growth and reach of the Federal government has exceeded that which is allowed by the Constitution.

Additionally, Republicans plan to hold oversight hearings to force administration officials to appear before Congress and explain to Members and the public (the hearings will be aired live) how policies were developed and decisions made. The intent is to expose the administration to public scrutiny and prevent it from continuing to pursue its agenda.

The real battle will be over budget. An agreement still needs to be reached on the FY 2011 budget. This debate will be merged with the request to raise the debt ceiling to allow the government to continue to function. Raising the debt ceiling has never been an issue but it will be a major issue for the fiscal conservative wing of the Republican Party.

Republicans scored a major victory during the lame duck session in ensuring a continuing resolution was extended only to March 4. This strengthened their position to pursue budget cuts; however, the ensuing debate will generate enough fireworks to rival those displayed during the annual Fourth of July celebration. Veteran Republicans understand they need to be careful not to challenge the president so aggressively and without the willingness to compromise. There are incoming Republicans freshmen itching for a showdown with the president on the budget and some have arrived with the intent to shut down the government. That approach comes with the same risks realized by the party in its last showdown with a former Democratic President. In the 90s Republicans aggressively challenged former President Bill Clinton on the budget, forced a government shutdown and paid a heavy political price for it. The same could occur this year.

During the lame duck session Obama utilized the bully pulpit of the presidency very effectively to persuade members to pass the Bush era tax cuts, enact the START treaty and repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell”. Obama demonstrated, as former presidents Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan demonstrated after the mid-term elections of 1994 and 1982 respectively, the president is most effective when he rises above the partisan fray and promotes issues and ideas which are more important than the politics surrounding them.

The country is neither as conservative as Tea Partiers would like nor as liberal as the left would prefer. Republicans must realize the election results were not a mandate to change the Obama policies of the last two years. The public mandate is to stop the partisan bickering so both parties can work together to solve our nation’s problems.

Hispanics True Winners of 2010 Census

Hispanics will prove to be the biggest winners when the full impact of the 2010 census is evaluated. Republicans clearly gained leverage when the results were announced as Red states had the largest population growth in the last decade. However, in most states the growth is a direct result of the rise in the Hispanic population.

Hispanics accounted for over 60 percent of the growth in Texas, Florida, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and West Virginia. Of these states Texas gained four congressional seats and Florida gained two seats. Other states gaining seats included Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, South Carolina, Utah and Washington. Even in states that lost seats the Hispanic population grew, for example, Hispanics in Illinois grew 90 percent. Other states losing seats included New York and Ohio (which lost two seats each), Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Missouri, Michigan, New Jersey and Pennsylvania which lost one seat each.

Clarissa Martinez De Castro, who works for the National Council of La Raza (a Hispanic civil rights group based in Washington, DC), was quoted in The Washington Post as being concerned with the public’s perception of Hispanics. She said 90 percent of the Hispanics counted were 18 years of age or younger and are United States citizens. As that group matures, they will become a potent political force in the country regardless of their party of choice. Their political affiliation of choice will likely be formed by their parents who voted overwhelmingly Democratic in the November 2010 election.

President Obama is expected to pursue comprehensive immigration reform which will meet firm opposition from Republicans, and some Democrats, in both chambers. House Republicans will address immigration as a jobs issue so as not to appear to be anti-Hispanic. Given the growth of the Hispanic community and its tendency to vote for Democrats, Republicans will be careful to not allow their short-term gains be negated in the future by initiatives perceived as anti-Hispanic. They could shoot themselves in the foot and relinquish their gains before the end of the decade.

Interesting Read

2010 Congress

Austerity is first order for Boehner's installation as House speaker
By Philip Rucker
The Washington Post

John Boehner's leadership style is 'anti-Pelosi'
By Richard E. Cohen
Politico

Two new rules will give Constitution a starring role in GOP-controlled House
By Philip Rucker and Krissah Thompson
The Washington Post

What Republicans have done -- and what they need to do
By Ed Hornick
CNN

Tea-party activists question if rebel political movement has changed for worse
By Amy Gardner
The Washington Post

Spending showdowns will test new Congress
By Charles Babington
The Associated Press

Life of the Party
By Deborah Solomon
The New York Times

One for the Books
By Ronald Brownstein
The National Journal

'The Wussification of America': Parting Shots From Gov. Ed Rendell on the NFL and More
By Jim O'Sullivan
National Journal

The Fix's 11 big questions for 2011
By Aaron Blake
The Washington Post

Incoming Congress girds for warfare
By Jonathan Allen
Politico

Mitch McConnell's iron grip slips
By Glenn Thrush & Manu Raju
Politico

Not such a lame-duck session: What Congress passed, Obama signed in week
CNN

Daughter says Newt Gingrich's 'serious' about 2012
By Jennifer Epstein
Politico

Housing and Community Development

Obama administration steps up monitoring of banks that miss TARP payments
By Zachary A. Goldfarb
The Washington Post

How a mortgage clearinghouse became a villain in the foreclosure mess
By Ariana Eunjung Cha and Steven Mufson
The Washington Post

A Push to Privatize Pennsylvania Liquor Stores
By Katherine Q. Seelye
The New York Times

In California, Few Signs of Transition
By Jennifer Medina
The New York Times

Wisconsin State Workers Fret, as G.O.P. Takes Over
By Monica Davey
The New York Times

Entrepreneurs Ask Santa for Loans, Lower Taxes
By Sarah E. Needleman
The Wall Street Journal

Immigration

Political Battle on Illegal Immigration Shifts to States
By Julia Preston
The New York Times

Immigration Overhaul Is Unlikely Without a Shift in Public Attitudes
By Peter Brown
The Wall Street Journal

Lamar Smith avoids hard line on immigration
By Carrie Budoff Brown
Politico

The GOP's census dilemma: Embrace immigration or gerrymander
By Edward Schumacher-Matos
The Washington Post

2010 Census

Behind Census Figures Showing Boom in Nevada, a Story of Bust
By Adam Nagourney
The New York Times

With census growth, Hispanic groups target redistricting to up political clout
By Krissah Thompson
The Washington Post

Census data realigns congressional districts in key political states
By Sandhya Somashekhar and Aaron Blake
The Washington Post

Census shows slowing US growth, brings GOP gains
By Hope Yen and Charles Babington
The Associated Press

Texas Hispanics set to challenge status quo in reapportionment
By David Mildenberg and Darrell Preston
Bloomberg News

Reapportionment winners and losers
By Aaron Blake
The Washington Post

Republicans Flex Muscle in Lame-Duck Session

2010-12-17T09:23:00.003-05:00

The congressional lame duck session will come to a close soon now that the legislation to extend various tax cuts including the Bush tax cuts and unemployment benefits has passed the House and will be signed by the president. The next step will be to approve a FY 2011 spending measure.

A lame duck session became necessary because the outgoing Congress did not pass any of the 12 appropriations bills that fund the government. However, that earlier passed CR expires at 12:01 a.m., Sunday, December 19th. Therefore, if Congress does not act pass a new funding measure by that date the federal government will be forced to shut down.

While there were critics of the lame duck session, many members of Congress argued that besides the CR, Congress had to use the session to pass an extension of unemployment benefits. Although states pay for the first 26 weeks of unemployment benefits, the federal government funds 34 to 53 weeks of "emergency benefits" and another 13 to 20 weeks of "extended benefits," thus allowing the long-term unemployed up to 99 weeks of benefits. Now that the measure has passed Congress can move on to completing the appropriations bill. Finding a compromise on the budget may prove a trickier task because any agreement will be tied to the politics of the November elections.

Because of the length of the discussion on the tax extensions, there is less time to debate and resolve differences for FY2011 budget. Time is on the side of the deficit hawks. The less time for a FY2011 debate, the more likely a short-term CR funding the government into January or February at the latest will be passed.

Congress has three options: pass a year-ling continuing resolution (CR), pass an omnibus bill which contains all 12 appropriations bills combined into one, or pass a short-term CR until the new Congress convenes in January.

The House passed a year-long CR and now the Senate must pass a bill which must then go to conference. The House bill keeps funding at the FY2010 level which is a cut in real dollars. The Senate tried to pass an omnibus bill with a slight increase in funding and approximately $8 billion in earmarks. Republicans prefer enacting a FY2011 spending bill that will only last through the end of January after they are in control of the House of Representatives. Republicans prefer to begin their charge to reduce Federal budget with current spending versus waiting for the FY 2012 budget. When they take control, Republicans are committed to changing the way appropriation bills are voted on in their chamber. They want to decide the budgets by agency versus bills grouped by committee jurisdiction.

If Republicans establish a new appropriations process, it will make it easier for Republicans to go after agencies they typically oppose like the departments of education, housing, Health and Human Services and the Environmental Protection Agency. It will create open warfare in the House and gridlock with the Senate. Democrats have no interest in changing the way the Senate operates. As a result, negotiations to agree on appropriations bills will be contentious and time-consuming. It will also make it harder for advocates to defend the programs administered by these departments. These programs will be under greater scrutiny and become more vulnerable during a time of economic distress.

Housing, education and other programs to benefit the needy have wide, but not deep support in Congress. Consequently, it is “easier” to justify cutting these programs than it is to cut funding for defense, veterans or agriculture subsidies.

When Pork Is Not a Pig

The desire of conservative activists in Congress to place a moratorium on earmarks has resulted in some interesting measures under consideration to ensure representatives are bringing home the bacon without being accused of “pork barrel” spending. House Republicans are discussing ways to redefine earmark spending to get around the ban singled for by the conservative wing of the party. Veterans Members of Congress are concerned that local projects will not be funded as a result.

As reported by Politico there is discussion underway to possibly exempt certain projects such as transportation and water. This will allow members to demonstrate to their constituents they are addressing pressing local needs. Even Tea Party leader Michele Bachman (R-MN) is against an outright ban. It is interesting how quickly the newcomers are conforming to the Washington way of doing business. The newcomers are quickly learning political rhetoric gives way to practical reality of politics after the election. It will be interesting to monitor this development next Congress.

The Spirit of the Deficit Commission’s Final Report Will Hover over Congress Next Year

In spite of the failure of the Deficit Reduction Commission to have a super majority approve the recommendations submitted to tackle the nation’s growing debt, the spotlight is now on congressional leaders to make the politically difficult decisions in the next session of identifying program cuts and tax increase to reduce the nation’s long-term debt.

The commission was three votes short of the majority needed to force Congress to act on its final recommendations which included cuts to popular initiatives like the mortgage deduction, defense programs, reductions in entitlement benefits and targeted tax increases.

The commission’s failure to secure 14 votes does little to minimize the impact their recommendations will have on funding issues the next Congress. Republicans campaigned on the promise they would control government spending and make the tough decisions necessary to reduce the Federal debt. The report stated unequivocally that drastic measure must be taken to address the nation’s current fiscal situation.

The Commission, co-chaired by former Republican Senator Alan Simpson (WY) and Erskine Bowles, the former Chief of Staff to President Bill Clinton, submitted its report with the belief that the nation must directly confront the real issues which must be addressed. They took their charge to heart and did not spare any program or department or allow sentimentality influence their recommendations. The recommendations included:

1. Enact tough discretionary spending caps and provide $200 billion in illustrative domestic and defense savings in 2015.

2. Pass tax reform that dramatically reduces rates, simplifies the code, broadens the base, and reduces the deficit.

3. Address the “Doc Fix” (a scheduled cut in Medicare payments to doctors) not through deficit spending but through savings from payment reforms, cost-sharing, and malpractice reform, and long-term measures to control health care cost growth.

4. Achieve mandatory savings from farm subsidies, military and civil service retirement.

5. Ensure Social Security solvency for the next 75 years while reducing poverty among seniors.

The panel’s emphasis on identifying a range of cuts to federal programs will draw a microscope around congressional action as it affects the deficit. For example, MSNBC’s First Read reported the irony that the cost of the agreement between Obama and Republicans - extending the tax cuts for two years, extending unemployment benefits and the other tax cuts in the agreement – will cost approximately $1 trillion which is more than the costs of the stimulus (approximately $800 billion).

It begs the question: how serious are both parties in reducing the deficit?

Interesting Read

Omnibus includes $8B in earmarks
By Scott Wong
Politico

The GOP Strategic Advantage
By Bill Connelly
Crystal Ball

2012 hopefuls challenged by tax deal
By Alexander Burns
Politico

Oversight Panel Slams Home-Rescue Efforts
By Jim Tankersley
National Journal

The Stages of Political Grief
By Charlie Cook
National Journal

Just weeks after 2010 election, Republicans lining up for 2012 Senate races
By Chris Cillizza
The Washington Post

In Entrepreneurship We Trust
By Alan McCormick
Forbes Magazine

Redistricting Reform is Tough Task Every Time
By Tricia Miller
Roll Call

Census Figures to Be Released Soon
By Kyle Trygstad
Roll Call

Wooing Joe Lieberman for 2012
By Manu Raju
Politico

Straight Talk on Immigration
By Ruben Navarrette
Real Clear Politics

Unusual methods helped ICE break deportation record, e-mails and interviews show
By Andrew Becker
Center for Investigative Reporting

Incoming GOP freshmen rapidly embracing big-money fundraisers
By Dan Eggen
The Washington Post

A Whole New Name Game
By Ianthe Jeanne Dugan
The Wall Street Journal

Pension Woes Prompt GOP Move
By Michael Corkery
The Wall Street Journal

Maybe the government would earn more of our trust if it leveled with us more and invaded our privacy less.
By Matthew Dowd
The National Journal

What the Bowles-Simpson plan left out
By Robert J. Samuelson
The Washington Post

Newt Gingrich's inner circle
By Chris Cillizza
The Washington Post

Mike Huckabee wants some respect
By Jonathan Martin & Ben Smith
Politico

House Rule
Will John Boehner control the Tea Party Congress?
by Peter J. Boyer
The New Yorker

2012 Hopefuls Gave Big to 2010 Candidates
Donation Strategies Differ for Palin, Pawlenty, Romney
By Steve Peoples
Roll Call

Tea Partyers Shredded Fundraising Playbook
By Steve Peoples
Roll Call Staff

First, Admit You Have a Problem
By Charlie Cook
The National Journal

Deficit Reduction Reports Hovers over Lame Duck Session

2010-11-22T21:15:00.002-05:00

Amidst all of the drama within both parties – Tea Party versus establishment Republicans, liberals versus conservative/moderate Democrats, make no mistake the 800 pound gorilla settling in Washington is the draft report issued by the bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. President Barack Obama creates the commission to seek recommendations on ways to reduce Federal spending and control future deficits.

The Commission, co-chaired by Former Republican Senator Alan Simpson (WY) and Erskine Bowles, the former Chief of Staff to President Bill Clinton, submitted a preliminary report with five basic recommendations:

1. Enact tough discretionary spending caps and provide $200 billion in illustrative domestic and defense savings in 2015.

2. Pass tax reform that dramatically reduces rates, simplifies the code, broadens the base, and reduces the deficit.

3. Address the “Doc Fix” not through deficit spending but through savings from payment reforms, cost-sharing, and malpractice reform, and long-term measures to control health care cost growth.

4. Achieve mandatory savings from farm subsidies, military and civil service retirement.

5. Ensure Social Security solvency for the next 75 years while reducing poverty among seniors.

In issuing the report, the co-chairs did not spare any program or department in the Federal government nor did the commission concern itself with the political ramifications of the recommendations made. For example, it calls for cuts to military, some paring down of the mortgage income deduction, some tax increases and measures to control Social Security benefits.

To no one surprise, it was met with bipartisan denunciation; however, both co-chairs stressed the importance of being honest with the measures needed to control Federal spending and future deficits. The current economic situation, the election results and this report is going to finally force the powers that be in Washington to confront the hard reality of what it will take to turn the nation’s financial situation around.

It is going to be interesting to watch the debate unfold on controlling federal spending. While Republican calls for reduced spending have been focused on domestic programs the truth is ALL federal spending must be curtailed to some degree to contain the spiraling deficits. Both parties are to blame for the deficit and both parties and now must agree to the pain required to fix it.

Housing Budget Unclear

Congress has returned for its lame duck session with a final decision on this year’s Federal budget still unclear. The debate over the future of the Bush tax cuts is generating the bulk of media attention; however, local providers of housing and community development programs still don’t know what their budget will be for next year. While there will be fireworks aplenty, expect Congress to reach an agreements on a number of issues including some type of extension of the Bush tax cuts and a temporary spending measure to keep the Federal government operating through the early part of 2011.

These programs will face an uphill fight next year securing any increases and will likely struggle to maintain current levels. Fiscal conservatives will seek cuts to domestic programs and will probably target public housing dollars. Vouchers will be affected as well; however, private landlords will carry enough sway to keep any cuts to a minimum. During downturns in the economy, landlords like participating in the voucher programs because of the certainty that the government will pay a large portion of the rent. When the economy improves some landlords may be less committed because of the higher rents they can secure in the open market.

Congressional Panel Urges Review of Factors Affecting Foreclosure Crisis

A congressional panel overlooking the mortgage irregularities in the foreclosure process is urging its colleague to review the situation closely to avoid greater damage to the financial markets. Examining the Consequences of Mortgage Irregularities for Financial Stability and Foreclosure Mitigation states that financial institutions and securitization servicers should not proceed with foreclosures unless all of the proper documents are in order.

It has been found that banks are foreclosing properties without proper documentation casting doubts about the legitimacy of the actions. There is uncertainty over whether in some cases banks had the authority to foreclose. This has also raised questions over who has ownership of the loan and the property in question.

The panel calls on policymakers to monitor what is occurring and offered these recommendations:

• The Department of Treasury should closely monitor the impact of foreclosure irregularities.

• Treasury and the Federal Reserve should stress test banks to evaluate their ability to weather a crisis related to mortgage irregularities.

• Policymakers should evaluate system-wide consequences of documentation irregularities.

The panel is concerned that the implications of the confusion of foreclosures could reverberate to banks of all sizes. As disturbing as the potential implications of documentation irregularities may be for “too big to fail” banks, the consequences would not be limited to the largest banks in the market. Other concerns of the panel include not placing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac at too much risk to underwrite these mortgages; homeowners losing confidence in the housing market; and, the public may lose faith in due process.

Interesting Reads

Housing and Community Development

GOP targets mortgage bailouts
By Sean Lengell
The Washington Times

Foreclosure takes toll on increasing number of children
By Dina El Boghdady
The Washington Post

Lame-Duck Game of Chicken
By David Broder
The Washington Post

Will Republicans Get Serious on Spending?
By Steve Chapman
The Chicago Tribune

Guns used to kill police officers: Where they come from and how they get in the hands of criminals
By Cheryl W. Thompson
The Washington Post

Politics

A Forecast That Obama Could Love
By Jeff Sommer
The New York Times

Obama Returns to an Unpredictable Congress
By Jackie Calmes and David M. Herszenhorn
The New York Times

Sober suggestions from Obama's debt commission
By David Broder
The Washington Post

Five myths about Sarah Palin
By Matthew Continetti
The Washington Post

The Palin Network
By Robert Draper
The New York Times Magazine

Political divide between coasts and Midwest deepening, midterm election analysis shows
By T.W. Farnam
The Washington Post

Romney, Weighing Run, Leans on State PACs
By Michael Luo
The New York Times

Murkowski victory a stinging rebuke to Palin and extreme partisans
By John P. Avlon
CNN Contributor

Junior Democrats in Senate seek to change the way chamber does business
By Shailagh Murray
The Washington Post

Truth or Consequences
By Evan Thomas
Newsweek

On to the Next Round

2010-11-08T18:34:00.002-05:00

The election is over and now both Republicans and Democrats will chart a course over the next two years with the intent to win the 2012 presidential elections. Since only one side can win the ultimate prize, the White House, drama will take center stage in Washington, DC. Here is what we know about the election:

The Republicans elected in both the House and Senate are more fiscally conservative than their predecessors and are chomping at the bit for a show down with President Barack Obama to reduce Federal spending. Republicans in both chambers are talking tough about cutting non-defense programs to the 2008 levels. Republicans have been soliciting recommendations from the public on which programs to cut. The site, America Speaking Out, allows citizens to recommend where they would like to see funding cut. The recommendations from citizens will only strengthen their resolve to reduce federal spending.

Republicans must assess how to incorporate these conservatives into a broader agenda which achieves substantive results. If they can accomplish that, they set the stage for their party presidential nominee to have a chance at victory in the 2012 presidential election. It will not be easy. Pursuing a balance budget agenda will be difficult for Republicans to accomplish if only domestic programs are under consideration for reduction. To truly reduce federal spending, there is a consensus that cuts to defense spending, Medicare and Social Security must be included. These are popular programs with strong voting constituencies who have historically punished politicians who broach cuts to these programs. However, some Republicans, such as Senator-elect Ron Paul (R-KY), have said those are on the table for discussion. This can become a dicey issue for Republicans to navigate and could be their Waterloo.

