Selecting the Vice President Does Matter

The first decision a President makes is made before he/she is elected to office. It’s the choice of vice president. The choices made by John McCain and Barack Obama do matter. Nine vice presidents have become president as the result of the death or resignation of the president.

Barack Obama is 47 years old. Unless he is forced to resign from office or is removed by impeachment the liklihood of Joe Biden replacing him is slim. If that should happen we know that Joe Biden has many years of experience. He came to the Senate in 1973. He has held two chairmanships as senator (Judiciary and currently Foreign Relations).

John McCain is 72 years old. His selection of Sarah Palin as vice president was not based upon her government experience. She was selected to help solidify the conservative base of the Republican party and to draw disaffected Hilary Clinton supporters.

It may not be fair to point out that John McCain is quite old but it is a fact. The reality is that average 72 year old men have a life expectancy of 12.01 years. However that is an average. McCain’s father, Admiral John S. McCain Jr. died of a heart attack at age 70 in 1981. So did Senator McCain’s grandfather Admiral John S. McCain Sr. at age 63. John McCain has serious health problems even though doctors have said he is in excellent health.

John McCain has been treated for recurrent skin cancer, including melanoma, in 1993, 2000, and 2002. The melanoma he had was life threatening.

Can you imagine Sarah Palin as president?

No on Waxman, What’s The Use?

Henry A. Waxman represents California’s 30th Congressional District, which includes the complete cities of Agoura Hills, Beverly Hills, Calabasas, Hidden Hills, Malibu, Santa Monica, West Hollywood and Westlake Village. He also represents communities including Pacific Palisades, West Hills, Canoga Park, Bel-Air, Century City, Westwood, Brentwood, Topanga, Chatsworth, Woodland Hills, Beverlywood and West Los Angeles.

Just this past September 30 I wrote a No on Waxman entry in this blog. Today I received my sample ballot. There is no one running against Henry Waxman. There is no Republican, no Libertarian, no Green Party or American Independent Party candidates on the ballot. There is only one name, Henry Waxman. While I know that Democrats predominate in this state I would have expected Arnold Schwarzenegger’s district to at least have a token candidate. If only I had known, I would have re-registered and run just so everyone would have an option.

We Are Not In a Recession

OK we may be getting to close to a recession but the country is not there yet. The National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) business cycle dating committee is the generally recognized arbiter of the dates of the beginnings and ends of recessions. Two consecutive quarters of decline in real GDP is commonly taken to be a recession. However, by the time the data to make a determination is accumulated the recession may be well on its way and perhaps have ended.

Business Week magazine economist, James C. Cooper, detailed indicators that usually proceed most recessions in an issue this past spring. The indicators are 1)weekly job claims [average, first 3 months of last two recessions 387], 2) monthly job losses [average, first 3 months of last two recessions 114,000], 3) ISM Manufacturing Index [average, first 3 months of last two recessions 44.1], 4) ISM Non-Manufacturing Index [average, first 3 months of last two recessions 49.3]. I set up a spread sheet to track those indicators and as of this date only one of those measurements have reached those criteria. Weekly job claims are over 457,000.

It’s easy to write this when you have a job or have sufficient income to meet you daily needs and still have money to go out to dinner. So I am not personally facing what is clearly a national economic crisis. I know three people who have lost their jobs as the result of the economic downturn. The economy is frightening us too.

With the election just a month away all of us have to listen to the candidate’s plans and ideas to speed up a recovery. I know I will be listening.

It’s 3 A.M. and You Must Read This!

Rarely do I promote someone else’s column but this is one time I will. His column starts with this paragraph.

“It’s 3 a.m., a few months into 2009, and the phone in the White House rings. Several big hedge funds are about to fail, says the voice on the line, and there’s likely to be chaos when the market opens. Whom do you trust to take that call?”

Those are the words of Paul Krugman’s latest column. It you don’t want to read it all he ends the column with these words.

“The modern economy, it turns out, is a dangerous place — and it’s not the kind of danger you can deal with by talking tough and denouncing evildoers. Does Mr. McCain have the judgment and temperament to deal with that part of the job he seeks?”

Hold your nose if you must. The nominees for president aren’t the ones I would have made but the deed is done. Now we must choose.

No on Waxman

I am not voting to re-elect my congressman, Henry Waxman (30^th District of CA). I knew the man when he held no office and was a member of the Beverly Hills Young Democrats. I never thought his West Los Angeles district would ever include any part of the San Fernando Valley. Somehow re-districting in the year 2001 moved part of the west end of the Valley into his district.

There are a few reasons for not giving him my vote.