Republicans increased their numbers in the Senate to be major players in any legislative initiative up for discussion in that chamber. If consensus can’t be reached on issues in the Senate, gridlock will occur. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Senate Minority Leader, has stated the Republicans number one agenda is to ensure Obama does not get reelected. That does set the stage for compromise; it only sharpens the ideological divide.

The remaining Democrats in the House and Senate are more liberal as a whole. Many of the party’s losses were in districts held by conservative Democrats. This reduces the number of “moderate” members willing to compromise with Republicans on issues. It also limits the number of Democrats Republicans can target for support on issues such as reducing federal spending. We can expect Democrats to now become the united opposition Republicans were over the last two years.

Republicans gained enough governor seats and captured state legislatures to reshape the future congressional map, increase the likelihood Republicans will maintain their current numbers in Congress and make the president’s road to reelection a bumpier one. Governors are heavily involved in the redistricting process in most states. Expect future Congress’ to be more conservative. Additionally, in controlling the political operations in their state, Republican governors can create structural barriers to deliver benefits to voters and campaign effectively. The changing demographics in many states also illustrate the difficult path Obama must follow to get reelected. States Obama carried in 2008 stand to lose seven seats in the House meaning there will be fewer electoral votes available in those states.

What does this mean?

Legislative action will be the exception while gridlock will be the rule. The political and philosophical make up of each party in Congress creates a bad mix for compromise. Tea Party conservatives are adamant about reducing federal spending and are willing to buck the party leadership to accomplish that goal. They are equally adamant about not compromising with Obama. Any sign of compromise by the Republican leadership will be met with revolt from these individuals. The House Republican leadership has more leeway to not compromise; however, Republicans can’t be viewed by the voters as obstructionist. They need substantive accomplishments to have any credibility and sustain momentum going into the 2012 election. The Senate is the chamber where compromise must be reached but it is unlikely either party will be able to reach consensus on fiscal issues. With all eyes focused on the 2012 presidential election, the ability and/or failure to compromise is risky for both parties.

Funding for existing programs will be reduced or eliminated. Funding for new initiatives is probably unrealistic unless it enjoys strong bipartisan support. The election results demonstrated the American public is not supportive of increased federal funding for new initiatives when the economy is faulting, jobs are being lost and homes are being foreclosed. Any initiative undertaken must focus on economic growth and will probably come at the expense of other programs. President Obama’s support of a three-year freeze on domestic spending and his willingness to seek further cuts leaves little room for negotiation if defense, Social Security and Medicare are not on the table. Even if they are included, other programs will bear a disproportionate burden of cuts due to the popularity of the big three program.

Expect an increase in demand for services provided by the government, nonprofits, churches and other private groups. Until the economy improves the demand for services will increase with fewer resources to provide those services. More people will need assistance to offset long-term job loss, foreclosure, underemployment, health care needs and other unforeseen situations. When Obama took office most economic experts did not expect the economy to turn around until 2012 at the earliest. But when the economy does improve a combination factors will likely keep wages down. First, fewer jobs will be available. As a result, it will continue to be a buyer’s market. In other words, there will be more workers than the number of available jobs. Older workers who lost their retirement money need to remain in the workforce for an extended period of time. Second, the level of internet purchasing will reduce the need for retail employment which is typically the entry point for young and low-skilled workers and increasing a source of income for the elderly. Third, housing prices will remain deflated reducing the principle vehicle used to create wealth in this country.

What can be done in the interim?

Organizations dependent on government and private funding will need to reevaluate its operations and make hard decisions about structure and scope of services. These groups must decide if portions of its work should continue as is, be consolidated with another program or be eliminated. For nonprofits, in particular, this will be a difficult task. Nonprofits are mission driven; however, economic pressures will force them to make these choices. Demands will increase while available revenue will probably continue to decrease.

The fundraising model currently employed by non-profits in particular needs to be revisited. During a time of fiscal austerity, groups which can demonstrate tangible results will increase the group’s chances of securing support from funders. It will be critical for nonprofits to work with existing funding sources to identify ways in which it can remain attractive to private funders. Nonprofits and public entities that can successfully demonstrate its recipients, or clients, are achieving self-sufficiency as a result of its programs will prove to be more successful in the future.

Look for funding formulas for state and local governments to be revisited as well. The Census will cause the government to revisit how funds are distributed. Deeper targeting of the resources meant to low and moderate income households could be both good and bad to entities serving these households. Changes to funding formulas could create strange bedfellows in certain parts of the country.

Interesting Read

For Obama, the daunting challenges of 2012 start at once
After a tough midterm election, the president must focus on righting the economy and recovering the voting coalition he has lost if he hopes to avoid becoming a one-term president.
By Peter Nicholas and Christi Parsons,
Los Angeles Times

Republicans prepare to take power
By Jake Sherman & Richard E. Cohen
Politico

The Republican Landslide
By Fred Barnes
The Weekly Standard

Fasten Your Seat Belts: Campaign 2012 Is Here
By Jim O'Sullivan
National Journal

Why? Why? Why?
Was it a referendum? A plunge after a surge? A search for political balance? Yep.
By Charlie Cook
National Journal

Wave gives GOP upper hand in drawing election map
GOP enjoys big gains in Great Lakes region as redistricting begins
By Tom Curry
MSNBC

Republicans signal a hard-line stance after election success
By Tom Cohen
CNN

Hispanics emerge as key 2012 wild card
By Ben Smith & Carrie Budoff Brown
Politico

The Mama Grizzly Scorecard
by Shushannah Walshe
The Daily Beast

Republicans tear up President Obama's map
By Ben Smith & Jonathan Martin
Politico

People

The rise and fall of Nancy Pelosi
By John Bresnahan
Politico

John Boehner inherits troubled House
By Richard E. Cohen
Politico

Mitch McConnell's power expands greatly in minority
By Manu Raju
Politico

5 myths about George W. Bush
By Julian Zelizer
The Washington Post

Don't underestimate Palin for 2012 run
By Ed Rollins
CNN

DeMint: 'I Think I've Found My Role'
National Journal

Bachmann to Seek GOP Conference Chair
The Minnesota Republican and tea party favorite says she will challenge the leadership's choice.
By Billy House
National Journal

One Chapter Ends, Another Begins

2010-11-01T22:51:00.002-04:00

The drama surrounding the current election season will come to a close November 2nd and the ensuing results will usher in the next chapter of our country’s political history. Beyond the numbers, time will tell which political party, which individuals and which movement was victorious. However, for the country to expect anything less than more partisanship is naïve and unrealistic.

Post-Election Partisanship

The partisanship will begin the moment the results are tallied. If predictions are correct, history will stay true to form and the party of the president in power, Democrats, will suffer losses. The size and severity of those losses are debatable at this time. The estimate of Democratic losses in the House of Representatives ranges from 40 to 75. It is possible, but unlikely, Republicans will gain the 10 seats necessary to control the Senate but it is not unrealistic for them to gain as many as eight seats. One of those seats could be the one held by Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) the current Senate Majority Leader.

Posturing will begin the minute the polls close. Republicans will make it clear they intend to put a halt to or delay any of President Barack Obama’s initiatives. Fireworks will begin to fly during the congressional lame duck session which is expected to begin approximately a week after the election. Among the issues to be debated during that session is the extension of the Bush tax cuts, extending unemployment benefits and passing a 2011 budget for federal agencies. Republicans will use this session to flex their muscle and lay the groundwork for next year’s congressional session.

Gridlock will be the rule not the exception

Don’t expect much congressional action next year or during the early months of 2012. Make no mistake, beginning November 3rd every political action is geared to building momentum for Democrats to keep or for Republicans to reclaim, the White House. Nothing will come easy for either party as each tries to exert its will on the other.

In victory, the Republicans will have more to lose than the president. They contend to know how to right the ship they helped steer aground. They will no longer be able to simply be obstructionist but must become legislators. In legislating they will need to compromise which may not sit well the increased number of “true” conservatives, including Tea Party candidates, expected to march into office. There is enough infighting within the party to cause trouble for itself as it navigates an agenda for the next year or two. Realistically, Congress will have 2011 and the first three to four months of 2012 to enact legislative initiatives. In the spring of 2012 presidential campaigning will be in full swing.

The country will learn a great deal about President Obama’s leadership abilities, his toughness and political astuteness in the next 12 to 15 months. How he handles himself will determine his prospects for reelection. If he handles himself well, he will have the party behind him heading into the reelection campaign of 2012. If not, he will likely be challenged from within the party.

State Elections are Where the Action Is

Keep your eyes on the state elections. The party in control of the statehouse will heavy influence the political representation of that state for the next 10 years. The future composition of Congress and the federal largess enjoyed by congressional districts hang in the balance of these elections.

Interesting Read

Late Senate polls show GOP trending up slightly
By Aaron Blake
The Washington Post

Spin cycle: What will top Dems say?
By Alexander Burns & Jonathan Martin
Politico

The Five Faulty Theories that Led Obama and Democrats to Disaster
By Fred Barnes
The Weekly Standard

The Next Two Years
By William Kristol
The Weekly Standard

Next for GOP leaders: Stopping Sarah Palin
By Mike Allen & Jim Vandehei
Politico

Sarah Palin: Thin-skinned, smartly strategic (or both)?
By Chris Cillizza
The Washington Post

2010-10-27T00:14:00.002-04:00

Leading up to the election, AVIEWFROMDC will provide its readers with some articles of interest about the election:

2010 Election

GOP poised to win redistricting supremacy, too
Down-ticket races could dilute Democrats' influence for next 10 years
By Jennifer C. Kerr
The Associated Press

The stimulus worked — but for which party?
'The failed stimulus' has become a Republican mantra this election season
By Tom Curry
MSNBC National affairs writer

Election Day could bring historic split: Democrats lose House, keep Senate
By Karen Tumulty
The Washington Post

Tea Party Already Shapes '12 Race
By Peter Wallsten
The Wall Street Journal

Gauging the scope of the tea party movement in America
By Amy Gardner
The Washington Post

Tea party groups say media has been fair, poll shows
By Amy Gardner
The Washington Post

Yes, They Can
By Charles Dharapak
Associated Press

In Nevada, it's can't live with Harry Reid and can't live without him
By Shailagh Murray
The Washington Post

Pro-Republican Groups Prepare Big Push at End of Races
By Jim Rutenberg
The New York Times

The rise, fall and rise of John Boehner
By Paul Kane
The Washington Post

Post 2010 Election

Can GOP leaders keep the peace?
By Jake Sherman
Politico

2012: How Sarah Barracuda Becomes President
Why do you think Barack Obama is being so nice to Michael Bloomberg?
By John Heilemann
New York Magazine

Obama’s Playbook After Nov. 2
By Sheryl Gaystolerb
The New York Times

Q&A With Newt Gingrich
By Peter Wallsten
The Wall Street Journal

Group Plans to Keep Pressure on Newly Elected Conservatives
By Jennifer Levitz and Douglas A. Blackmon
The New York Times

Election Outcome Still in Doubt

2010-10-24T23:49:00.002-04:00

With the election fast approaching, its outcome, and the subsequent political climate of the nation, is still in doubt. While the specific results are yet to be determined, there are still some predictions we can make about the aftermath of November 2, 2010.

1. There will be a number of surprises on Election Day. Expect the unexpected.

2. Whichever party “wins” November 2, it will overplay the significance of its victory. Historically, the party of the president in office loses congressional seats in the first mid-term elections. The fact of the loss is almost certain. What is not known is how big the loss will be.

3. Very little will be accomplished in Congress as Republicans seek to weaken President Barack Obama in the attempt to reclaim the White House in 2012.

4. The most significant results of the elections on the state level will be the real story of November. The party in power in the statehouse controls the process to redistrict congressional seats. That party also can influence voting patterns in presidential elections. In swing states like California, Pennsylvania, Illinois and Florida, controlling the governorship could prove beneficial in 2012.

Here are some observations to keep in mind as we draw closer to Election Day:

Democrats: It is estimated that 100 House Democratic incumbents are at risk of losing their election. Prognosticators estimate that Democrats will in fact lose from 45 to 75 of those seats and, therefore, Republicans will win control of the House. There is a chance Democrats will retain control of the House but, if that occurs, they will retain it by a small margin. It is unlikely that Democrats will lose control of the Senate but their margin will diminish by as many as seven or eight seats.

It appears the traditional Democratic constituency, unions, women, minorities and liberals, are becoming more engaged in this election cycle which gives the party some hope it can minimize its losses. The Associated Press is reporting that in some states Democrats have submitted more early ballots than Republicans. In Iowa, Maryland, North Carolina, Louisiana, and in Nevada’s Clark County (where two-thirds of the votes in 2008 originated) Democrats have the lead.
Is it too late for Democrats? It may be but it is still too early to tell and a lot can happen between now and Election Day. After the election, President Obama will need to develop a strategy to lead his party against a Republican Party smelling blood.

Republicans: Republicans are confident of a resounding victory this November. They are so confident that current House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) is promising choice committee assignments to candidates to help boost their election prospects. Republicans are not only confident they will take control of the House but also functional control of the Senate. They are already developing strategies to confront the White House with subpoenas, hearings, proposals to cut funding for the health care bill, etc.

The Republican Party needs to be careful not to repeat the strategy of the House under the leadership of Newt Gingrich which led to the shutting down of the government. That strategy turned the public against the Republicans and eventually led to Gingrich’s downfall. They do need to temper their confidence. There is a chance Democrats will either retain control of the House or lose the House by a slight margin. Anything less than a resounding victory will punch a hole in the sails of Republicans.

Tea Party candidates: Assuming they win their elections, they will be a problem for Republicans specifically, and the Congress generally. They will be forced to turn the anger that elected them into a governing style that actually accomplishes something substantively. They can be elected in sizeable numbers to continue to force Republicans to the right. How their approach translates into a governing style will be interesting to watch. Until then, there is the real possibility that their candidates will implode on the campaign trail. Sharon Angle, Christine O’Donnell, Ron Paul and Joe Miller have each stumbled badly on the campaign trail.

State Races: This is the real story of the election. Republicans are poised to make major gains in gubernatorial races. The party controlling the statehouse has the power to influence, approve or veto redistricting plans which don’t meet its satisfaction. The reshaping of congressional seats helps to determine who is elected to the House of Representatives.

Nick Ayers, executive director of the National Republican Governors, told CNN redistricting could result in 15 to 20 House seats changing parties. He told CNN that his message to Republicans is, "The only way to prevent Democrats from controlling an unfair process is to win the governors' seats where redistricting is up."

Keep an eye on Proposition 20 in California. This ballot initiative, if approved, would remove elected representatives from being involved in the redistricting process. California has historically been known as a “bell weather” state, meaning what happens in that state tends to reverberate to other parts of the country.

2010 Census: The results of the 2010 census, while technically not an issue on Election Day, is a major factor hanging over the state races. The census results will influence redistricting decisions. Some states, like Pennsylvania and New York, are expected to lose congressional seats. The party in power will seek to redraw lines with the intent to protect its own, but the loss of one congressional seat could mean a reduction of millions of Federal dollars to that state.

Also, don’t be surprised if there is a significant increase of Latinos in states where Hispanic representation has been historically low. Arturo Vargas, executive director of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) Education Fund, said he believes the story of the 2010 census will be the rise of the Latino South.

Economic issues: The economy, tax cuts, earmarks, reducing the deficit and the cost of health care will dominate the discussion of the new Congress. It will likely result in gridlock the next two years. The campaign rhetoric will be over and the elected officials will finally have to govern. Expect political realities to influence congressional decisions. For example, as much as some Republicans are calling an end to earmarks, congressional members of both parties realize the importance of “bringing home the bacon.” Most economic experts expect the economy to rebound in 2012 which will help President Obama in his reelection campaign.

Latino voters: Keep an eye on the Latino (Hispanic) vote. All indications are that unions, African Americans and liberals are getting motivated to go to the polls; however, the mainstream media has made assumptions that Latinos will stay home because of the failure of the administration to pass immigration reform. Vargas has criticized a recent ad in Nevada calling for Latinos not to vote. Vargas said Latino voters are fully engaged and prepared to assert itself in November.

Latino Vote expected to grow 17 percent in November

Nearly one million new Latino voters are expected to participate in this year’s midterm election representing a 17 percent increase above the total that voted in the 2006 midterm election, according to a report released October 19 in Washington, DC.

The NALEO Educational Fund estimates that 6.5 million Latinos will vote this November. Vargas states that Latinos are fully engaged this election cycle in spite of reports in the mainstream media indicating Hispanics will not vote in large numbers this fall.

“The Latino vote is fully engaged and ready to vote,” said Vargas. “Our polling and outreach shows Latinos voting participation will likely surpass our projections.” The NALEO Educational Fund is the nation's leading non-partisan, non-profit organization that facilitates full Latino participation in the American political process, from citizenship to public service.

Vargas said Latinos have been receiving the bulk of their information from Spanish-language media which is more involved in reporting the issues of concern to Latinos than the mainstream media. Vargas’ group has partnered with a number of other organizations to launch a campaign to get 250,000 low propensity voters to become engaged and vote. The campaign consists of national Latino advocacy organizations, leading Spanish-language media partners, and local community based organizations (CBOs). They are committed to increasing Latino participation using a multi-layered approach. They are reaching out by utilizing the Spanish-language media, nonprofits, the internet, etc.

Vargas expects Latinos to have a significant impact in a number of races. He said that in races for the U.S. House of Representatives, the number of Latinos in Congress could increase by as many as three:

• Washington State, Representative Jaime Herrera (R) is currently running ahead in her bid
for that state’s 3rd congressional district, and could become the first Hispanic of either major
party to represent the Evergreen State in Congress.

• In Florida, the seat held by U.S. Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart (R) in the 25th congressional district
could become a win for the Democrats if former Obama administration official Joe García
wins his bid. That race is currently a toss-up.

• In Texas, businessman Bill Flores (R) is locked in a very tight race with Rep. Chet Edwards
(D) in the 17th congressional district.

Vargas also pointed to one of the nation’s most closely watched contests for Senate in Florida which includes a Latino candidate:

• Former Florida Speaker of the House Marco Rubio (R) is locked in a tight, three-way race
with Governor Charlie Crist (I) and U.S. Rep. Kendrick Meek (D) to fill the seat once held
by retired Sen. Mel Martínez (R). Latinos represent almost 13% of registered voters in the
Sunshine State, and are a key constituency in this closely watched race.

In statewide races, Latinos are running in several of the most competitive races in the country.

• In New Mexico, Doña Ana County (Las Cruces) District Attorney Susana Martínez (R) is in
a close race with Lt. Gov. Diane Denish (D) in the gubernatorial race.

• In Nevada, federal judge and former Nevada Attorney General Brian Sandoval (R) is running
ahead of Clark County Commission Chair Rory Reid (D) and could become the state’s first
Latino governor.

Vargas further states that Latino candidates running for state Senate and state Houses nationwide are expected to make gains; nine seats in the state upper chambers (from 65 to 74) and five in the state lower chambers (from 179 to 184). Latinos are running for top positions in 41 states throughout the nation – which shows political progress in both the traditional Latino population centers, and in regions with emerging Latino communities. In this year’s election -- both as candidates and as voters -- Latinos are poised to play a key role in shaping the nation’s political landscape.

NBC Identifies Potential Leaders in Light of Republican Victory on Election Day

MSNBC’s First Read took a look at the Republican men and women who would likely assume the leadership positions and committee gavels if Republicans take back the House. The leadership, per NBC’s Luke Russert reporting, is expected to be the following:

Speaker: John Boehner (R-OH)

Majority leader: Eric Cantor (R-VA)
Majority whip: Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) or Pete Sessions (R-TX) GOP conference chair: Mike Pence (R-IN) GOP conference vice-chair: Cathy McMorris-Rodgers (R-WA) NRCC chair: Sessions or McCarthy

The men and women who would be House GOP chairs: And, per NBC’s Russert, here are the people who are likely to become the committee chairs:

Appropriations: Harold Rogers (R-KY) or Jerry Lewis (R-CA) Armed Services: Buck McKeon (R-CA)
Budget: Paul Ryan (R-WI)
Education and Labor: John Kline (R-MN)
Energy and Commerce: Fred Upton (R-MI) or John Shimkus (R-IL) Financial Services: Spencer Bachus (R-AL), Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), or Ed Royce (R-CA) Foreign Affairs: Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) Homeland Security: Peter King (R-NY)
Judiciary: Lamar Smith (R-TX)
Oversight and Government Reform: Darrell Issa (R-CA)
Rules: David Dreier (R-CA)
Standards of Official Conduct/Ethics: Jo Bonner (R-AL) Transportation and Infrastructure: John Mica (R-FL) Ways and Means: Dave Camp (R-MI)

If Republicans win back the Senate in November, NBC’s Ken Strickland has put together this list of the likely GOP Senate leadership:

Majority leader: Mitch McConnell (R-KY) Assistant majority leader (whip): Jon Kyl (R-AZ) Conference chair: Lamar Alexander (R-TN) Conference vice-chair: John Barrasso (R-WY) Policy committee chair: John Thune (R-SD) NRSC chair: John Cornyn (R-TX) President pro tempore: Dick Lugar (R-IN)

The men and women who would be Senate GOP chairs: And, per NBC’s Ken Strickland, here are the likely GOP Senate chairs:

Appropriations: Thad Cochran (R-MS)
Armed Services: John McCain (R-AZ)
Banking: Richard Shelby (R-AL)
Budget: Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Commerce: Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX)
Energy and Natural Resources: Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) or Richard Burr (R-NC) Environment and Public Works: Jim Inhofe (R-OK)
Finance: Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
Foreign Relations: Dick Lugar (R-IN)
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions: Mike Enzi (R-WY)
Judiciary: Jeff Sessions (R-AL)
Homeland Security and Government Affairs: Susan Collins (R-ME)

Interesting Read

2010 Election

Election Day could bring historic split: Democrats lose House, keep Senate
By Karen Tumulty
The Washington Post

More Democrats casting early ballots
By Nancy Benac and Liz Sidoti
Associated Press

The early vote: Signs of GOP passion
By Molly Ball
Politico

The new political map: Welcome to 2004
By Jonathan Martin & Alex Isenstadt
Politico

Every big Senate race just got closer
By Alexander Burns
Politico

Barack Obama struggles to win women back
By Carol E. Lee & Glenn Thrush
Politico

Democrats face power struggle
By Manu Raju
Politico

Five governors races to watch
By Chris Cilliza
The Washington Post

Hispanic organizers don't see Democrats' funding
By Carrie Budoff Brown
Politico

How GOP could win the 10 seats needed to take back Senate
By Chris Cillizza
The Washington Post

Can Democrats and Republicans work together after the election?
By Tom Cohen
CNN

Black Turnout Will Be Crucial for Democrats on Election Day
By Kevin Sack
The Washington Post

The landscape as the final midterm sprint begins
By Dan Balz
The Washington Post

GOP poised for big election gains
ASSOCIATED PRESS

Black voters may be just as engaged as they were in 2008, polls show
By Krissah Thompson and Nia-Malika Henderson
The New York Times

Tea Party Set to Win Enough Races for Wide Influence
By Kate Zernike
The New York Times

Why Business Doesn't Trust the Tea Party
By Lisa Lerer and John McCormick
Bloomberg Business Week

In Wisconsin, the 2010 campaign story distilled
By Jim Vandehei
Politico

Democrats fear wipeout for women
By Marin Cogan
Politico

GOP Tries to Capitalize on Expanding House Field
By John McArdle
CQ-Roll Call

Year of the missing candidate
By Jonathan Martin
Politics

People of 2010 Election

President Obama’s white working-class problem
By Glenn Thrush
Politico

Education of a President
By Peter Baker
The New York Times Magazine

Boehner’s Path to Power Began in Southern Ohio
By Jennifer Steinhauer and Carl Hulse
The New York Times

Five myths about Sarah Palin
By Matthew Continetti
The Washington Post

Bond With Past Foe Is Fodder for Attack on Cuomo
By David M. Halbfinger
The New York Times

Newt Gingrich’s rhetoric will backfire
By Joe Scarborough
Politico

State Elections

The Sweep: Governors' races are 'main event' in 2010
By Jessica Yellin
CNN

Housing and Community Development

Looking Ahead
BY Jacob Gaffney
Housingwire Magazine

As G.O.P. Seeks Spending Cuts, Details Are Scarce
By David M. Herszenhorn
The New York Times

Florida community feels ripple effects as paperwork issues stall foreclosures
By Brady Dennis
The Washington Post

From This House, a National Foreclosure Freeze
By David Streitfield
The New York Times

Lack of proper mortgage paper trail could leave big banks reeling again
By Ariana Eunjung Cha and Jia Lynn Yang
The Washington Post

The Political Rumble Over Public Pension Costs
By Ben Elgin, Chad Terhune, Christopher Palmeri and Dunstan McNichol
Bloomberg Business Week

Interesting Reads

2010-10-01T09:46:00.002-04:00

The Midterm Election of ‘62: A Real “October Surprise”
By Rhodes Cook
Crystal Ball

Report: Fla. adds 2 seats, N.Y. loses
By Richard E. Cohen
Politico

If Voters Choose Divided Power, What Then?
By Morton M. Kondracke
Roll Call

What to watch as Rahm Emanuel leaves
By Glenn Thrush & Kendra Marr
Politico

The GOP's 'Pledge to America': a closer look at the details
By Perry Bacon Jr.
Washington Post

After 2 turbulent years, officials assess TARP
By Brady Dennis
The Washington Post

The Secret World of Extreme Militias
By Barton Gellman
Time Magazine

Glenn Beck is obsessed with Hitler and Woodrow Wilson. (I'm just saying.)
By Dana Milbank
The Washington Post

Drama Surrounds November Election

2010-09-24T09:33:00.003-04:00

We at Viewfromdc want to thank Sarah Palin, the Tea Party and the Republican Party for the political theater known as the November election which has engulfed the country. Not even Shakespeare, Twain or Hemingway could have written a better drama.

As we begin to head into the home stretch toward the November election, there are a few clear factors which will shape the outcome this fall:

1. Republicans are currently riding high with momentum. All predictions call for a major victory for Republicans, possibly of historic proportions.

2. The economy is the principal cause for the momentum enjoyed by Republicans. As unemployment continues to hover close to 10 percent, the electorate is increasingly disenchanted with the president’s economic policies.

3. Republicans still have not resolved their internal debate with the Tea Party movement which will have a significant impact on their ability to legislate. While the Tea Party candidate in Utah, Michael Lee, appears to be a shoo-in to win election to the Senate representing that state, other Tea Party candidates still must prove they can win a general election.

4. Democrats need to regroup and develop a post-election strategy which may include a change in leadership on Capitol Hill.

5. While the short-term prognosis for housing and community development programs looks good, there are ominous signs that cuts to vital housing programs could be a part of the future.

Let the Fighting Begin

The Republicans seem to be doing all they can to squander the good fortune the current political environment is affording them. All of the major polls and political experts agree Republicans are poised for major gains at the congressional and state level. However, intraparty fighting is bubbling to the surface as Tea Party activists have turned the primary season upside down by electing candidates of their choice to represent the party in a number of key states.

The latest beneficiary of the Tea Party support was Christine O’Donnell who won the Republican nomination for senator in Delaware. She will run against the Democratic nominee, Chris Coons. O’Donnell’s victory comes at the price of Castle, a popular former governor and most recently the House Representative for the State. He was expected to defeat Coons handily and be a key victory in the Republicans quest to regain the Senate. Now, there is significant doubt that O’Donnell can defeat Coons this fall.

O’Donnell’s victory follows the defeat of Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) by Tea Party candidate, Joe Miller, in the Alaska primary. Murkowski is defying party officials and has decided to pursue retaining her seat as a write-in candidate. Even though the party’s leadership at the national level stands behind Miller, a civil war is brewing within the party’s rank and file.

While primary results are typically determined by the most ardent party supporters, the victory by Tea Party candidates in Nevada, Kentucky and Delaware raises a number of concerns for the Republican Party in the fall. First, it is unclear if Tea Party candidates can win in a general election. A win in the primary doesn’t guarantee a win in the fall. With the exception of Utah and possibly Kentucky, there is genuine concern about the ability of Tea Party candidates to connect with “mainstream voters.”

Second, if Republicans do win control of the Senate, how they govern will be interesting to watch. Republicans releases a Pledge to America promising to create jobs, cut taxes, curtail government spending and protect the country. The message sounds good but what does it mean when it is time to govern? Will they govern from a Tea Party platform of reducing Federal spending and reducing taxes which includes facing a showdown with President Obama? This approach will satisfy the conservative base in the party but will it have broad public appeal? The last time Republicans did this was in 1995 and it backfired on them. They received the bulk of the blame and galvanized support for then President Bill Clinton.

There are some Republicans and Tea Party supporters who relish the thought of a government shutdown. If Republicans regain either chamber, they will clearly have a major say in national policy for the next two years. This can be both a blessing and a curse to the party. They will be pressured by Tea Party supporters and their allies, to do all they can to reduce taxes and limit the Federal government’s authority. However, Republicans must be careful. House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) has indicated he believes the Tea Party supporters have the potential to shape policy on the Hill. If so, a repeat of 1995 is possible.

Republicans are becoming so confident they will regain control, they have already promised oversight hearings to embarrass the administration, will seek to defund the health care initiative and some members have openly discussed confronting the president into a showdown resulting in a shutdown of the Federal government. With Republican momentum on the upswing, the party is unanimous in opposing the president’s call to eliminate the tax cuts enacted during the Bush administration for those earning above $250,000 a year.The president wants to make tax cuts for those earning under $250,000 permanent and allow the cuts for those above that figure to expire. To Republicans, it is all or nothing.

It will be interesting to watch the Tea Party approach to governing. Will they adhere to principles over platform or will they adjust to the realities of governing and compromise? There is a tension between the Tea Party's three principles (limited government, fiscal responsibility and free enterprise) and the realities of having to govern. If you are for fiscal responsibility and for tax cuts, then how will you move toward balancing the budget? What will you do about entitlement spending - Social Security and Medicare – which some of the Tea Party activists rely on? If you even try to close a post office, the rural limited government pro-fiscal responsibility folks in the community turn into rabid pro-jobs, cut-somebody-else activists.

From a purely political standpoint, the Tea Party's refusal to offer anything about the specifics is brilliant. It's like Obama's promise of change. The Tea Party wants to get their people elected first. But you can only be a radical outsider once. When the election is over, the coalition will break apart when the hard choices have to be made.

Tea Party Victory Could Help Housing Agenda

The election of Tea Party candidates could enhance efforts to enact legislation granting housing authorities’ greater flexibility in the administration of their programs. While national groups representing housing and community development issues have fared well in the bills up for approval, this year Congress approved cuts to food programs and has frozen future domestic spending. Additionally, the administration is proposing significant cuts to defense spending at levels unheard of in Washington. This does not bode well for increased funding for housing programs. It could; however, spur discussion on deregulation.

The three major public housing groups, Council of Large Public Housing Agencies (CLPHA), Pubic Housing Authorities Directors Association (PHADA) and the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO), have agreed upon a set of principles which they hope will guide Congress on deregulation efforts. It is unlikely anything of significance will happen so close to the election. This will create a lame duck session in mid to late November; during which it is unlikely much will get done except for a continuing resolution (CR). A CR is a temporary funding measure which keeps the government open for a fix period of time. In this case, the likely scenario is that Congress will pass a CR to keep the government funded until sometime in January.

All indications are a Republican Landslide

Major news organization s have prominently reported that recent polls show the president’s support declining while generic support for Republicans is gaining. This is not atypical for the mid-year election cycle of a first-term president, according to Larry Sabato and Mark Abromovitz of the University of Virginia’s Crystal Ball who have written extensively on this subject.

Sabato believes Republicans are in position to gain enough seats to take over the House and come within striking distance of reclaiming the Senate. Stu Rothenberg, a political analyst in Washington, DC, believes Republicans will reclaim both chambers. Charlie Cook, another highly regarded political analyst and author of the Cook Political Report, believes Republicans will fall short of controlling both chambers but he believes they will take the house.

Interesting Read

2010-08-23T23:38:00.002-04:00

Enclosed you will find a series of articles which help explain some of the political discourse which can change the dynamics in Washington this fall. Next week, we will include a posting which will summarize some of the key issues which will dominate DC in the fall.

Politics

Reagan's first term offers measuring stick for Obama
By Dan Balz
The Washington Post

Poll numbers in 1994, a bad year for Democrats, don't bode well for them in 2010
By Chris Cillizza
The Washington Post

In South Dakota, Democrats' own 'mama grizzly' vs. 'the next Sarah Palin'
By Philip Rucker
The Washington Post

Establishment candidates in Arizona, Florida rally against 'outsider' rivals
By Dan Balz
The Washington Post

10 things Obama must do in 10 weeks
By Kristi Keck
CNN

Obama's Four Disasters
Heckuva job, Mr. President.
By Fred Barnes
The Weekly Standard

Does Barack Obama want to be re-elected in 2012?
Toby Harnden
The Telegraph

When Economic Policy Became Social Policy
By Peter J. Wallison
The American

In Florida, a Candidate Veers From Tea Party’s Script
By Jeff Zeleny
The New York Times

Race An Undeniable Aspect of Democrats’ Ethics Troubles
By Josh Kurtz
Congressional Quarterly

End run: Romney's crafty financing
By Jeanne Cummings & Andy Barr
Politico

Debate on taxes affects the savers
By Patrice Hill
The Washington Times

GOP takes harsher stance toward Islam
By Ben Smith and Maggie Haberman
Politico

Five myths about midterm elections
By Alan Abramowitz and Norman Ornstein
The Washington Post

With Obama address, Democrats revive specter of GOP threat to Social Security
By Michael D. Shear and Lori Montgomery
The Washington Post

Desperate Democrats pin their hopes on scary Republicans
By Dan Balz
The Washington Post

Prominent Democrats want Kennedy's widow to run for his Senate seat
By Mary Ann Akers and Philip Rucker
The Washington Post

Will its offbeat candidates hurt GOP?
By Alexander Burns
Politico

How Michael Bennet made it look easy
By David Catanese
Politico

Using the Generic Ballot to Forecast Gubernatorial Elections
Alan I. Abramowitz, Senior Columnist
Crystal Ball

Profiles

Newt Gingrich: The Indispensable Republican
By John H. Richardson
Esquire Magazine

Lazio Finds an Issue in Furor Over Islamic Center
By Michael Barbaro
New York Times

Joe Sestak, the 60th Democrat
By Michael Sokolove
The New York Times

The most powerful Republican in politics
By Jim Vandehei, Andy Barr & Kenneth P. Vogel
Politico

Thank You for Not Screaming
By Lisa Depaulo
GQ Magazine

The Making of Andrew Cuomo
By Jonathan Mahler
The New York Times

Housing and Community Development

Housing Fades as a Means to Build Wealth, Analysts Say
By David Streitfeld
New York Times

Kill Fannie, Freddie
By Boston Herald Editorial Staff

Rovian immigration fallacy
By Tom Garcia
The Washington Times

Interesting Reads

2010-08-11T10:01:00.002-04:00

Summer Lays Foundation for Fall Contests

2010-07-12T13:04:00.003-04:00

As Congress returns from its July 4 recess, recent events reinforced the belief that the November election will be filled with surprises. So far we have learned:

1. In certain cases, being an incumbent has not helped. Rep. Bob Inglis (R-SC) is the latest incumbent to lose his reelection effort; however, the anti-incumbent fever may not be as strong as indicated in the media.

2. Republicans are still expected to make majors gains this fall.

3. The Republican Party is hoping the primary results in South Carolina where an African American and Indian American were nominated to represent the party in a congressional and gubernatorial race will demonstrate the party is more racially and ethnically diverse.

4. Ron Paul and Sharron Angle, Republican Senate candidates and Tea Party Favorites in Kentucky and Nevada respectively, must prove their platform will appeal to a broader audience.

5. Unions will seek to push Democrats to the left as the Tea Party is pushing Republicans to the right.

6. Democrats run the risk of alienating Hispanic voters by focusing on a punitive approach to immigration reform instead of the type of comprehensive reform promised by President Obama during his campaign.

Inglis Defeat

Rep. Bob Inglis (R-SC) is the latest incumbent to lose his reelection bid.
Inglis joins Sen. Robert F. Bennett (R-Utah), Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA), Alan B. Mollohan (D-WV), and Rep. Parker Griffin (R-AL) as incumbents who have lost primary battles. His major crime – he supported the Federal bailout of the banking industry and opposed the Iraq troop surge in 2007. Ironically, he was recently honored for his “consistent support of conservative principles on a wide range of issues” by the American Conservative Union. He has a lifetime rating of 93.4 percent with the group.

The loss by Inglis is another example of the volatility of voting patterns; however, some writers are not convinced being an incumbent is a bad thing. While anti-incumbent fever is high this election cycle, it is far too simplistic to assume anger against sitting Members of Congress is driving this election cycle. Stuart Rothenberg, a political analyst based in Washington, DC points out that 98 percent of incumbents seeking reelection has been renominated.

Anti-incumbency may be a factor in voter anger but the faltering economy is driving their anxiety. The war, growing frustration with immigration, the oil spill, and lingering uneasiness about the impact of health care reform continue to create opportunities for Republicans to exploit in their quest to recapture one or both chambers of Congress.

Republican Gains still expected to be high

Republicans are hoping voter discontent will result in major gains for their party. There are some observers holding onto the belief Republicans will regain control of both the House and Senate. However, elections are not an exact science. Much can happen between now and the election and Republicans have not fared well in the special elections held this year which they were expected to win. Additionally, the infighting within the Republican Party has not stopped. Republicans can’t seem to stop putting their feet in their mouths. The remarks by Party Chairman Michael Steele on Afghanistan created an unwelcomed amount of bad publicity for the party. It has forced prominent Republicans to distance themselves from the remarks and place a spotlight on the trials and tribulations of Steele’s tenure as party chairman.

Steele is the Republican Party’s highest profile minority who has alienated various elements of the party faithful. Due to dissatisfaction with Steele’s leadership, Republican donors have bypassed the party and have contributed to other entities such as the Republican Governors Association headed by Haley Barbour, Governor of Mississippi. There are some Republicans who feel Steele’s difficulties will adversely impact their efforts in November.

The Republican Party appeared poise to waltz to a landslide victory in November after the health care debate was completed and growing concerns about the deficit increasing forced Democrats to scale back some of their initiatives. The Elena Kagan nomination hearings were expected to rally the Republican base; however, her hearings were uneventful.

While Republicans are expected to make gains this fall, politics is a fickle profession and things can change very quickly. When Charlie Crist decided not to seek the Republican nomination in Florida and run as an independent, most observers predicted he would lose badly and crowned Marco Rubio the next senator from Florida. Rubio was seen as a rising star within the Republican Party and was a darling of the Tea Party. He was expected to easily defeat the Democratic nominee, Rep. Kendrick Meek. Now, Crist is poised to stun the political world and is favored to win the vacant Florida Senate seat as an independent. Assuming he wins, polls show he is comfortably ahead of both Crist and Meek, and he will likely caucus with Democrats and be a major power broker in Washington.

In Nevada, most “experts” were drafting the political obituary for Majority Leader Harry Reid (D). Polls were showing voter dissatisfaction with him which made him a primary target for Republicans to win back that seat. However, Sharron Angle’s Republican primary victory in Nevada has caused many “experts” to now believe Reid will survive his reelection bid. Angle has some within her own party suspicious that her views are in sync with voters. Angle is strongly supported by the Tea Party. She and the other Tea Party candidate, Ron Paul, seem to be avoiding “mainstream” media as much as possible to avoid too much scrutiny. Paul came under fire for suggesting the Federal government had no right to prevent private businesses from discriminating against any one and is the only Republican to support Steele’s Afghanistan remarks.

Two new stars are about to shine within the Republican Party as Nikki Haley seeks to become the first woman of Indian descent to become governor of a state. Haley is representative of a wave of individuals of Indian descent flexing their political muscle. There are at least eight individuals of Asian Indian descent seeking electoral office this year. Haley, like Bobby Jindal in Louisiana, will be prominently featured by Republicans to represent the new diversity of the party.

Joining her will be Tim Scott who defeated the late Senator Strom Thurmond’s (R-SC) son Paul in a congressional race. Scott is poised to become the first African American Congressman since J.C. Watts (R-OK) decided not to seek reelection in 2002.

Union to Flex its Muscle, Hispanic Impact Unclear

Unions were unsuccessful in defeating Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) in her primary race this year but have positioned themselves to be the “Tea Party” players of the left. They spent millions of dollars in Arkansas to defeat Blanche but more importantly sent a clear message to Democrats they will not tolerate any middle to the right democratic candidates. It will be interesting to monitor their efforts within the Democratic Party and see how it mirrors the actions of the Tea Party. The Tea Party will continue to impact the Republican strategy heading into the fall. An interesting development occurred recently when Politico reported that Ginny Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, had raised money to position herself as a bridge between the Tea Party supporters and “establishment” members of the party. This is reflects the efforts and resources advocates will expend this fall to influence the outcome of this year’s election. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is expected to spend as much $100 million to ensure Republicans win this fall.