He lacks the will to take an independent position. The $700 billion Wall Street bailout is an excellent example. He voted for the bill after posting his objections on his web site. In part he wrote, “I have serious reservations about the Administration’s bailout proposal. The structure of the plan appears designed to maximize returns for Wall Street and minimize protections for the taxpayer.”
He is now holding hearing on the collapse of Lehman Brothers and AIG. Where was he in previous years?
After the biggest passenger train accident in California history he then co-sponsors legislation that requires railroads to install safety equipment. Where was he before the accident?
Ten years ago he passed legislation in Congress outlawing a subway in West Los Angeles that was based upon desire of the wealthy in that area, to the detriment of public transportation. He had the law canceled this past year when traffic became unbearable and his wealthy supporters relented.
He is now holding hearing on the collapse of Lehman Brothers and AIG. Where was he in previous years?
He has been in office so long he has become stale. He first went to Washington in 1975. He has lost the vigor to actively represent his district. It’s a combination of too comfortable and too old. He is 69 years old this month.

So who will receive my vote? It will not be the Republican. His confusing web site says “Vote November 2010” and rants against John McCain but does support Sarah Palin (“Palin si – McCain no”). My vote will go to any other party that has a clear vision.

The $700 Billion Give Away

The three page proposal by Henry Paulson was clearly written. There was no misunderstanding of the language. It was an improper proposal because the plan put too much authority in the hands of the Treasury Secretary. In just two weeks the House of Representatives rewrote the proposal into a 110 page law that is not understandable by most people. I have read 12 pages of this bill entitled ‘‘Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.’’ I know you have to write law in proper legal form but this law has been written to hide its true purpose and provide political coverage. Even the candidates for president (Obama is a Harvard law graduate) have given mediocre support for this law.

An example is the section on executive pay. This was written to obfuscate the issue. It obviously is not intended to prevent golden parachutes to incompetent executives. Apparently Chris Isidore of CNNMoney.com agrees.

SEC. 111. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION AND CORPORATE

GOVERNANCE.

(a) APPLICABILITY.—Any financial institution that sells troubled assets to the Secretary under this Act shall be subject to the executive compensation requirements of subsections (b) and (c) and the provisions under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as provided under the amendment by section 302, as applicable.

(b) DIRECT PURCHASES.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Where the Secretary determines that the purposes of this Act are best met through direct purchases of troubled assets from an individual financial institution where no bidding process or market prices are available, and the Secretary receives a meaningful equity or debt position in the financial institution as a result of the transaction, the Secretary shall require that the financial institution meet appropriate standards for executive compensation and corporate governance. The standards required under this subsection shall be effective for the duration of the period that the Secretary

holds an equity or debt position in the financial institution.

(2) CRITERIA.—The standards required under this subsection shall include—

(A) limits on compensation that exclude incentives for executive officers of a financial institution to take unnecessary and excessive

risks that threaten the value of the financial institution during the period that the Secretary holds an equity or debt position in the financial institution;

(B) a provision for the recovery by the financial institution of any bonus or incentive compensation paid to a senior executive officer

based on statements of earnings, gains, or other criteria that are later proven to be materially inaccurate; and

(C) a prohibition on the financial institution making any golden parachute payment to its senior executive officer during the period

that the Secretary holds an equity or debt position in the financial institution.

(3) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘‘senior executive officer’’ means an individual who is one of the top 5 executives of a public company, whose compensated is required to be disclosed pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and any regulations issued thereunder, and non-public company counter parts.

If Congress refuses to go along with this bill I will totally understand. If this law is adopted I fear that it may be a wasted effort.

$700 Billion, California Democrats Have Major Misgivings

The news reports indicate that it’s the Republicans who have concerns about the bailout package but look at my Democratic representatives. They too are voicing their concerns.

I called my congressman and both senators to voice my objections to the bailout.

Henry Waxman a leading congressman and I am in his district:

“I have serious reservations about the Administration’s bailout proposal. The structure of the plan appears designed to maximize returns for Wall Street and minimize protections for the taxpayer.” This was part of a one page press release.

Dianne Feinstein, Senior California Senator

On September 26, 2008, Senator Feinstein speaks on the Senate floor about the national economic crisis and Congressional efforts to negotiate an economic rescue bill. Click here to watch the video.

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House and San Francisco congresswoman

“We’re very pleased that the President acknowledged last night in his remarks four of the principles that we had been looking for, which was oversight, forbearance for homeowners, CEO compensation, and equity for the American taxpayer. We think in making this large of investment, the taxpayer should have sole ownership, some upside to it, get some of the benefit of the investment.” This was part of her statement this past Thursday.