Immigration continues to escalate into an issue which could prove detrimental to both parties. The administration has decided to sue Arizona over the law it passed which allows police to stop any one it believe might be undocumented. Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah appear close to passing similar legislation. Each of the aforementioned states is considered a conservative state and it should not surprise anyone that they would consider enacting that type of legislation. For Democrats in Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah, opposing that type of legislation could spell certain defeat. If the administration believes suing Arizona will compensate for not enacting comprehensive immigration reform, they could be in a for a major surprise this fall.

In Arizona, the size of the Hispanic population causes a person to assume considerable political risk by taking either a supportive or opposing position on the issue. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has historically enjoyed considerable support within the Hispanic community and has called for comprehensive immigration reform. However, since his failed run for president, he has become a hard-liner calling for deportation and stronger border enforcement. While Hispanics are as concerned about employment and the economy as other Americans, immigration is an issue which can be a determining factor for either party’s success this fall.

Observations on Hearings to Nominate Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court

The recent Supreme Court decision striking down gun control laws in Chicago and its suburb of Oak Park cast a spotlight on the Senate nomination hearing for Elena Kagan who is President Obama’s current nominee for a seat on the Supreme Court. The decision which stated Second Amendment rights to gun ownership extend to state and local governments can have a chilling effect on efforts to curb gun violence in many communities. It also highlights the magnitude of the decisions made by the individuals sitting on the Supreme Court.

As the Senate Judiciary Committee and then, by extension, the Senate deliberate on her nomination, there are a number of issues pertinent for housing and redevelopment professionals to understand as the debate proceeds.

Debate on Qualifications

Republicans are raising concerns about her qualifications since she has never served as a judge. They argue that her work as an attorney was mostly about policy, instead of deciding cases as a judge would. Those opposed to her confirmation will argue that Kagan is a "political activist."

Democratic supporters of the Kagan nomination will argue for Kagan to be confirmed based on her service as solicitor general. In that position, Kagan has been responsible for arguing cases before the Supreme Court. She has also served as dean of Harvard's Law School and held positions in the Clinton Administration.

The larger issue is not qualifications, it is politics. There is no requirement in the Constitution that nominees be judges. Of the 111 judges nominated since 1789, 40 did not have experience as judges (36 percent). These individuals were nominated by both Democrats and Republicans. Attacking the “qualifications” is one way opponents attack a nominee in the hopes of derailing the nomination. is the minority party’s way of trying to defeat the president’s nominee.

Debate over Judicial Philosophy

A second way of attacking a nominee is to gauge their judicial philosophy by reviewing their track record of cases. If a nominee has not been a judge, there is no track record of cases to find out how they will rule from the bench.

Because of the intense scrutiny given to the writings and decisions of a nominee, the practical result is that in order to get the nomination through the Senate, there is an incentive for presidents to choose individuals who have a similar profile to Kagan (talented lawyers and academicians, but not judges with a case record to defend). Speaking broadly, some conservatives believe that decisions of the court are limited to examining what the framers of the Constitution or legislators that enacted the law wrote and applying the terms to the facts of the particular case before them. These "strict constructionists" believe that other judges, who take a broader view of a judge's review, are “judicial activists,” and are improperly expanding the role of the judiciary.

More liberal judges assert that their role is not to just follow the text of the law but also the intent of the legislators and the reasonable inferences of the text.

As an example, “cruel and unusual punishment,” which is prohibited by the Constitution, meant one thing two hundred years ago. However, modern notions of what is “cruel” or what is “usual” have changed. What is a “speedy” trial? What does the “right to bear arms” mean as weapons get more and more sophisticated?

Moreover, it is quite difficult to amend the Constitution. If our notions of justice and equal treatment change over time (as they did with women’s suffrage and civil rights issues), or if technology advances in ways that the framers of the Constitution couldn’t possibly have anticipated (DNA evidence, for example), how should fundamental rights of U.S. citizens be decided?

On the other hand, how can judges, be they conservative or liberal, keep their political and personal opinions out of their decisions and avoid making up the law as they go along? Kagan will be asked to explain her philosophy on these issues.

Confirmation

Since Supreme Court justices serve for life, both sides recognize that the ability to nominate members of the federal judiciary is one of the most powerful aspects of a president's authority. In this particular instance, if Kagan, like Justice Stevens before her, sits on the bench until she is 90, she will be deciding cases until the year 2050.

Opponents of the Kagan nomination understand the stakes, and they are reluctant to let Kagan be confirmed without a fight. There's an old saying: "When you have the votes, you want to vote. When you don't, you want to stall." On the Kagan nomination, the Democrats want to vote.

There is not much serious doubt that Kagan will make it through the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing without a hitch. Kagan’s nomination has been supported by an array of individuals and interest groups, including former First Lady Laura Bush, 68 deans from major law schools around the country, and the American Bar Association.
Unless something surprising happens, it is expected that Kagan will field the questions from the Committee, be as bland as possible, and avoid giving her opponents ammunition. Kagan will likely be confirmed by the full Senate during the month of July.
Republicans will attempt to use Kagan as another example of Obama’s “socialist” agenda in the fall election.

Check back with the Blog for more information on the nomination and key legal issues facing housing professionals.

Interesting Read

The Un-routine Sets Apart Sotomayor's First Term
By Robert Barnes
The Washington Post

As Congress Returns, Series of Tests Awaits
By John Harwood
The New York Times

Unions, Business Lobbies Look to November
By Bennett Roth, CQ-Roll Call
Congressional Quarterly

Obama’s Phoenix Act
By John Heilmann
New Yorker Magazine

Behind US v Arizona pure politics
By Kris W. Kobach
The New York Post

Governors Voice Grave Concerns on Immigration
By Abby Goodnough
The New York Times

Mechanical Failure
By Stephen Spruiell
The National Review

Why Obama Disappoints the Left
By Peter Beinart
The Daily Beast

Is Palin Cranking Up 2012 Campaign?
By John Ellis
RealClearPolitics

GOP takeover could make committee staff member Democrats' 'worst nightmare'
By Mary Ann Akers
The Washington Post

Labor unions pivot toward midterm elections with jobs campaign
By Philip Rucker
The Washington Post

Progressives hope 'One Nation' coalition can recapture grass-roots fervor
By Krissah Thompson
The Washington Post

President Obama's policy time bombs
By Chris Frates & Ben White
Politico

Primaries Offer Peak into Anti-Incumbent Fever Heading to the November Election

2010-05-18T10:28:00.002-04:00

Today’s primaries in Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Kentucky and Oregon will provide a sneak peak into the level of anger directed towards incumbents by voters. Today’s results could single Federal funding for affordable housing will be more difficult to achieve in the next Congress if more conservative candidates are elected.

The primary losses of Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-WV) and Sen. Bob Bennett (R-UT) to more conservative opponents reflects an anti-incumbent trend expressed in concern over too much Federal spending. Both Mollohan and Bennett were members of their chamber’s appropriations committee which placed them in prime position to ensure Federal resources were directed to their states. Each of their opponents are calling for less Federal spending.

The primary loss of Mollohan to a blue dog (conservative) Democrat, Mike Olivero, is a blow to housing advocates who could count on him as a reliable vote in support of affordable housing in his seat on the Appropriations Committee. Mollohan had a 100 percent score on affordable housing issues according to the voting report card issued by the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO) over the last two years.

The losses suffered by Mollohan and Bennett (the remaining candidates in the Utah race must face-off in a run off) have raised concern among incumbents. These losses, combined with the possible losses of other incumbents in the today’s primaries, sent a message to members of both parties not to take anything for granted. These losses also illustrate various elements of both parties are not happy. Bennett was considered not conservative enough while Mollohan was punished, in part, by his vote for health care reform. Mollohan has also been hounded by allegations of ethics issues. Mollohan was considered unbeatable since his father held the seat for seven terms prior to his own election.

In Arkansas, the liberal wing of the Democratic Party is upset with the incumbent, Blanche Lincoln’s, opposition to a public option in the health care reform bill. They have rallied around her challenger, Lt. Governor Bill Halter. Frustrated with the failure to include a public option in the final bill, they want to send a message of dissatisfaction to the party by attacking Lincoln.

In Pennsylvania, incumbent Senator Arlen Specter (D-PA) is not expected to win the Democratic nomination which would end his tenure in Congress. He was first elected as a Republican to the Senate in 1980. He switched parties in 2009 because he felt the party’s shift the right was too extreme for him. He has not been fully embraced by Pennsylvania Democrats and has been challenged by Rep. Joe Sestak. Sestak is expected to win. Both Lincoln and Specter have perfect scores in support of affordable housing according to NAHRO.

If Specter and Lincoln lose, the party’s nominees are expected to cast similar votes if elected to the Senate. However, even if Halter and Sestak win their party’s nomination, their victory in November is still in doubt. The Republican nominee in Pennsylvania, former Congressman Pat Toomey, is a formidable opponent. Because of the anti-incumbent tone of the electorate, Republicans have an excellent chance to capture the Senate seat in Arkansas. There are five individuals seeking the Republican nomination in Arkansas with Congressman John Boozman considered the favorite to win. Today’s primary will determine the Republican nominee as well.

Here are four things to look for in the final results Tuesday evening:

1. Incumbency: This is not a good year to be an incumbent. You are either going to lose or your standing will be weakened by a furious electorate. If a large number of incumbents lose or win by small margins, Congress will be reluctant to act on controversial legislation such as immigration reform before the election. Members will want to spend as much time as possible campaigning to avoid defeat in November.

2. Establishment influence: Each party is poised to see their “anointed” nominee lose today. In Pennsylvania, Specter enjoyed strong backing from the Democratic Party while Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell’s (KY) hand-picked candidate, Trey Grayson, could lose as well. Both parties will need to reevaluate their strategies this fall in the wake of these expected losses.

3. Tea Party: The defeat of Bill Bennett in Utah was a clear victory for the Tea Party movement. It singled that they can be major players in certain races. They have now turned their attention to Kentucky where Rand Paul is challenging Grayson for the U.S. Senate nomination in Kentucky. Paul is the son of Texas Representative Ron Paul. Paul will leading the race heading into today’s showdown; however, the Tea Party-backed candidate’s ability to win a general election will be tested in November.

4. Unions/liberals: Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln has drawn the ire of unions and liberals for her vote against the health care legislation. Each group has funneled an enormous amount of money in support of her challenger Bill Halter. Lincoln is expected to be the top voter among the Democratic candidates (businessman D.C. Morrison is the third candidate) but will not secure more than 50 percent of the votes to avoid a run-off. Unions/Liberals have also threatened conservative Democrats most notably in North Carolina for their vote against health care reform. If they can defeat Lincoln, they will be the Democrats’ version of the Tea Party and seek to push Democratic candidates to the left. This strategy might actually help Lincoln in a state that is moderate at best. If Halter wins, there is a huge risk he will be unelectable in the fall.

Tuesday’s primaries will provide another scene to the landscape called the November election. Both parties will sit on pins and needles waiting for the outcomes to be announced in the early evening.

Report Links Financial Stability Early in Life to Future Economic Prospects

A new report released by the Corporation for Enterprise Development (CFED) reviewed data which showed that assets and financial stability have a powerful impact on the future economic prospects of children.

The report, Assets & Opportunity Special Report: The Financial Security of Households with Children, reviewed data on the net worth and asset poverty of households with children, and finds that many families are on financially shaky ground. The report stated that millions of children are growing up in families facing economic hardship. Savings and asset ownership can provide a cushion to help get families through periods of unemployment, a medical emergency or other financial shocks.

Key findings include:

• Households with children are more vulnerable to economic shocks than those without children: households with children own only 70 cents for every $1 in wealth held by all households.

• Wealth gaps by race, income and gender persist across all households, but are most significant for households with children.

• While net worth grew for most households in the years leading up to the recession, African American households and poor households with children fell further behind.

CFED called on policymakers to adopt policies in four broad areas to address the lack of financial assets and incomes of families:

1. Boost the income of families and children by expanding or enacting Earned Income Tax Credits (EITC) at all levels of government; enacting the Child Tax Credit; and increasing minimum wage and unemployment insurance.

2. Encourage and incenting savings by creating Child Savings Accounts (CSA) and expanding Individual Development Accounts (IDA).

3. Eliminate disincentives to save by changing policies which require savings limits in order to be eligible for assistance.

4. Promote safe and affordable financial services by outlawing or better regulating payday lending practices and providing user-friendly financial services.

CFED is a national nonprofit based in Washington, DC dedicated to expanding economic opportunity for low-income families and communities. CFED uses a “think-do-invest” approach grounded in community practice, public policy and private markets.

Interesting Read

Primaries may help foreshadow November elections
By Dan Balz
The Washington Post

Tuesday's primaries could provide early answers for election year
By Dan Balz and Chris Cillizza
The Washington Post

Voters may be fed up with congressional pork
By Sean Lengell
The Washington Times

In Pa., 'Surging Sestak' tries to close the deal
By Paul Kane
The Washington Post

Heated campaign to fill Murtha's seat
By Sandhya Somashekhar
The Washington Post

In Ky., the Establishment vs. the Quasi-Outsider
By Perry Bacon Jr.
The Washington Post

To catch Blanche Lincoln, challenger plans 20 stops in 25 hours
By Peter Slevin
The Washington Post

Palin calls Fiorina and other Republican candidates 'mama grizzlies'
By Chris Cillizza
The Washington Post

Bob Schieffer: White House bracing for Specter loss
By Greg Sargent
The Washington Post

TARP becomes prime target for senators facing reelection battles
By Shailagh Murray
The Washington Post

In Backing Insurgents, Republicans Face November Risks
By Nate Silver
The Washington Post

Louisiana governor Jindal takes active role in dealing with spill
By David A. Fahrenthold
The Washington Post

Conservative thinkers tout three innovative and controversial proposals
By Perry Bacon, Jr.
The Washington Post

House Democrat calls out Republicans for defying their party on earmark ban
By Carol D. Leonnig
The Washington Post

2020 Census will have an online option
By Ed O’Keefe
The Washington Post

Immmigration Moves Front and Center

2010-04-26T17:18:00.002-04:00

This is the third in a series of articles on issues which will affect the November election. Today we look at immigration.

The decision by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer to sign legislation which allows state and local law enforcement officials to detain anyone who “appears” to be in the United States illegally has thrust immigration into the forefront of the national debate. On the heels of a divisive debate on health care, immigration appears to be the next contentious issue President Obama and the Democratic Party will address this summer.

The president promised during his campaign that he would pass comprehensive immigration reform within his first year in office. Democrats, concerned about the potential to suffer significant losses this November, have decided to pursue immigration reform this year in the hope that it will motivate Hispanic voters turn out in large numbers this fall.

A report released last month states the Hispanic vote can have a dramatic effect on 40 state and congressional races in the 2010 mid-term election. The report, The Power of the Latino Vote in the 2010 Election, also states immigration will be a major issue to the Hispanic voter. According to the Census, New Mexico is 44 percent Hispanic, Texas and California each are 36 percent Hispanic. Every state with high concentrations of Hispanic voters will see registrations for the elections soar. On a national basis, Hispanic residents were 9 percent of the country's population in 1990, 12.5 percent in 2000, and over 15 percent in 2007. One of every two people added to the nation's population between 2006 and 2007 were Hispanic. While the economy, health care and education are important to members of the Hispanic community, passage of comprehensive immigration reform is considered a litmus test on how committed the president and the Democratic Party are to their concerns.

Lydia Camarillo, Vice President of the Southwest Voter Registration and Education Project (SVREP) in an interview with A View from DC in March said the grassroots is very angry and feels the president has not kept his promise of enacting immigration reform which prompted many Latinos to vote for him in the fall of 2008. Camarillo said Latinos will not be satisfied with simply introduction of a bill, she says Latinos want a comprehensive bill passed.

“There are no excuses,” she said. “Democrats are in control and should be able to pass something.”

Republicans see risk and reward in immigration legislation. They believe it is an inopportune time to discuss immigration reform when the economy is the number one issue facing the country. Failing to address these economic issues, they believe, heightens their prospects this fall. However, there is the risk they will be perceived as anti-Hispanic and could alienate the fastest growing segment of the nation’s voting population.

In an editorial in the March 19 edition of the Washington Post, Sens. Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) and Lindsey O. Graham (R-SC) summarized the basic elements of comprehensive immigration reform legislation they hope will generate bipartisan support.

Their proposal will require the creation of a biometric Social Security card to ensure that illegal workers cannot get jobs; fulfill and strengthen the nation’s commitment to border security and interior enforcement; create a process for admitting temporary workers; and implement a tough but fair path to legalization for those already here.

Graham recently threatened to withdraw his support for reform if Democrats insist on proceeding on this issue at the expense of another key issue: climate change. The House Democratic leadership said they will move on immigration reform after they receive a Senate-passed bill. Democrats are privately saying they do not have the votes to pass a bill but are willing to make the effort and make the Republicans appear the villain when it fails.

Camarillo said Hispanics may withhold support for Democrats in the fall if immigration reform is not passed. That strategy doesn’t sit well with a long-term time advocate for immigration reform.

Arnoldo S. Torres, a political consultant based in Sacramento, California, does not believe that strategy will help.

“How is that helping their efforts,” he said. “They need to elect more progressive people in the next two to four years who will work toward passing reform. For them to say it is okay for moderate Democrats or conservative Republicans to get elected who aren’t going to vote for what they want contradicts their objective to get reform passed. It really is an empty threat and not a well thought out idea.”

He doesn’t believe many Hispanic advocates are interested in solving the problem and stopping the flow of immigrants but getting more Hispanics registered to vote for Democrats
Torres was the Director of the Washington office of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) in the late seventies and early eighties and was instrumental in writing and helping to pass the Immigration Reform and Control Act (ICMA) of 1986. That was the last time Congress passed comprehensive immigration reform.

ICMA sought to address the same issues currently under debate:

1. It made it illegal to knowingly hire or recruit illegal immigrants (immigrants who do not possess lawful work authorization);

2. Required employers to attest to their employees' immigration status;

3. Granted amnesty to certain illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 ; and,

4. Granted a path towards legalization to certain agricultural seasonal workers and immigrants who had been continuously and illegally present in the United States since January 1, 1982.

Torres said lessons from that legislation have not been learned. He said our immigration policy has never fully addressed the two key factors that influence immigration. First, there is the “push” factor. There is insufficient economic development occurring in the countries of origin of the immigrants. In his view, trade agreements open markets for US goods but keep the US markets closed to foreign products. Therefore, there are few economic opportunities in those countries to prevent migration to the US. He said the “pull” factor is the second issue not address. This is where US businesses offer work opportunities which are low-paying by US standards but are better than the prospects immigrants have in their home countries.

What is the answer?

That is hard to say. As Torres stated the Schumer-Graham proposal is a political response to a complicated issue. Without addressing the “push” factor Torres talked about, we will have this discussion again in 20 years. Plus, if politics defeats any reasonable solutions the status quo will only get worse. The response by Republican hardliners to immigration reform which includes a path to legalization is causing the party to be viewed as hostile to Hispanics. While the perception of Republicans by Hispanics is not as bad as the perception which exists in the African American community, it is heading in that direction. Republicans are not likely to increase their numbers significantly within the Hispanic community; however, more Hispanics can find comfort under their tent that African Americans.

What does this mean for housing?

The composition of the next Congress will determine the type of funding and policies affordable housing providers can expect over the next two years. A more conservative Congress is likely to reign in spending. A liberal Congress will attempt to increase funding for social programs. Immigration reform can potentially motivate Hispanic voters to participate this November and will likely vote for Democrats.

Here are a few thoughts to keep in mind:

1. Congress will take on immigration reform this year. With the signing of the Arizona law, Obama now has a call to action, a reason for taking it off the back burner and moving it to the front. Had the Arizona bill been vetoed, the urgency of reform would have been defused. Neither party is itching for this fight. This is an issue the winner can lose for winning.

2. Immigration and the economy will focus voter attention more than health care reform. As contentious as health care reform is as an issue, it pales in comparison to the historical, social and emotional weight that immigration carries. It will be divisive. Expect the debate to be heated.

3. Immigration will more strongly motivate the Republican Party base and Tea Party advocates to vote this November. Just as the Arizona law is galvanizing proponents for reform, a path to legalization or citizenship is galvanizing the Republican base and the Tea Party. For Democrats, Arizona gave them an early Christmas present. The Arizona bill is the easy get-out-the-vote cry for Hispanic voters. If the Hispanic voting population gets energized, the tea party’s electoral power will be put to the test. As reflected in the Census data cited above, there could be drastic effects in every election throughout the southwest, and enough swing voters in other areas that Congressional races could be decided on the immigration issue alone.

4. Opposition to a path to legalization is not universally opposed by some of the Republican Party’s natural constituents. For example, the US Chamber of Commerce (USCC) supports comprehensive reform which includes a path to legalization, while the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) which represents small businesses, does not. While there will be a great deal of pressure on Democrats in conservative districts, Republican lawmakers will also be under tremendous pressure from competing supporters within their party.

5. Immigration reform can be a key unifying civil rights issue for 2010. Hispanics of all backgrounds, Asians and African-Americans, each have shared experiences of racial profiling by police officers. Many police departments, to their credit, have worked hard to develop trust within these communities. If the Arizona law gains momentum in other states, that trust can evaporate and create hostilities which can adversely affect communities. Housing advocates may find different groups and new players in the public arena. There may be opportunities for coalition building, grassroots organizing and networking that simply weren't present in previous years. Stay up to date on immigration reform as this issue is debated in the near future.

Interesting Read

Politics

Can 2010 be a 2008 repeat?
By Chris Cillizza
The Washington Post

Voter anger fuels New Hampshire congressional candidates
By Shailagh Murray
The Washington Post

Prominent Republicans making more endorsements in primary races
By Karen Tumulty
The Washington Post

In Upstate New York, Democrats feel betrayed by Rep. Arcuri
By Sandhya Somashekhar
The Washington Post

Florida waits to see whether Crist will stay Republican or go independent
By Dan Balz
The Washington Post

Cuomo the non-candidate
By Howard Kurtz
The Washington Post

Democrats move to stem corporate political cash
By Ross Colvin and Thomas Ferraro
The Washington Post

'Nobody wins' on immigration reform
By Jonathan Martin and Kasie Hunt
Politico

Arizona governor signs immigration bill, reopening national debate
By Anne E. Kornblut and Spencer S. Hsu
The Washington Post

Hispanics urge Obama to reform immigration laws
Reuters

Growing Split in Arizona Over Immigration
By Randal C. Archibold
The New York Times

Arizona immigration conflict heats up
By Jonathan J. Cooper
The Associated Press

Immigration advocacy groups to challenge Arizona law
By Jonathan J. Cooper and Paul Davenport
The Washington Post

Housing and Community Development

Census nears 2000 mail-in response rate
By Carol Morello
The Washington Post

Fannie Mae wants to help some troubled borrowers get back into home market
By Kenneth R. Harney
The Washington Post

The national debt and Washington's deficit of will
By Joel Achenbach
The Washington Post

Goldman executives cheered housing market's decline, newly released e-mails show
By Zachary A. Goldfarb
The Washington Post

The Fall Election Part Two: The Economy

2010-04-21T12:14:00.003-04:00

This is the second in a series of articles on issues which will affect the November election. Today we look at the impact the economy will have on the election results.

As former President Bill Clinton said during the presidential campaign in 1992, "It's the economy, stupid." The economy is the only constant issue which can dramatically impact elections. In 1992, then President George Herbert Walker Bush had very high approval ratings (above 90 percent following Desert Storm). Clinton was able to use dissatisfaction with the economy as a tool to focus voter attention, and he upset the incumbent.

A grassroots movement occurred in the 1994 mid-term election and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich's "Contract with America" became the rallying point for Republicans. Republicans gained control of both houses of Congress that year. It was the first time they had control of the House in over 30 years.

In the 2008 election, it was the Democrats who had the theme. Then Senator Barack Obama ran on "change." He parlayed voter dissatisfaction with the state of the economy and a ballooning deficit into a historic victory becoming the first African-American to be elected president in the United States.

He inherited a bad economy and a huge deficit. In just over a year's time, he shepherded a stimulus package initiated by his predecessor, George W. Bush, signed into law health care reform, and is pursuing other key agenda items he feels are important to the country.

However, in spite of the administration’s efforts, the economy does not show signs of immediate recovery and voters are upset. The immediate concern is to return the unemployed to work. In testimony delivered before the Joint Economic Committee, Ben S. Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, said restoring the two million jobs lost during this tough economic period will take time.

While the administration has touted the most recent employment figures which indicated 162,000 new jobs were created in March. Republicans say those figures are misleading because they include temporary positions filled by the Bureau of the Census and employment due to the recovery from the February snowstorms. Unemployment still hovers near 10 percent and benefit claims are steady at approximately 450,000 weekly. This is causing some financial experts to be skeptical a full recovery is near.

Concerns about the economy and the Obama “agenda” have given rise to a grassroots movement, the Tea Party, which has energized opposition to incumbents in general, but more specifically, Democrats. Nervous Congressional Democrats, however, haven't forgotten the lessons from 1992 and '94. It is the status of the economy that determines the outcome of elections; and a grassroots movement and voter anger can affect the type of "change" that House and Senate incumbents fear in the mid-term elections.

Historically, the party of a new president loses seats in the subsequent mid-term election. The Democratic Party will not buck historical trends and win big this November. The only question facing Democrats is: how big will the losses be? Most experts expect Republicans to gain eight seats in the Senate and as many as 30 to 40 seats in the House. It is unlikely, but not improbable, for Republicans to regain control of the House, Senate or both. However, you can expect a surprise or two this fall

Whether Democrats lose big, small, or maintain the status quo, the appetite for big idea initiatives will be significantly diminished in 2011. One issue which is certainly going to be front and center leading into the fall and beyond is deficit reduction. President Obama has proposed a deficit reduction commission to explore short and long term solutions to this issue. Any proposed recommendations will be non-binding. However, it will be interesting to see what is proposed, but more importantly, what recommendations the White House and Congress will seek to implement. In his congressional testimony, Bernanke urged Congress to do more to control the Federal deficit. He has said the US economy can not sustain the deficits long term. His testimony will add pressure to Congress and the president to act.

Congress has held discussions in the past to devise strategies to control the deficit but these talks grind to a halt beyond a verbal agreement that controlling entitlement spending, specifically Medicare and Social Security, is critical to deficit reduction. No politician wants to face the wrath of citizens potentially facing cuts in benefits in the name of fiscal prudence. Any politician offering such a plan faces the real possibility of losing his or her next election.

As a result, expect gridlock in a number of arenas, particularly in the appropriations process. One of the most memorable examples of gridlock occurred in 1995 when the federal government was shut down. It could happen again in 2011. Even if it doesn't, there won't be money for housing issues unless advocates grow in effectiveness.

National Decisions, Local Impact

This raises legitimate concerns for housing and community development advocates and program providers. They are the first responders to the needs of the poor. When the economy is strong or weak, these individuals struggle to secure the resources and policies to help poor families. For example, very little has been done to help poor renters who were evicted from foreclosed properties not for failure to pay rent but due to the owners’ failure pay the mortgage.

The Congressional Black Caucus has expressed its concern to the president that poor communities, specifically the black community, have not benefited from the influx of stimulus dollars to local communities hardest hit by the economic downturn.

National decisions will have local consequences. Advocates need to keep certain points in perspective:

1. The current political and economic dynamics are not working in their favor; however, the ability to effectively manage current resources can help you leverage additional resources and different policies.

2. The health care legislation is going to increase administrative costs for all employers; therefore, plan for this increase now and factor it into the current budget as much as possible so as not to be blindsided when those costs go into effect.

3. It is unrealistic to expect significant increases in funding from the Federal government so there is a need to look outside the box for resources.

4. It is important to study and understand the impact the internet is having on business development, expansion, contractors, suppliers and the workforce. Understanding its impact is important in creating future economic development and job training initiatives.

5. Monitor local demographic changes and the analyses and assessment of their impact on your community’s economy. These demographic changes will help determine the type of economic development and job training initiatives you community and citizens will need in the future.

In order to navigate these murky economic times, it is advisable for local advocates to consider these ideas in the planning process;

1. It is important for local agencies and advocates to convey their work and contributions to the community in a concise and easy to understand language and images. Keep the message simple and easy for the listener to digest the salient points. Talk in terms of how your work is providing jobs to your community, increasing the local tax base, reducing dependency, serving kids, etc. Most people don’t care about the challenges you face or the details of your programs. They want to know their tax dollars are not being wasted.

2. Determine when it is best to play defense and when it is best to play offense when seeking Federal resources and regulatory changes. Don’t be afraid to use the current anti-Washington sentiment to advocate for greater local control.

3. Local agencies, such as public housing authorities, should explore hiring a rating agency like Standard and Poors, Fitch or Moody’s to assess your operations. These assessments can be expensive but they offer credibility and confirmation of your work.

4. Reevaluate your staff needs when an opening appears. Seek to hire individuals who do not require a lot of supervision, have great communication skills and are confident to express a fresh set of ideas.

5. Work with your professional associations to create career fairs in colleges and universities to encourage students to pursue a career with public agencies.

6. Pursue activities which can benefit both the agency and residents. For example, starting a business incubator or establishing a credit union might create opportunities to provide education, training, resources and opportunities in a non-traditional way that can be “sold” to a diverse group of policy makers and funders.

Economic downturns are platforms for innovation and growth. It is during these challenging times which offer great opportunities for local communities to challenge existing assumptions, pursue new ideas, tweak current initiatives and embrace the future. With some thought, an open mind and a willingness to make adjustments, advocates can become stronger, more efficient and more successful in meeting the needs of local communities.

Interesting Read

Housing and Community Development

Dorothy I. Height, founding matriarch of U.S. civil rights movement, dies at 98
By Bart Barnes
Special to The Washington Post

Inspector general says changes to Making Home Affordable may impede help
By Dina ElBoghdady
The Washington Post

Maryland changes how prisoners are counted in census
By Carol Morello
The Washington Post

Big businesses winning contracts meant for small ones, groups charge
By V. Dion Haynes
The Washington Post

Treasury seeks public comments on reform plans for housing-finance system
By Zachary A. Goldfarb
The Washington Post

Federal aid is forestalling only a fraction of foreclosures, report says
By Renae Merle
The Washington Post

Big Banks Draw Big Profits From Microloans to Poor
By Neil MacFarquhar
The New York Times

Politics

1994 Republican Rout Is Casting Shadow in 2010
By Adam Nagourney and Marjorie Connelly
The New York Times

Both national party committees spend big chunks on fancy meals, hotels, travel
By R. Jeffrey Smith
The Washington Post

North Carolina Democrats' votes against health care push labor to form party
By Philip Rucker
The Washington Post

A census sign that the Tea Party is less than it seems
By Dana Milbank
The Washington Post

Big cities, rural areas both trail on census returns
By Carol Morello
The Washington Post

Behind the Curtain, Cuomo Runs His Own P.R. Machine
By Jeremy W. Peters
The New York Times

G.O.P. Confidence Tested by Fears of Searing Divisions
By Jeff Zeleny
The New York Times

The Fall Election Part One: Uncertainty Continues to Surround the Fall Election

2010-04-12T14:27:00.002-04:00

During last week’s post we listed a series of issues which will affect the November election and provided an outline of action steps we believe the affordable housing community must undertake to prepare itself for the future. This week we look at the traditional mid-term losses faced by a first-term president and discuss its implications for affordable housing advocates.

Barack Obama’s first year and a half in office has not been without drama:

1. He inherited one of the most challenging economic periods of our country’s history;

2. Nominated the first Hispanic to the Supreme Court;

3. Decided to expand our presence in Afghanistan;

4. Saw the seat of the late Senator Ted Kennedy fall to a Republican resulting in Democrats losing their filibuster-proof majority in the Senate;

5. After a bruising and time-consuming fight was able to pass health care reform which was tried unsuccessfully by previous president’s for 100 years;

6. Has endured a highly vocal and confrontational opposition to his efforts by “Tea Party” activists;

7. Dissatisfaction by his liberal Democratic base; and,

8. He faced unanimous opposition by the Republican Party on health care and other initiatives.

Now he must lead his party through the mid-term election. Historically, the party of the incumbent president loses seats in the ensuring mid-term election. The fundamental question facing Obama is not whether Democrats lose seats, but how many. Since the health care debate heated up, the president’s popularity has dipped below 50 percent which could portend trouble for Democrats this fall.

Larry Sabato, Director of the University of Virginia’s Center on Politics is predicting Republicans will gain seven seats in the Senate, 27 in the House of Representatives and will likely win at least seven gubernatorial races. The expected gains in the House and Senate will not give Republicans majority status in Congress but will give them greater leverage and influence on legislative matters and Supreme Court appointments.

Alfred Cuzan, writing for the Center on Politics Crystal Ball, correlates the president’s approval rating against the number of seats his party is expected to lose in the fall election. He reviewed the approval ratings of past Presidents Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter entering their midterm election and posed the question: is Obama another Reagan or Carter? His analysis suggests the more unpopular the president the more likely his party will lose seats in the next fall election. Cuzan determined his model indicates Obama’s approval rating will continue to decline which could be a bad omen for Democrats this fall. However, Cuzan acknowledged that Reagan benefited from a recovering economy after suffering loses in his midterm election while Carter endured a struggling economy which included high interest rates and high unemployment.

So where does this leave Obama and Democrats? Right now, on the defensive. There are so many factors which come to play this summer leading into the fall. Here are three to watch closely:

1. The economy. The administration indicated the most recent jobs numbers reflect an economy on the rebound. Republicans disagree. A recovering economy will help the president and Democrats this fall.

2. Immigration. The administration is under tremendous pressure by Hispanics to enact comprehensive immigration reform which includes a path to citizenship for undocumented workers. Many Republicans, including Tea Party activists, are adamantly opposed to what they call “amnesty”. This is an issue which will motivate the bases of both parties, although Republicans can damage themselves long-term with Hispanic voters if they are viewed as “hostile” towards immigrants.

3. The Supreme Court nomination process. This can invigorate the bases of both parties. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens’ decision to retire creates another opportunity for the president to nominate a replacement. Stevens’ timing so close to the contentious health care has the potential to be just as volatile. Supreme Court Justices serve for life and Republicans are not eager to allow Obama to appoint a “liberal” to the bench.

In the House races, many of the seats gained by Democrats in the last two election cycles were in districts which leaned Republican. In 40 of those districts, voters voted for President George W. Bush in 2004 and half of the voters in those districts voted for John McCain in 2008. It is not unreasonable to assume a majority of those districts will return into the hands of the Republican candidate.

The Senate is a bit more unpredictable. No one would have predicted the seat of the late Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy would fall into the hands of a Republican. Delaware was considered a safe Democratic seat until the vice president’s son, Beau Biden, decided not to run for office. Now it appears a Republican, the moderate Mike Castle, will win that seat. The fall elections are so unpredictable, there are some experts suggesting the solidly Democratic State of California may elect one of Senator Barbara Boxer’s (D) Republican challengers to replace her.

While a great deal of attention is focused on the congressional elections, the gubernatorial races could significantly shape Congress for the future. According to the Center for Politics, there are 23 states with no incumbents running for governor, including the big states of California, New York, Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania. New York and Pennsylvania are expected to lose seats after the Census Bureau has completed its tally of the 2010 Census. Congressional maps will be redrawn as a result of the census results and the party in power will control that process. Historically, redistricting has been a vehicle for the party in power to protect its members while punishing the opposing party.

What should affordable housing advocates do next? Here are our suggestions:

1. Learn from the Tea Party. Grassroots organizing and education are critical to ensure your concerns are reflected by candidates.

2. Make sure you educate all of your constituents, workers, etc., on the importance of sending back in Census forms and what it means to your community. (We will discuss the Census in greater detail in a future posting.)

3. Although you likely cannot tell others how to vote, make sure to tell them to vote and why it is important.

4. Solidify your relationships now with businesses, churches, non-profits and other groups and see what common ground exists politically.

5. As you are discussing issues, be sure to listen. Ask residents and other groups what is important to them. You may be surprised at what you learn.

6. Rehearse your elevator speech now. Be prepared to tell both elected officials and candidates who you are and why your concerns matter. Let them know that you are not just a housing advocate, but a person that represents a block of voters, and tell them how many.

7. Remember, elected officials, for all of their talk of service, are most interested in themselves. That’s why they are putting up with all of the headaches of running for office. Therefore, find common ground. If you went to the same college, use that to your advantage. If their play children play soccer and your do too, find an artful way to mention soccer when you talk to them.

8. Be fair in your criticism and praise of your elected official. Research until you find at least one vote on which the incumbent did something right, and thank them for it.

9. Treat Republicans like Democrats and vice versa. Advocates simply can’t assume they will receive support or opposition from their congressional representative.

10. There is a fine line between being persistent and a pain in the rear. Strike the right balance between being a pest and being a professional.

11. Know your issues well enough so that you can express your concerns in a way that is meaningful to the incumbent.

12. Take the time to educate candidates on the work you are doing in the community. If the incumbent is never with you on any issues, try as hard as you can to get someone else elected.

13. Remember all politics is local. National member groups, by their nature, do not have the focus to assist much with the issues that may be in play in your district or state. Therefore, strike a careful balance between your local concerns and support of national issues.

Next week’s posting will focus on the economy.

Interesting Read

Housing and Community Development

Economy has shifted Americans' attitudes about homeownership and money
By Sadie Dingfelder
Special to the Washington Post

Renting isn't reckless if you're not ready for homeownership
By Michelle Singletary
The Washington Post

Foreclosures create opportunities in Prince George's, Md.
By Ovetta Wiggins
The Washington Post

Thousands May Lose Rental Vouchers
By Cara Buckley
New York Times

The Invisible Underclass
By Eugene Robinson
The Washington Post

Faith in homeownership drops, Fannie Mae poll shows
By Renae Merle
The Washington Post

Baltimore takes a holistic approach to unhealthy housing
By Eliza Barclay
The Washington Post

Obama to meet at the White House with black church leaders
By Hamil R. Harris and Krissah Thompson
The Washington Post

Politics

A census sign that the Tea Party is less than it seems
By Dana Milbank
The Washington Post

Republicans focus efforts on November, say 2012 can wait
By Dan Balz
The Washington Post

Of Swans and Spoilers
Heading toward Election Day, Democrats won't be getting much help on the jobs front.
By Charlie Cook
The National Journal

Hispanics skeptical that Obama, Democrats will deliver immigration overhaul
By Sandhya Somashekar
The Washington Post

Anger over health-care reform spurs rise in threats against Congress members
By Sari Horwitz and Ben Pershing
The Washington Post

Five ways Michael Steele could come back
By Chris Cillizza
The Washington Post

Summer Action Could Turn Up the Heat for Housing Advocates this Fall and Beyond

2010-04-06T00:23:00.003-04:00

The debate surrounding passage of health care reform illustrated how intense the partisan divide is in Washington, DC and underscores the growing importance of the November mid-term election. The level of the disagreement reminds many political veterans of the events leading up to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The epithets, death threats, spitting incidents and threats of violence against individuals and the Federal government who supported the legislation have dominated the media in the past few weeks.

Opponents of President Barack Obama’s health care plan, particularly those who are part of the Tea Party movement, have vowed to take their fight to the ballot box this November. They promised to punish Democrats who voted for Obama’s health care plan. Tea Party groups and others are targeting those Democrats elected in Congressional districts won by Sen. John McCain in his failed 2008 presidential bid.

The fervor surrounding the health care debate should be a wake up call to housing and community development advocates leading into, and going beyond, the fall election. A number of issues are going to influence the election results to varying degrees. They include:

1. The typical mid-year losses that the party of a new president endures;

2. The economy; an economic upswing bodes well for Democrats if an economic upswing occurs. The jury is still out whether the economy will really pick up in time to make a difference in November.;

3. The various constituency groups with a point to make this fall;

4. Cash; more specifically the Supreme Court decision on corporate and union spending on elections; and,

5. The anger associated with the passage of health care legislation;

Each of these influences are pieces to a broader puzzle to determine how much and what type of Federal resources will be available to low-income households. How the puzzle is put together will determine the level of financial assistance to individuals, families and the agencies serving this population and the kind of initiatives to help these families achieve economic self-sufficiency.

What do the political changes mean for those administering local housing and community development programs? Are there action steps local advocates and administrators can take to position themselves favorably regardless of the results of November’s elections?

In the coming weeks A View from DC will look at some of the factors affecting November’s election and offer our recommendations on the steps needed by advocates in 2011 and beyond. Here is an outline of our recommendations:

1. Job creation is not the only measurement of a growing economy and should be viewed with caution by local communities. Local groups should also take the time to more fully understand the internet’s impact on the economy and on the future earning potential of low income individuals and households.

2. The census. Working with the Census Bureau is going to be critical to ensure as many individuals in low-income communities are counted particularly immigrants from Asia, Africa and Latin America.

3. National membership organizations need to develop regional strategies to meet the needs of their constituents. Redistricting will create winners and losers which will result in the need for different political strategies to address the implications these changes will bring to localities. A broad national approach to accommodate the resulting changes will be insufficient.

4. It is important to learn the key lesson from the Tea Party movement - it all begins with the grassroots. Greater emphasis needs to be placed on local organizing efforts.

5. There appears to be a consensus among political experts that Republicans will make significant gains in November. It is important to develop a strategy now to work with elected officials before they become entrenched in Washington politics.

6. Advocates need to revise their message and take advantage of the anti-Washington sentiment in the country. Advocates who are members of national organizations need to be more judicious in using their political capital.

7. Traditional job training programs and skill development for low-income individuals need to be reevaluated and other forms of training need to be explored.

8. Local groups, particularly housing authorities, need to better utilize the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) and other financial tools to generate additional resources for themselves and their residents.

9. Without an element of teaching financial literacy and wealth creation to low-income households, any future progress will be short-lived.

More than 30 million US Households Receive Inadequate Banking Services

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) released data this winter which documented that more than 30 million households in the United States are either unbanked or underbanked. According to the data, 25.6 percent of the population does not receive adequate financial services. It is estimated that the total number of adults in these households is 60 million.

Included in the findings:

1. The Southern Region has the highest incidences of underbanked households.
2. A large percentage of black, American Indian/Alaskan and Hispanic households are unbanked or underbanked.
3. Approximately five million households which are banked may be underbanked as well.

The survey, FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households, collected a variety of data by sponsoring a supplemental survey to the Current Population Survey (CPS) administered by the US Bureau of the Census. The survey sought to identify more reliable data number and types of households in the United States which are unbanked or underbanked.

For purposes of the survey, unbanked households did not have anyone with a checking or savings account. Underbanked households contain an adult with either a checking or savings account but who also uses other financial services like check cashing establishments, non-bank money orders, payday loans, or pawn shops at least once or twice a year.

The data revealed the following characteristics of unbanked households:

1. They are more likely to be single-head of household with women comprising a higher percentage of these households versus men. Women comprised 20 percent of this population while men comprised 14.9 percent of the population.

2. Blacks, American Indians/ Alaskans and Hispanics are more likely to be unbanked than Asians and whites.

3. More low-income households are unbanked with those earning less than $30,000 comprising the overwhelming majority (71 percent) of low-income, unbanked households.

4. As age and education increases, the unbanked percentage decreases.

5. Over 40 percent do not believe they will open a bank account in the future.

6. Two-thirds of this population uses alternative financial services such check cashing establishments.

The underbanked share many of the characteristics of the unbanked population:

1. This population is more likely to be single head of household; however, the difference between females and males is only one percent. Approximately 28 percent of female headed households are underbanked versus 27 percent for male head of household.

2. Blacks, American Indians/Alaskans and Hispanics are also more likely to be underbanked versus Asians and whites.

3. Money orders and check cashing services are the two most popular alternative financial services used by this population. Convenience is the principal reason given for utilizing these services.

4. The underbanked rates decline as education and age increases but the rates are similar in the $30,000 to $50,000 range as it is for those earning less than $30,000.

The report concludes there is an opportunity for the government and the financial industry to provide a service to a significant portion of the US population. It does not offer recommendation on how to provide that service.

Hispanic Coalition Issues Interim Immigration Report Card

A coalition of Hispanic organizations released an interim report which is critical of the lack of support for “progressive immigration” reform as reflected in their votes on related matters.

The National Latino Congreso (NLC) issued the Immigrant Justice Report Card Interim Progress Report Card which looked at how Members voted and/or supported immigration-related legislation in the 110th and 111th Congress. The report looked at 15 Senate votes, four Senate bills, seven House votes and 10 House bills.

The report concluded that in spite of strong national support for “progressive immigration reform”, most members of the House of Representatives have records which favor
anti-immigrant measure” while Senators are slightly more inclined to support “pro-immigrant” reform. NLC says 53 percent of House members are pro-immigration reform while 67 percent of the Senators have similar views.

According to the organization’s tally, approximately 41 percent of House members with a large number of immigrants in their district tend to support what NLC calls “anti-immigrant” measure. In the Senate, approximately 26 percent of the senators support similar measures.

Congressional action on immigration reform is expected to be a major factor in determining the level of support candidates running for office this fall will receive from Hispanic voters. Many of the organizations represented by NLC have called for action on immigration reform this year and have stated they will not be satisfied unless legislation is passed.

The National Latino Congreso has brought together Latinos from all walks of life- from grassroots community members to national elected officials- to create a united Latino agenda on a variety of issues. The National Latino Congreso is convened by the Hispanic Federation (HF), League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), the Mexican American Political Association (MAPA), the National Alliance of Latin American and Caribbean Communities (NALACC), the National Day Labor Organizing Network (NDLON), the National Hispanic Environmental Council (NHEC), Southwest Voter Registration Education Project (SVREP), and the William C. Velasquez Institute (WCVI).

Interesting Read

Politics

RNC chairman defends stewardship of party affairs
The Associated Press

RNC Chief of Staff Ken McKay resigns
By Philip Rucker and Chris Cillizza
The Washington Post

GOP chairman Michael Steele is out front, attracting detractors
By Philip Rucker and Amy Gardner
The Washington Post

Democrats pull in more cash for campaigns than GOP
By R. Jeffrey Smith
The Washington Post

Quarter of Republicans Think Obama May Be the Anti-Christ
Live Science

Assessing John Thune's 2012 chances
By Chris Cillizza
The Washington Post

5 Reasons Why Romney's Political Career Isn't Dead
By Marc Ambinder
The Atlantic

Hamstrung by Health Care
Two Ways to Lose a House Majority
Rhodes Cook,
Crystal Ball

Parties Scrap for Governors’ Seats to Gain Handle on Redistricting
By Bob Benenson
Congressional Quarterly

GOP Senate contest heats up in Arizona
By George F. Will
The Washington Post

Housing and Community Development

Americans rebuild for the 'new urban century'
By John Blake
CNN

Foreclosure fund gets $600 million to help residents of 5 more states save homes
By Renae Merle
The Washington Post

Obama administration announces effort to slash mortgages for unemployed borrowers
By Renae Merle and Dina ElBoghdady
The Washington Post

Census caught in anger toward Washington
Officials worry low response rate is a form of protest
By Richard S. Dunham and Meredith Simons
The Houston Chronicle

Hispanics Set to Grade Candidates on Litmus Test this Fall

2010-03-22T13:11:00.002-04:00

A leading analyst on Hispanic voting patterns said immigration reform will be to Latinos what choice is to women – a litmus test for Members of Congress in this fall election. For those members

Lydia Camarillo, Vice President of the Southwest Voter Registration and Education Project (SVREP) told A View from DC in a wide ranging interview that a member’s position on immigration reform will have a big say on the support he or she receives from Latino voters. She said Gray Davis, former Republican Governor of California, would still be governor if he did not renege on his promise to support immigration reform. James G. “Gray” Davis was the Democratic Governor of California from 1999 until he was removed in a recall election in 2003.

She said the grassroots is very angry and feels the president has not kept his promise of enacting immigration reform which prompted many Latinos to vote for him in the fall of 2008. Camarillo said Latinos will not be satisfied with simply introduction of a bill, she says Latinos want a comprehensive bill passed.

“There are no excuses,” she said. “Democrats are in control and should be able to pass something.”

She said Latinos are not the swing voters as some might surmise but are a pretty reliable vote for Democrats although the intensity of their vote may vary state-to-state. She said 67 percent voted for President Obama which is significant because Latinos, on average, are a young electorate. The average age of the Latino electorate is 22 years old and is likely to vote along the lines of their parents. She said there is no gender or generation gap within the Latino community.

She said because of the closeness of various races in November, the Latino vote can have a significant impact on the election’s outcome. She said any effort to pass a punitive immigration bill will not please the Latino electorate. She said the health care debate has ignited the anger within the Latino community because of a provision which prevents undocumented immigrants from purchasing health care even if they have the resources to do so.

“The president won by such a large margin the Latino vote is not appreciated as much,” she said. “If he won by a closer margin, Latinos would be call saviors.”

She said the census will have a huge impact on future elections. She said the Latino community continues to grow in spite of being undercounted by a third in the last census. She said the census count will be of particular importance in states with large Hispanic populations which are expected to gain congressional seats such as Utah, Colorado, Arizona and Texas.

SVREP's mission is to empower Latinos and other minorities by increasing their participation in the American democratic process. They do this by strengthening the capacity, experience and skills of Latino leaders, networks, and organizations through programs that consistently train, organize, finance, development, expand and mobilize Latino leaders and voters around an agenda that reflects their values. Thus, SVREP's motto: "Su Voto Es Su Voz" (Your Vote is Your Voice).

Credit Unions Fail to Meet Needs of Low Income Households

A report released by the National Community Reinvestment Coalition found that credit unions are failing to meet the needs of low income households. As a result, NCRC is calling for the Federal government to require credit unions to comply with reporting and investing requirements as specified in the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) http://www.ffiec.gov/cra/.

"Credit Unions: True To Their Mission Part II" looked at data to measure how credit unions fared in offering services to low income households as compared to mainstream banks. The findings in the report indicated that mainstream banks performed better in offering services as measured by fair lending indicators than credit unions which are non-profits chartered with the mandate to service the underserved. The fair lending indicators measure the percentage of loans given to women, minorities and low- and moderate-income borrowers.

As a result of the report, NCRC is calling for CRA to be applied to all large credit unions. NCRC has a total of seven recommendations as a result of the report:

1. It is calling for CRA’s reach to expand and apply to credit unions.

2. NCRC is calling for changes in how the designation of underserved areas is determined. They feel it should be defined in a more meaningful way where only areas with low- and moderate income households should designated as underserved.

3. They are also calling for the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) to enhance its anti-discrimination reviews of credit unions.

4. NCRC wants to mandate the NCUA to measure a credit union’s performance.

5. NCRC want to amend the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) so that small institutions can report their lending data. Previous arguments against such reporting center on the time and cost of gathering this data. NCRC contends that technological advances make reporting much easier and less expensive.

6. NCRC feels small business lending should be disclosed by credit unions and mid-size banks.

7. Finally, NCRC feels community development credit unions (CDCU) should be supported by other credit unions and banks.

HUD Secretary Testifies Before Congress

Shaun Donovan, Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) testified before the House Financial Services Committee to explain the administration’s rationale for submitting its proposal on the Choice Neighborhoods Initiative.

In his testimony Donovan reiterated the department’s desire to broaden the number of players involved in the revitalization of neighborhoods. Donovan praised the HOPE VI program, which the Choice initiative would replace, but felt it was not as comprehensive as is needed in many neighborhoods.

Location of Subprime Crisis Crosses State and Party Lines

2010-03-10T16:02:00.002-05:00

A recent study released by the National Community Reinvestment Coalition (NCRC) showed that the subprime mortgage crisis is more wide-spread by state, congressional district, race and ethnicity than has been previously reported.

The report, entitled, Politics and the Subprime Mortgage Meltdown: An Examination of Disparities by Congressional District, Political Party, Caucus Affiliation and Race, was authored by Maurice Jourdain-Earl, Managing Director of ComplianceTech. Founded in 1992, ComplianceTech provides specialized lending intelligence services to financial institutions nationwide. It is known for its expertise in identifying market opportunities; formulating lending benchmarks; and implementing emerging markets, CRA and fair lending best practices.

Here is a list of some of the study’s findings:

1. Twenty-one Republicans represented congressional districts with what the reports calls “high risk” districts. These are districts with a “high number of and percentage of subprime loans".

2. Twenty-three Democrats represented similar type districts.

3. The 44 high risk districts are concentrated in nine states: Florida; California; Arizona; Maryland; Illinois; Nevada; Georgia; Missouri; and, Virginia.

4. Florida, Nevada, Maryland, and Arizona were the stats with the highest percentage of subprime loans.

5. States with highest concentration of congressional districts with a high number and percentage of black subprime loans include Maryland (5); Florida, Georgia and Illinois (three apiece); Michigan, New York and Virginia (two apiece); and. Missouri, Alabama, New Jersey, Tennessee and Wisconsin one each.

6. Of the five congressional districts with the highest number of subprime loans, four were represented by Republicans. The five in order were Reps. Alcee Hastings (D-FL), Trent Franks (R-AZ) Mario Diaz Balart (R-FL); Jerry Lewis (R-CA) and Mary Bono (R-CA).

7. People who were white received the largest percentage of subprime loans while minority borrowers and communities received the highest percentage of subprime loans.

8. Districts with the highest percentage are represented by minority Members of Congress. They include Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL); Kendrick Meek (D-FL); Bobby Rush (D-IL); Edward Pastor (D-AZ); and, Lacy Clay (D-MO).

9. The two top congressional districts with high white subprime rates are the districts represented by Trent Franks (R-AZ), Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and the district formerly held by Jon Portor (R-NV).

10. Almost half of high volume lending to whites took place in Florida.

11. The districts with more than 3,000 black subprime rate loans were dominated by those represented by the black caucus; only five of 26 districts with 3,000 or more subprime loans were represented by white congressmen.

The report cited four lessons to be learned from the study:

1. Subprime lending impact some states and congressional districts unevenly.

2. In spite of the disproportionate impact that existed within their congressional districts, some Members of Congress did not support The Housing and Economic Recovery Act (HERA) which was intended to address the issue.

3. The lending to minority groups indicates a disproportionate level of default which will occur with in those communities.

4. The housing market grew out of control due to lack of congressional oversight and the failure to regulate high cost lending.

Older Workers Affected by Recession

The recent recession has had a major impact on job opportunities for older workers, according to a report released by The Urban Institute. The report, How Did Older Worker Fare in 2009?, reviewed data from the Current Population Survey to determine how older workers fared in 2009.

The report looked at age differences in unemployment rates; labor force participation rates; employment rates; duration of unemployment spells and earnings. It compares data from 2009 with data gathered in 2007. The Current Population Survey is a monthly survey of 50,000 households which is the basis for the government's official unemployment statistics.

Among the reports findings include:

1. Unemployed workers age 55-64 and 65 and older were more than double the numbers in 2007.

2. 2009 unemployment was 7.2 percent for men between the ages of 55-64; 6 for women in the same age group; and 6.7 percent for men 65 and older; and 6.1 for women in the same age group.

3. Unemployment was more common for men than women in all ages because male dominated professions were hit hardest by the recession.

4. Unemployment was much higher for older blacks, Hispanics, and workers with limited education.

5. Older workers tended to spend more time out of work.

The report indicates that more will need to be done to address the needs of older workers as a larger share of the population enters the 55 and older age group.

Interesting Read

Housing and Community Development

Rep. Frank questions safety of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac investments
By Zachary A. Goldfarb
The Washington Post

Minority births on track to outnumber white births
By Hope Yen
The Associated Press

Politics

Sunday Take: For fed-up voters, a buffet of gaffes
By Dan Balz
The Washington Post

House Democrats seek to limit earmarks to show commitment to ethics
By Paul Kane
The Washington Post

In e-mails, lobbyists perceive ties between campaign cash, earmarks
By Carol D. Leonnig
The Washington Post

Thin wall separates lobbyist contributions and earmarks
By R. Jeffrey Smith
The Washington Post

Massa resigns; Democrats' ethical lapses could threaten hold on power
By Perry Bacon Jr.
The Washington Post

Rep. Frank questions safety of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac investments
By Zachary A. Goldfarb
The Washington Post

Race, Politics and Troubles in New York
By Josh Kurtz
Congressional Quarterly

Ethnicity vs. Ideology in Texas Primary
By Greg Giroux
Congressional Quarterly

Here’s Why You Shouldn’t Believe Everything You Read
By Stuart Rothenberg
Congressional Quarterly

Brown's Election May End up Being a Positive for Health-Care Reform
By Shailagh Murray
The Washington Post

Cuomo and Lazio Headed for Showdown in New York Governor’s Race

2010-03-01T08:46:00.003-05:00

Current New York State Attorney General, Andrew Cuomo, and former congressman, Rick Lazio, are headed for a showdown this fall to become Governor of New York State. The inevitable showdown materialized after current governor, David Patterson, decided not to seek election for a full term. Patterson was the sitting Lieutenant Governor when then Governor Elliot Spitzer resigned in scandal. Patterson was appointed governor after Spitzer’s resignation.

Cuomo, the former Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), is the son of former governor Mario Cuomo. He has not officially announced his candidacy; however, it has been a foregone conclusion he will run for governor.

Lazio is a former Republican congressman from Long Island who chaired the House Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity for six years. He helped write the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998 which sought to overhaul public housing laws.

Lazio has been discouraged by some leading Republican figures in the state to forego his pursuit of the governor’s seat and instead challenge New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D). She is seen as a vulnerable candidate even though she has the backing of her party’s state and national leadership including President Barack Obama. Early polling shows Cuomo beating Lazio or any other potential opponent handily.

Latest Projection Calls for Significant Republican Gains in November

A new analysis by The Center for Politics is predicting Republicans can make enough gains in the fall elections to potentially reclaim control of the House of Representatives.

The analysis, the second completed in two weeks by The Center, predicts Republicans will pick up 37 seats in the House leaving it three short of the number needed to take control of the lower chamber based. The Center utilizes two different methods of analysis to make this prediction. The first includes an analysis of each individual district and making estimates based in a review of polling data, past election results, a review of the opinions of highly regarded individuals in each district and other relevant data. Based on that first analysis, the Center predicted a net gain of 27 seats.

The latest analysis is considered a more accurate predictor of the congressional races. The author is Professor Alan Abramowitz of Emory University. He uses a regression analysis which includes the following four factors:

1. The president’s net approval rating according to the latest Gallup Polls.

2. Looking at the results of generic ballot questions in the Gallup Polls.

3. He includes a dummy variable which is a plus or negative factor in mid-term year elections, plus for Democrats and negative for Republicans.

4. The number of seats held by Republicans.

The first two variables are fluid during an election while the last two are “fixed” as the election progresses. Abramowitz bases his analysis on the normal tendencies of voters to react against the party controlling the White House in the middle of the president’s first term. Additionally, he said Democrats have a large number of seats to defend because they have gain approximately 50 seats in the last two election cycles.

The Center for Politics is a nonpartisan unit of the University of Virginia started by Larry Sabato which seeks to promote the value of politics and the importance of civic engagement. It strives to encourage citizens to actively participate in the political process and government; evaluate and promote the best practices in civic education for students of all age; and, educate citizens through the Center's comprehensive research, programs, and publications. Dr. Sabato is the University Professor of Politics and director of the center which was founded in 1998. He is the author of over 20 books and countless essays on politics and has taught more than 14,000 students in his career at Oxford University, Cambridge University, and the University of Virginia. He is widely regarded as one of the most accurate prognosticators of election results in the country.

Interesting Read

Politics

Bill White eagerly watches Perry-Hutchison battle in Texas
By Chris Cillizza
The Washington Post

Where Scott Brown Is Coming From
By Frank Bruni
The New York Times Magazine

Washington rancor angers bipartisan-minded Pennsylvania town
By Paul Kane
The Washington Post

Partisan ploy overshadows Elbridge Gerry's legacy
By Kristi Keck
CNN

Why Washington Is Tied Up in Knots
By Peter Beinart
Time Magazine

America's democracy
A study in paralysis
The Economist

Housing and Community Development

Marketing the 2010 census with a conservative-friendly face
By Juan Williams
The Washington Post

Fighting foreclosure
The Washington Post Editorial

Workers wait on promise of jobs as Obama agenda stalls on Hill
By Lori Montgomery
The Washington Post

For far too many homeowners, help still not on the way
By Robert McCartney
The Washington Post

FDIC to test principal reduction for underwater borrowers
By Renae Merle
The Washington Post

Member Earmarks Increase According to Taxpayer Group

2010-02-23T09:59:00.002-05:00

Members of Congress continue to take advantage of their positions on key committees in doling out Federal dollars to their constituents according to a recent report, TCS FY2010 Earmark Analysis: Apples-to-Apples Increase in Earmarks.

Taxpayers for Common Sense recently released an analysis of earmarks included in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 appropriations bill and found a slight increase in the number of pet projects included in the funding bill. Earmarks are set-asides included in an appropriations bill at the member’s request.

Taxpayers for Common Sense is an independent and non-partisan voice for taxpayers working to increase transparency and expose and eliminate wasteful and corrupt subsidies, earmarks, and corporate welfare.

According to their analysis, a Member’s position on the Appropriations Committee made a huge difference in the amount of money the Member of Congress was able to divert to his or her home state or district. Predictably the chair representing the party in power is bale to use that influence to provide funding back home.

Of the top recipients of earmarked funds in the Senate, eight of the top ten are Democrats and six of the top ten are on the Appropriations Committee. The amounts secured include Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS) at the top of the list with close to $500 million to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) who rounded out the top ten with $211 million.

In the House, The top ten recipients included three Republicans in the top five ranging from the top of the list, Rep. Bill Young (R-FL) with almost $90.5 million and the bottom of the list, Rep. James Moran (D-VA) with slightly more than $38 million.

The analysis showed that the majority party typically doles out 60 percent of the earmarks funds. Senate appropriators tend to receive approximately 48 percent of earmark funds while their colleagues in the House receive roughly 30 percent of all earmarks.

The group offers two principal recommendations for reform:

1. Reduce the number and cost of earmarks and the types of projects eligible for earmark funding. Included in this recommendation is the call for reducing the funding level for earmarks by 50 percent; banning earmarks for private or for-profit entities; disallowing earmarks in competitive or merit-based funding programs; and, establishing a term-limit on the funding of projects.

2. Increase transparency of earmarks. They recommend a centralized location where all earmarks are displayed in an easy-to-read downloadable format; include amplified budget information like the type included in the president’s budget; allow all legislation to be viewed 72 hours before it is under consideration; and creating a mechanism which allows some enforcement of compliance.

The report’s release coincides with the start of the annual appropriations process after the president released the FY2011 budget proposal. Hearings on next year’s budget have begun with Shaun Donovan, Secretary for the Department of Housing and Urban Development scheduled to appear before the House Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies on February 23.

Senator’s Illness Raises New Concerns for Democrats

New Jersey Sen. Frank Lautenberg’s diagnosis of cancer creates another headache for Democrats as the mid-term election inch closer. If Lautenberg is unable to resume his work in office, the sitting governor, Chris Christie, a Republican, by law, will appoint his successor.

The announcement of Lautenberg’s illness comes at a time when the Democratic Party was reeling from the decision by Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) to retire instead of pursue another term. Democrats are expected to maintain control of both chambers of Congress after this fall’s elections; however, Republicans are expected to make significant gains seats in both chambers.

Losses of any sizeable number of Democrats could undermine that party’s efforts in pursuing its agenda in the future particularly for affordable housing programs. However, Republicans are not resting easy since Tea Party activists are challenging the party to veer further to the right and work towards reducing Federal funding across the board. Tea Party activists are expected to back more conservative candidates in the Republicans primaries. This tactic could result in a Republican candidate running for office in the fall which satisfies the desires of the party activists but is not compatible with voters in that particular district.

Home-Based Businesses Contribute to Employment and Overall Economy

Home-based businesses are becoming a growing force in the US economy and are as successful as non-home based businesses with a median household income higher than the general population, according to a research report Homepreneurs: A Vital Economic Force.

According to the Small Business Success Index (SBSI) home-based businesses account for 34 percent of all small businesses which provide more than half of the owner’s household income. According to the analysis:

- The vast majority of them, 75 percent, work full-time in their home business.

- Half have employees.

- Thirty-nine percent have between three and five employees.

- Ten percent have more than five employees.

- It is estimated that home-based businesses, homepreneurs, hire roughly 13.2 million people versus 10.4 million hired by companies funded by venture capitalists and 9.2 million hired in the oil and gas sector.

Home-based businesses are expected to increase in the next few years because of the lower start-up costs associated with home-based businesses; demographic and social shifts as home-based businesses are a viable work option; and, the lack of corporate jobs.

SBSA is a collaboration between Network Solutions and the Robert H. Smith School of Business at the University of Maryland. The index measures small business competitiveness and success looking at six key factors: access to capital, marketing and innovation, workforce, customer service, computer technology and compliance as it relates to small businesses.

Interesting Read

Housing and Community Development

Lack of customers, assets stunting growth of small business
By Binyamin Appelbaum and Ylan Q. Mui
The Washington Post

Under the world's greatest cities, deadly plates
By Joel Achenbach
The Washington Post

Manufacturing, housing growth up in January, Federal Reserve says
By Zachery A. Goldfarb
The Washington Post

Administration pushed to expand foreclosure-prevention program
By Renae Merle
The Washington Post

White House crafts jobs bill, a year into stimulus effort
By Neil Irwin, Lori Montgomery and Alec MacGillis
The Washington Post

U.S. looks to reluctant foreign investors to help fund the housing market
By Howard Schneider
The Washington Post

Politics

From the bluest of states, a red senator of a different color
By Dana Milbank
The Washington Post

Republicans weigh the political implications of the Bush legacy
By Chris Cillizza
The Washington Post

Fresh worries for Indiana Democrats
By Peter Slevin
The Washington Post

Sarah Palin and the mutual loathing society
By George F. Will
The Washington Post

Va. Democrat from Appalachia hopes to quell anger among voters
By Amy Gardner
The Washington Post

G.O.P. Hopes for Senate Control Face Hurdles
By Adam Nagourney
The New York Times

It's past time for President Obama to show some leadership
By Steven Pearlstein
The Washington Post

Senator Evan Bayh's departure sparks debate about partisanship in Congress
By Dan Balz
The Washington Post

Party Gridlock in Washington Feeds New Fear of a Debt Crisis
By Jackie Calmes
The New York Times

Plus 10 in the Senate? GOP Not There Yet
By Stuart Rothenberg
Roll Call

Hispanics Look to Flex Muscle in 2010 Election

2010-02-15T20:40:00.003-05:00

A new report states the Hispanic vote can have a dramatic effect on 40 state and congressional races in the 2010 mid-term election.

The report, The Power of the Latino Vote in the 2010 Election, looks at Hispanic voting patterns from as far back as 2000 and how those votes could impact the 2010 mid-term elections. It cites numerous studies which point out immigration is a defining issue for Hispanics even the economy is identified as the community’s number one issue.

According to the report, a politician’s position on immigration reform “serves as a lens though which Latinos assess the political environment and candidate attitudes not just towards immigrants, but towards the community as a whole.”

The report was released by America’s Voice which started in 2008 with a focus on communications and media as part of a renewed effort to win comprehensive immigration reform. America’s Voice speaks directly to key audiences through the mainstream, new, and Spanish-language media, conducts cutting edge public opinion research, communications, and online campaigns, and supports courageous leaders from all walks of life who are standing up for workable comprehensive immigration reform now.

The report notes Hispanics tend to trend in voting towards Democrat; however, it reports that 40 percent of the Hispanic vote consists of foreign-born naturalized citizens who have proven to be “swing votes” in various elections. This population voted overwhelmingly for Barack Obama versus John McCain in 2008 (75% to 25%) after voting for the 2004 Democratic nominee John Kerry by a smaller margin (52% to 48%).

The report also cites a number of examples where a Republican candidate’s position on immigration is a key factor in determining the level of support he or she can expect from Hispanic voters. For example, McCain reversed his long-standing support for comprehensive immigration reform during his pursuit of the presidency. He decided to support a tougher stance calling for border security before any other reforms take place. That position hurt him with Hispanic voters. Conversely, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s support among Hispanics increased during his reelection campaign in 2006 after he supported comprehensive immigration reform.

The reports identifies 40 key state, House and Senate races in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Virginia where the Hispanic vote can have significant impact in determining the winner. The report includes the following information to illustrate this contention:

• One in five (79) congressional districts has a Hispanic population of at least 25 percent.

• Twenty-five Republican Members of Congress represent districts with Hispanic representation at 25 percent or higher.

• In the 2008 election, approximately 10 million Hispanics voted compared to 2.5 million in 2004.

• Voter registration among Hispanics grew 10 percent from 2000 to 2008.

• Texas and Florida saw turnout increase by 31 and 81 percent respectively between 2000 and 2008.

• Hispanics saw their numbers increase in other parts of the country as well between 2000 and 2008. For example, Georgia saw a 392 percent increase in its Hispanic while North Carolina (250%), Nevada (164%) and South Carolina (157%) also saw sizable increases in Hispanic residents.

• Hispanics voted for President Obama in greater numbers in 2008 than they did for Kerry in 2004. In 2004, Kerry won the Hispanic vote by a 19 percent margin (59 to 40); however, Obama won the Hispanic vote in 2008 by a 36 percent margin (67 to 31).

• The report believes states looking to gain congressional seats after the latest Census is complete will do so in large part to the influx of Hispanics; conversely, states losing congressional seats would do worst had Hispanics not moved there.

The report also warns Democrats not to take the Hispanic vote lightly. In its conclusion, it points out that Democrats run the risk of alienating the Hispanic vote this fall if it does not pursue meaningful immigration reform.

Bayh Retirement Complicates Mid-Term Election Strategy for Democrats and Could Prove Costly for Housing Advocates

Sen. Evan Bayh’s (D-IN) decision to retire rather than pursue reelection further complicates the Democratic Party’s efforts to hold onto it majority in the Senate and leaves housing advocates with one less ally.

"Congress is not operating as it should," Bayh said at a news conference in Indianapolis, adding there's too much partisanship and "the people's business is not getting done."

Bayh, a former two-term governor, first won election to the Senate in 1998 and won reelection in 2004 with 64 percent of the vote. He joins Sens. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and Byron Dorgan of North Dakota as Democrats choosing to retire instead of seeking re-election. Democrats now have five open seats to defend this fall where Roland Burris of Illinois and Ted Kaufman of Delaware will not seek re-election for their appointed seats.

Republicans have six seats to defend including those of retiring Sens. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, Kit Bond of Missouri, Jim Bunning of Kentucky, George Voinovich of Ohio and Sam Brownback of Kansas. Sen. George LeMieux of Florida will not pursue re-election. He was appointed to complete the term of Sen. Mel Martinez who resigned before the expiration of his term.

His decision adds to the list of affordable housing supporters who will be leaving the Senate. Bayh was a solid supporter of affordable housing programs, according to the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO) www.nahro.org. He voted on behalf of affordable housing initiatives 75 percent of the time according to the latest NAHRO scorecard. Of the aforementioned Senators, only Bunning voted for affordable housing programs less than 50 percent of the time according to the NAHRO scorecard.

Interesting Read

Housing and Community Development

U.S. Housing Aid Winds Down and Cities Worry
By David Streitfeld
The New York Times

Refinancing unavailable for many borrowers
By Dina ElBoghdady and Renae Merle
The Washington Post

D.C. sees best and worst of recession
By Sandhya Somashekhar
The Washington Post

Stimulus foes see value in seeking cash, Pet projects irresistible to GOP lawmakers
By Jim McElhatton
The Washington Times

Politics

Obama's ratings are crucial to the midterm fortunes of congressional Democrats
By Dan Balz
The Washington Post

Three House retirements spur debate on whether Republicans are losing momentum
By Chris Cilliza and Paul Kane
The Washington Post

Can Sarah Palin translate celebrity into real political power?
By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer

New and Improved Romney
He's more fiscal, less social. And he's got millions. But will GOP voters give a Mitt?
By David S. Bernstein
The Boston Phoenix

Success of President Obama's crackdown on lobbying questioned
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer

Should ex-felons vote?
With different laws in each state, some urge a federal answer to the question.
By Emma Dumain
Congress.org

Evolving Politics Could Have Long-Term Implications for Housing

2010-02-09T09:55:00.002-05:00

The evolving political situation may create an opportunity for Republicans to increase their numbers in the Senate and state houses putting them in position to control of redistricting efforts. This could result in fewer elected officials available to support affordable housing programs.

The consensus among experts who analyze elections is that there are approximately a dozen Senate races at play this November. If Republicans run the table, they will have a majority in the Senate and will be in a stronger position to exert their will on the legislative process. If victorious, they will attempt to derail any legislative initiative proposed by the president and will aggressively seek initiatives which will reduce government spending. The likely scenario will result in Republicans narrowing their numbers in the Senate. It is too early to predict the margin of difference between the two parties this fall but most prognosticators are predicting Republicans have a good chance of picking up seven seats this fall. That will give Democrats a 52 to 48 advantage over the Republicans.

Complicating matter for Democrats is that they are getting hammered from every constituency within their tent. The combination of a struggling economy and concerns about the long-term debt of the nation is causing Democrats to lose independent voters. These voters typically consist of working class individuals with little to no college education who tend to be conservative on fiscal, cultural and foreign policy issues. Liberals are upset the president has not been more aggressive in pursuing a public option in health and ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. African-Americans are upset that not enough stimulus dollars has filtered into their communities to help reduce their high unemployment rates. Gays want the president to demonstrate stronger support for gay marriage. Hispanics want immigration reform and believe failure by the Democrats to address this issue will result in less support within the Latino community.

For supporters of federally-funded housing programs, the fewer Democrats elected to Congress, the harder to gain support for additional funding for affordable housing programs. (Democrats tend to be more supportive of providing Federal funding for housing programs.) In the Senate, every Senator with the exception of Evan Bayh of Indiana and Claire McCaskill of Missouri have scored 100 percent on issues related to affordable housing according to the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO).

With a few exceptions, a majority of the Senate seats with competitive races are held by senators with perfect scores according to NAHRO. They are Arkansas (Blanche Lincoln); Colorado (Michael Bennet); Illinois (Roland Burris); Nevada (Majority Leader Harry Reid); and, Pennsylvania (Arlen Specter). In Connecticut (Chris Dodd) and North Dakota (Byron Dorgan), Democrats are trying to hold seats vacated by retiring members who each scored 100 on NAHRO’s score card.

In Delaware, it was widely assumed that Beau Biden, current Attorney General for the State of Delaware and son of Vice President Joe Biden, would “inherit” his father’s seat after the elder Biden’s selection as President Obama’s running mate. However, his decision to remain in his current position leaves the race wide open for the state’s House Representative Mike Castle (R) to win. Castle is a moderate Republican who has been a strong supporter of affordable housing programs. He has voted 83 percent of the time in NAHRO’s assessment of his voting record in support of affordable housing programs.

In Indiana, Evan Bayh (83%) could face a tough reelection race as former House Representative Dan Coats is making waves to run for that seat. In Missouri, long-time housing supporter Kit Bond (67%) is retiring which is unfortunate for housing advocates. Bond has oftentimes been the lone Republican offering vocal support for Federal housing programs and had an outstanding working relationship with his colleague on the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies, Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD).

In Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Ohio both parties are battling over seats being vacated by Republicans. Of the aforementioned races, Democrats are expected to lose in Arkansas, Delaware, Nevada, and North Dakota. Democrats are also at risk of losing in Colorado, Illinois and Pennsylvania. It is only February and the elections are nine months away, an eternity in politics. However, if the election were held today, Democrats would probably lose seven seats. Of the seven new Republican senators under this scenario, only one, Castle, can be expected to be supportive of Federally-funded affordable housing programs.

According to Charlie Cook of The Cook Political Report, the road may be tougher for Democrats in 2012 and 2014 when they have a total of 43 seats to defend. According to Cook it is not unrealistic to expect a Republican take over of the Senate in the near future.

Governors Races will Impact Redistricting

While much attention is being paid to the impact Election Day will have in Congress races to control governor seats is flying under the radar. Controlling the state houses will impact who redraws congressional lines when redistricting decisions are made. It is not unreasonable to expect the gains reaped in Congress by Republicans will filter into the races for governor and control of state legislative bodies. Larry Sabato, Director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, is predicting Republicans will gain six governorships in 2010 with the potential to gain three more.

According to Stateside Associates there will be 46 states holding legislative elections with Democrats currently holding 61 out of 99 chambers. Controlling state government places the controlling party in position to influence redistricting decisions. New lines will be drawn after the 2010 census is completed. With the exception of eight states, the governor is directly involved in the redistricting process. Governors either have veto power over final redistricting plans or they appoint the commissions designed to redraw congressional lines.

Interesting Read

Credit unions seek larger share of business loans
By Binyamin Appelbaum
The Washington Post

Mortgage giants GSEs in limbo: In housing, a dangerous policy vacuum grows
Washington Post Editorial

Why are liberals so condescending to conservatives?
By Gerard Alexander
The Washington Post

Obama, GOP sparring over job creation proposals
By Philip Elliott
Associated Press

After Escaping Jobless Woes, Trauma May Linger
By Michael Luo
The New York Times

G.O.P. Group to Promote Conservative Ideas
By Jackie Calmes
The New York Times

HUD Budget Offers Opportunities for New Initiatives

2010-02-03T22:56:00.002-05:00

President Obama’s proposed 2011 budget could single a shift in the way future housing assistance is provided to low-income families as it seeks to encourage a regional approach to providing tenant-based rental assistance. This approach could portend how the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) will fund future initiatives to local communities.

The budget proposes a new initiative which seeks to implement the first phase of a multi-year effort to increase tenant mobility and access to assistance. The Transforming Rental Assistance (TRA) Initiative will allow a limited number of housing authorities adjacent to one another to combine the administrative functions of serving vouchers to eligible families. The intent is to create a “regional entity” designed to allow for increased mobility in the use of the voucher and access to greater housing options for the family receiving assistance. The administration expects to introduce legislation in the spring to give it the legislative authority to carry out this initiative. The administration is promising to enter into long-term property-based rental contracts with the authorities if the “mobility” or regional approach is part of the agreement. In the accompanying HUD documents, the department contends this will eventually result in “a uniform funding stream, governed by a single set of rules and regulations.”

Housing authorities can currently seek approval from HUD to convert public housing units to vouchers without the mobility component. HUD has been very hesitant to grant the conversion. There are stricter rules governing the public housing program. The voucher program is easier to administer, generates fees for the PHA and can be used as an incentive for public housing residents to pursue self-sufficiency initiatives.

This approach has been advocated by low-income housing advocates for years. This approach is centered on the notion that a regional approach eases the burden on the administrative agency and the family seeking housing. There isn’t enough evidence to suggest a regional authority increases housing opportunities for voucher holders. However, jurisdictional issues and the cost implications for an agency when a voucher leaves its inventory do warrant additional review and adjustments.

It is early and more details about the initiative need to be reviewed; however, given the current political and economic climate, this could gain the necessary support to be enacted into law. There will probably also be a few housing authorities which will reach agreement with HUD to test this initiative. Our guess is HUD will be very accommodating to these agencies.

The budget also includes $1 billion for the Housing Trust Fund although the accompanying documents do not include a source of funding for the initiative. According to the budget documents, HUD will propose a source of funds from outside of the appropriations process. The Trust Fund was enacted as part of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008.

Overall, the balance of the president’s submission is fairly straightforward:

1. The budget proposes $41.6 billion for HUD which is approximately $2 billion below the FY 2010 level. It does assume an additional $7 billion will eventually be available to the department from the receipts earned by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) and Ginnie Mae.

2. The public housing capital fund will receive slightly more than $2 billion in the 2011 budget submission which is approximately % billion below the FY 2010 level. The administration sights the distribution of $4 billion in stimulus funding to justify the reduction.

3. The administration is proposing $4.8 billion for the public housing operating fund which it claims will meet 100 percent of the costs of running a housing authority.

4. The administration decided not to fund the HOPE VI program instead opting to ask for $250 million for the Choice Neighborhoods Initiative. This is significant because housing authorities must compete for funding under the Choice initiative with local governments, non-profits and for-profit entities. Under the HOPE VI program, housing authorities competed with other housing authorities for funds.

5. The proposed budget includes $17.3 billion for Section 8 tenant-based assistance. The budget does include an increase in administrative fees, calling for $1.7 billion, an approximate $200 million increase over last year’s budget.

6. The budget includes $9.3 billion for project-based assistance, $400 million of which will be available in FY 2012.

7. The budget includes $4.45 billion for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program which includes $3.99 billion for the formula and the balance in set-asides.

8. Included as a set-aside within CDBG is $150 million for the Sustainable Communities Initiative which are grants help regional panning efforts to integrate transportation and housing initiatives.

9. Another set-aside is a new program called the Catalytic Investment Competition Grants which will be designed to provide gap financing for a variety of local economic development activities. The grants are expected to ignite economic activities in distressed communities.

10. The budget also proposes $25 million to fund the University Community Fund. These are grants which are designed to spur economic development activities in communities near universities.

11. The budget proposes $1.65 billion for the HOME program.

12. The budget proposes $2 billion for Homeless Assistance Grants.

13. The budget eliminates funding for the Brownfields Economic Development Initiative and the Section 108 Community Development Loan Guarantee Program.

14. In a surprise, the department also proposed suspending funding the Sections 202 and 811 programs. The purpose is to restructure the programs to make them more efficient.

Former HUD Secretary to Run for Governor of New York

Former HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo, currently the Attorney General for the State of New York, is expected to run for governor and challenge the incumbent, David Patterson, in the Democratic primary according to several news reports. Several reports state he has more than $12 million for a campaign versus $600,000 for the incumbent David Patterson. Cuomo is heavily favored to defeat Patterson in the primary. For Congressman, Rick Lazio, who chaired a housing subcommittee during his tenure in the House of Representatives, is running to seek the Republican nomination for governor. Lazio is the principle author of a 1998 public housing reform bill. Assuming Cuomo wins the Democratic nomination, observers expect him to easily defeat his Republican opponent.

Interesting Read

Housing and Community Development

Struggling banks need government help, trade group says
By Binyamin Appelbaum and David Cho
The Washington Post

Small businesses leery of Obama's jobs plan
By Ylan Q. Mui and David Cho
The Washington Post

Rising FHA default rate foreshadows a crush of foreclosures
By Dina ElBoghdady and Dan Keating
The Washington Post

Silverdome's bargain price reflects financial woes in Detroit suburb of Pontiac
By Dana Hedgpeth
The Washington Post

Stimulus created 600,000 jobs at the end of 2009, White House says
By Ed O’Keefe
The Washington Post

The Stimulus Project
Ghosts of recessions past
CNN Money

Politics

Obama Continues Policy Outreach to Republicans
By Carl Hulse and Jeff Zeleny
New York Times

House GOP Focuses Troops on Winning Majority
By Jackie Kucinich
Congressional Quarterly

In Illinois Campaign, Republicans Squabble Amid Attempt to Regain a House Seat
By Susan Saulny
The New York Times

The Stuff of Riveting Political Theater
By Dan Balz
The Washington Post

G.O.P. Envisions Northeast Comeback
By Carl Hulse
The New York Times

G.O.P. Facing Opportunities and Obstacles
By Adam Nagourney
New York Times

New media help conservatives get their anti-Obama message out
By Jerry Markon
The Washington Post

Initial Review of President’s Proposed 2010 HUD Budget

2010-02-01T00:00:00.000-05:00

Here is a preliminary list of the president’s proposed budget for the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). More details to follow:

Community Development Block Grants (CDBG): $4.5 billion
Project and tenant-based vouchers (combined total): $25.9 billion
Public Housing Operating Fund: $4.6 billion
Public Housing Capital Fund: $2.2 billion
HOME Investment Partnership Program: $1.8 billion
Homeless assistance: $1.8 billion

Massachusetts Election Could Cloud 2010 Legislative Agenda

2010-01-25T21:42:00.003-05:00

Scott Brown's election to the Senate could alter legislative plans for the remainder of 2010. In addition to putting the president’s plans for health care reform into doubt, Brown’s election could also cast doubts on additional stimulus funding and funding for housing and community development programs.

Rising deficits, the high costs associated with the president’s health care bill, uncertainty about the benefits of the president’s stimulus package and concern for their economic future drove voters to elect an outsider, and a Republican) in a reliably Democratic state.

Without a filibuster-proof majority, Democrats must be more careful with how they proceed on legislative initiatives particularly on items with large price tags. Media reports are suggesting the president will use his State of the Nation address to modify some of his initiatives and may even call for cuts to programs.

The president’s speech is going to focus heavily on jobs with, according to press reports, these five initiatives as the centerpiece of his presentation with an eye towards middle class voters:

1. Expansion of the child tax credit -- doubling it among families with incomes up to $85,000;

2. Increasing funding for child care;

3. Broader support for families supporting elderly relatives, including counseling, training and temporary respite care;

4. Limiting student loan payments to no more than 10% of their income; and,

5. Establishing an automatic employer-based individual retirement account plan, so that workers can establish an IRA through their workplace.

There are also late news reports Obama will ask for a partial three-year spending freeze. For providers of housing and community development programs and their constituents, there is cause for concern. In spite of successful utilization of the stimulus dollars, housing programs could be victims of future cost-cutting measures. In a recent editorial in The Advocate, the bi-weekly publication of the Public Housing Authorities Directors Association (PHADA), P. Curtis Hiebert, Director of the Keene (NH) Housing Authority, raised concern about the impact voter concerns about rising deficits could have on housing programs.

“All this raises concerns,” he said, “given that our capital needs and voucher programs are no adequately funded even under the current year’s good budget.”

This occurs shortly after the House narrowly passed another “jobs stimulus” bill in December. The bill does not offer much in terms of “new” money to create jobs but does provide an increase in funding for unemployment benefits, COBRA health insurance, and Medicaid spending. The prospect of passing another stimulus bill in the Senate is unlikely given the current political dynamics.

The Brown election has emboldened Republicans to play hard ball as they envision an opportunity to increase their standing in Congress. Most analysts don’t expect Republicans to regain control of either chamber but do expect them to increase their numbers. The landscape does not look good for Democrats. Vice President Joe Biden’s son, Beau Biden, has decided not the run for the Senate seat in Delaware. This creates a tremendous opportunity for Rep. Mike Castle (R-DE) to win that seat. (Republicans are also targeting the president’s former Senate seat in Illinois believing they can capture it as well.) For housing advocates, Castle has long been considered a supporter of affordable housing in Delaware; however, Tea Party activists in the Republican Party are aggressively supporting conservative Republican candidates seeking to reign in Federal spending. If they are successful, it can further erode funding support for housing programs.

Stuart Rothenberg, a highly respected political analyst in Washington, DC, is predicting there are 28 House races which are shifting the Republicans way giving them some traction at this early stage of the election cycle. In total, Rothenberg believes there are 72 seats in the House in play. The results of those elections could have a dramatic impact on support for housing programs.

The following list was posted on Rothenberg’s blog January 25. The asterisk indicates the trends shifting towards Republicans. Viewfromdc added the percentages in the brackets. That number reflects the percentage of votes taken by the congressman on housing and community development legislation which were consistent with the positions taken by the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO) in 2009. While NAHRO’s positions are not shared by all housing advocates, their congressional voting record on Members of Congress provides a window into the current support for affordable housing.

Of the 28 listed with asterisks as currently leaning Republican, 17 had scores of 100 percent; three at 83 percent; one each at 80, 67 and 60 percent; three at 50 percent; and, two at zero. Of the 72 listed below, 50 have scores of 100 percent.

Pure Toss-Up (1 R, 9 D)

• AR 1 (Open; Berry, D) * (83%)
• AR 2 (Open; Snyder, D) * (100%)
• CO 4 (Markey, D) (100%)
• IL 10 (Open; Kirk, R) (17%)
• MI 7 (Schauer, D) * (100%)
• NH 1 (Shea-Porter, D) (100%)
• NH 2 (Open; Hodes, D) (100%)
• PA 7 (Open; Sestak, D) (100%)
• TN 8 (Open; Tanner, D) (83%)
• WA 3 (Open; Baird, D) (100%)

Toss-Up/Tilt Republican (0 R, 10 D)

• AL 2 (Bright, D) * (50%)
• FL 8 (Grayson, D) * (100%)
• ID 1 (Minnick, D) * (0%)
• KS 3 (Open; Moore, D) (100%)
• MD 1 (Kratovil, D) * (0%)
• MS 1 (Childers, D) * (80%)
• NM 2 (Teague, D) (100%)
• OH 1 (Driehaus, D) * (50%)
• OH 15 (Kilroy, D) * (100%)
• VA 5 (Perriello, D) (100%)

Lean Republican (3 R, 2 D)

• CA 3 (Lungren, R) (33%)
• LA 3 (Open; Melancon, D) * (100%)
• PA 6 (Gerlach, R) * (67%)
• TN 6 (Open; Gordon, D) (100%)
• WA 8 (Reichert, R) * (60%)

Republican Favored (8 R, 0 D)

• CA 44 (Calvert, R) (33%)
• CA 45 (Bono Mack, R) (67%)
• MN 3 (Paulsen, R) (0%)
• MN 6 (Bachmann, R) (17%)
• NE 2 (Terry, R) (33%)
• OH 2 (Schmidt, R) (17%)
• OH 12 (Tiberi, R) (33%)
• PA 15 (Dent, R) (67%)
•
Toss-Up/Tilt Democratic (0 R, 3 D)

• FL 24 (Kosmas, D) (100%)
• IL 14 (Foster, D) (100%)
• VA 2 (Nye, D) * (50%)

Lean Democratic (0 R, 11 D)

• HI 1 (Open; Abercrombie, D) Special Election (100%)
• IN 9 (Hill, D) * (83%)
• MO 4 (Skelton, D) (100%)
• NV 3 (Titus, D) (100%)
• NY 1 (Bishop, D) * (100%)
• NY 19 (Hall, D) (100%)
• NY 23 (Owens, D) (83%)
• NY 24 (Arcuri, D) (100%)
• NY 29 (Massa, D) (100%)
• SC 5 (Spratt, D) * (100%)
• WV 1 (Mollohan, D) * (100%)

Democrat Favored (2 R, 23 D)

• AZ 5 (Mitchell, D) (83%)
• AZ 8 (Giffords, D) * (83%)
• CO 3 (Salazar, D) * (100%)
• CA 11 (McNerney, D) * (100%)
• CA 47 (Sanchez, D) (100%)
• DE A-L (Open; Castle, R) (83%)
• GA 8 (Marshall, D) (83%)
• IA 3 (Boswell, D) (100%)
• LA 2 (Cao, R) (50%)
• NY 13 (McMahon, D) * (100%)
• NY 20 (Murphy, D) (N/A)
• NC 8 (Kissell, D) (100%)
• ND A-L (Pomeroy, D) * (100%)
• NJ 3 (Adler, D) * (100%)
• OH 16 (Boccieri, D) (100%)
• OH 18 (Space, D) (100%)
• PA 4 (Altmire, D) * (100%)
• PA 8 (Murphy, D) * (100%)
• PA 10 (Carney, D) (100%)
• PA 11 (Kanjorski, D) (83%)
• PA 17 (Holden, D) * (100%)
• SD A-L (Herseth Sandlin, D) (83%)
• TX 17 (Edwards, D) (100%)
• VA 9 (Boucher, D) * (100%)
• WI 8 (Kagen, D) (100%)

The time between now and the November election is an eternity but it is important for housing supporters to monitor these developments closely.

Mayors Present President with Plan to Address Unemployment

The United States Conference of Mayors (USCM) met with President Obama and continued to express their concern about the loss jobs in their communities. The meeting with the president kicked off the organization’s annual winter meeting which was held January 20-22 in Washington, DC.

More than 230 mayors gathered to advocate for their 2010 Metro Agenda for America. The agenda focuses on five areas the mayors feel are keys to revitalizing their communities:

Jobs

In meeting with the president and his cabinet, the mayors contend additional resources are needed to stem the rise in unemployment in their communities. Their report points out unemployment remains in double-digits in many communities with the highest concentration of unemployment in large metropolitan statistical areas. The report contends that the stimulus funds have not gone directly to cities. In order to boost unemployment, the mayors outline nine steps to increase employment opportunities:

1. Target new funds directly to cities with the highest unemployment rates or revenue shortfalls. The mayors contend states (which received the majority of stimulus funding for distribution) are slow to spend funds and fail to fund areas with the greatest needs.

2. Increase funding for the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) to provide “green” jobs.

3. Increase funding for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program.

4. Increase funding for the Community Oriented Policing Services by $1 billion.

5. Provide an additional $1.2 billion for summer youth jobs.

6. Provide additional funding for the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Grants with the Department of Treasury.

7. Increase funding to modernize school.

8. Increase resources to the Small Business Administration (SBA) to make credit available to small businesses.

9. Use Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds to provide job-creating municipal bonds for infrastructure projects.

Surface Transportation

The mayors are calling for a reauthorization of legislation to fund infrastructure in cities with a call for more funds to go directly to cities and by-pass states.

Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG)

The mayors are calling for long-term funding for the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant program. The mayors do not call for a dollar amount but state that funding should come from regular appropriations and new energy and climate legislation.

Airport Security

The mayors are calling for state-of-the-art technology for detecting weapons and explosives at commercial airports.

Federal Investments

The mayors are calling for support of a number of programs which benefit local communities including CDBG, the Home Affordable Housing Program, public housing programs, Section 8 funding and the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program.

Interesting Read

The Stimulus Project: CNN Looks at the CNN Project

Phoenix mayor: The stimulus is working
By Phil Gordon
Special to CNN

Economy flounders, despite the stimulus
By Ron Paul
Special to CNN

Anti-Incumbent Election? Don’t Hold Your Breath
By Stuart Rothenberg
Congressional Quarterly

Nonprofit helps small businesses form
Economy offers opportunity
By Ted Griggs
Advocate business writer

Stakes are high as government plans exit from mortgage markets
By David Cho, Neil Irwin and Dina ElBoghdady
The Washington Post

President Gets A- for Handling Current Situation

2010-01-11T18:05:00.002-05:00

The Brookings Institution gave President Obama an A- for his handling of the current economic situation in a posting released January 11. The grade was part of a status report issued by Brookings a year after issuing a series of 12 memos to the incoming president on the most important issues it felt the nation faced during his tenure in office.

Brookings gives the president credit for appointing Timothy Geithner as Secretary of the Treasury and for keeping Ben Bernanke as Chair of the Federal Reserve. Overall, Brookings gives the president an A for his handling of the current economic crisis. However, it feels the president still has to improve on his perceived ability to address long-term economic challenges. He gets a B- for his handling of long-term issues for his overall rating of A-.

For more information, click here.

Group Releases Report on Stimulus Funds and Public Housing

The National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO) released the result of a survey it conducted last summer on the use of stimulus dollars by its members. Respondents to the survey stated they had obligated 53 percent of their funds and expended 18.5 percent. On average, respondents expected to spend all of their funds by June.

The survey results included:

A majority of respondents, 93.2 percent, said they used the funds to complete projects identified in their agency plan.
Dwelling structures was the principal activity undertaken with these funds.
The most popular projects were roof repairs/replacements (33.5%); heater/A/C repairs/replacements (32.2%); window replacements/upgrades (25.7%); and, parking lot/sidewalk repairs (21.8%).
Greene improvements accounted for 38.5% of the projects reported.
According to the report, $319,339 on average was obligated to local businesses and $61,435 has been spent on local businesses.
The report also states that, on average, $62,071 had been obligated to minority-or women-owned businesses and $10,441 has been spent on these groups.

NAHRO recently reported to its membership that Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing Sandra Henriquez has expressed her happiness with the success of housing authorities to expend these funds. Her only concern is the rate of expenditure to date but she expressed confidence it will improve.

Preliminary Findings Suggest Financial Conditions Will Continue to Decline for States

The National Governors Association (NGA) and the National Association of State Budget Officers (NASBO) forecasted continued fiscal difficulties for states in releasing preliminary results of its biannual report The Fiscal Survey of States.

The economic downturn has dramatically impacted states over the last two years have caused state officials to believe the impact on states will not be over soon. According to the findings in The State Fiscal Situation: The Lost Decade states were forced to reduce General Fund expenditures by 4.8 percent and are expected to reduce these funds by four percent in 2010.

Tax revenues are expected to continue a downward spiral in 2010 which will also be felt in fiscal years 2022 and 2012. Overall, state revenues declined 7.5 percent in fiscal 2009, which for most states ended June 30, 2009. Revenues will likely continue on this downward trend for another one to two quarters before turning up slowly.

The weakening of state fiscal conditions is reflected in the $250 billion in budget gaps faced by states between fiscal 2009 and fiscal 2011. Of the $250 billion, states closed $72.7 billion in budget gaps during fiscal 2009 and $113.1 billion before the enactment of their fiscal 2010 budgets to bring them into balance with drastically declining revenues.

Founded in 1908, NGA is the collective voice of the nation’s governors and one of Washington, D.C.’s most respected public policy organizations. Its members are the governors of the 50 states, three territories and two commonwealths. Founded in 1945, NASBO is the instrument through which the states collectively advance stage budget practices. The major functions of the organization consist of research, policy development, education, training, and technical assistance.

States Taking the Initiative to Combat Dropout Problem

Six states – Colorado, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Tennessee and West Virginia – have decided to develop comprehensive state dropout prevention and recovery policies through the State Strategies to Achieve Graduation for All initiative.
The initiative will help states clearly identify their dropout problem; assess the gaps in student supports for preventing students from dropping out of school and recovering the students that drop out; and create a dropout prevention and recovery action plan for implementation that includes tactics such as state policies, executive orders, advisory councils, legislation or regulatory reforms.

The initiative is informed by a report recently released by the NGA Center, Achieving Graduation for All: A Governor’s Guide to Dropout Prevention and Recovery, which identifies the root causes of the high school dropout problem and offers an action plan for states to curb dropouts, help youth succeed and strengthen state economies. Specific recommendations contained in the report for states to reduce the incidence of students not completing high school include promoting high school graduation for all; targeting youth at-risk of dropping out; reengaging youth who have dropped out

Survey Reveals Lack of Financial Capability by U.S. Adults

2009-12-28T22:11:00.002-05:00

The first of three linked surveys assessing the financial capability of U.S. adults was released in December and paints a troubling picture of financial capacity of US adults while indicating the importance of increasing the ability of US adults to make informed decisions. According to the report, more than half of those surveyed reported difficulty covering monthly expenses; do not have a “rainy day” fund; more than one in five were engaged in alternative financing mechanisms; and, demonstrated an “inability to do basic interest calculations and other math-oriented tasks.”

The survey, Financial Capability in the United States, is based on the responses of 1,500 American adults in a nation-wide telephone survey. (The results of two other surveys will be released in 2010 which will provide information on a State-by-State survey and Military Survey.) The survey was released by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Investor Education Foundation.

The mission of the FINRA Investor Education Foundation is to provide under served Americans with the knowledge, skills and tools necessary for financial success throughout life. The FINRA Foundation envisions a society characterized by universal financial literacy. FINRA is the largest independent regulator for all securities firms doing business in the United States. All told, FINRA oversees nearly 4,800 brokerage firms, about 170,400 branch offices and approximately 643,000 registered securities representatives.

The survey focused on four components of financial capability – making ends meet, planning ahead, managing financial products, and financial knowledge and decision-making. The survey found:

Almost half of the responders stated they had troubled making ends meet;
A quarter reported having overdrawn checking accounts;
Approximately 16 of mortgage borrowers were late with their payment at least once in the preceding 12 months;
A significant number withdrew funds from their retirement accounts;
Only 49 percent of the respondents stated they had a three-month rainy day fund. The percentage decreased as the age and income of the respondents decreased;
The majority of Americans do not have any retirement plans;
Less than half of the respondents with financially dependent children have not set aside money for a college education;
Twelve percent of all respondents are “unbanked: while 15 percent do not have a checking account and 28 percent do not have a savings account, money market fund or time-deposit account;
Nearly one-quarter of respondents utilized alternative forms of banking in the last five years;
Sixty-eight percent of the respondents said they had a credit card and 27 percent said they had at least four;
Three in five respondents owned a home. This includes 41 percent of African-Americans, 42 percent of Hispanics and 69 percent of Caucasians own homes;
More than half of the respondents had retirement accounts yet the responses varied by income and education group; and,
Most respondents were not as financially literate and they thought.

FINRA will continue to analyze the survey results as it tabulates and prepares to release the Military and State-by-State Surveys. The survey is available online. FINRA plans to repeat the survey in three to five years to measure the progress of efforts to increase the financial capabilities of US adults.

SBA Releases New Report on Business Owners

The Small Business Administration (SBA) released a working paper which seeks to provide a better understanding of the starts and stops of nonemployer businesses. Nonemployer businesses are those with no employees other than the owner and include part-time, home-based businesses where the owners work less than 40 hours per week.

According to the paper, The Nonemployer Start-up Puzzle, points out that these firms make up three-quarters of the firms in our economy. These firms are more likely to start as an occupational decision as oppose to a response to an opportunity in the marketplace.

The paper is authored by Zoltan Acs, Brian Headd, and Hezekiah Agwara, and uses special tabulations produced by the U.S. Census Bureau’s Nonemployer Statistics and funded by the U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy. The findings include:

1. Nonemployer firms have entry rates about three times those of employer firms. Of existing companies in 2004, 34.3 percent of nonemployers were new and 12.6 percent of employers were new.
2. Exit rates in the time period studied were lower but similar to entry rate levels for both nonemployers and employers.
3. Entry and exit rates, collectively referred to as turnover, seem to be associated with an industry’s economies of scale, or the amount of capital needed for entry. For example, mining, with high economies of scale, had low turnover rates, while services, with low economies of scale, had high turnover rates.
4. The econometric model found, after controlling for population growth, that states’ unemployment rates were positively correlated with nonemployer entry.

Interesting Read

Redistricting and the 2010 Governor’s landscape
By Chris Cilliza
Washington Post