Budget Deal Moving Ahead, Despite Outrage on the Right
The bipartisan deal to suspend the debt ceiling and increase federal spending over the next two years will get a vote in the House on Thursday, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) said late Tuesday. Leaders in both parties have expressed confidence that the bill will pass before lawmakers leave town for their August recess.
"We're gonna pass it," Hoyer told reporters. "I think we'll get a good number [of votes]. I don't know if it's gonna be huge, but we're gonna pass it."
President Trump announced that he backs the deal, removing one possible hurdle for the bill. “Budget Deal gives great victories to our Military and Vets, keeps out Democrat poison pill riders. Republicans and Democrats in Congress need to act ASAP and support this deal,” he tweeted Tuesday evening.
Despite widespread agreement that the bill will pass, however, not everyone is on board.
Grumbles from the left: Some progressive Democrats have been critical of the deal, portraying it as too easy on Republicans. Worried that the agreement could set up a budget crisis in 2021, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) said he was “concerned that it was a two-year deal. Why not a one year deal?... It seems like it’s basically handcuffing the next president.” Other liberals, noting that Democratic leaders have agreed to avoid “poison pill” riders on controversial issues such as abortion and funding for the border wall in the funding bills that must pass this fall, lamented their loss of leverage in those negotiations.
Outrage on the right: Resistance to the deal was more pronounced on the right, with the hardline House Freedom Caucus announcing Tuesday that it would not support the bill due to concerns about the growing national debt. “Our country is undeniably headed down a path of fiscal insolvency and rapidly approaching $23 trillion in debt. … All sides should go back to the drawing board and work around the clock, canceling recess if necessary, on a responsible budget agreement that serves American taxpayers better—not a $323 billion spending frenzy with no serious offsets,” the 31-member group said in a statement.
The deficit hawks at the Committee for Responsible Federal published “Five Reasons to Oppose the Budget Deal,” which include its purported $1.7 trillion cost over 10 years. CRFB noted that the agreement would increase discretionary spending by 21 percent during President Trump’s first term, pushing such spending to near-record levels.
Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) was more colorful in his criticism, saying, “You don’t have to be Euclid to understand the math here. We’re like Thelma and Louise in that car headed toward the cliff.” Nevertheless, Kennedy said he would consider supporting the deal.
Is the deficit hawk dead? The budget deal represents “the culmination of years of slipping fiscal discipline in Washington,” said Robert Costa and Mike DeBonis of The Washington Post, and it highlights the declining influence of fiscal conservatives in the capital, at least as far as policy is concerned. Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) said the Republican Party’s credibility on fiscal restraint is “long gone.”
Although it may be too early to declare the fiscal hawk extinct – plenty of critics say the bird will return as soon as there’s a Democratic president – it certainly seems to be in ill health. As the University of Virginia's Larry Sabato said Wednesday: “A battered bird has been named to the list of endangered species. The ‘deficit hawk’ is on the road to extinction. Rarely spotted around Washington, D.C., the deficit hawk’s last remaining habitat is found in some state capitals.”
Some Republicans said that fiscal conservatism was never really a core Republican value, dating back to President Reagan’s tax-cut-and-spend policies, and that Paul Ryan’s emphasis on fiscal issues was an aberration. “It was never the party of Paul Ryan,” former House Speaker Newt Gingrich told the Post. “He’s a brilliant guy, but he filled a policy gap. The reality here is that Republicans were never going to get spending cuts with Speaker Pelosi running the House, and they didn’t want an economic meltdown or shutdown this summer.”
Is the whole debate missing the point? William Gale of the Brookings Institution, who served on President George H.W. Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers, said he wasn’t sure why the budget deal was producing so much hostility, since it basically maintains the status quo and – more importantly – is focused solely on discretionary spending. “There *is* a long-term budget issue,” Gale tweeted Tuesday, “but cutting [discretionary spending] is not the way to go.”
Instead, Gale says that any serious fiscal plan must focus on the mandatory side of the ledger, where the rapidly increasing costs of health care and retirement are straining against revenues reduced by repeated rounds of tax cuts. Gale recommends a combination of entitlement reductions and revenue increases – a standard mix of policy options that faces an uncertain future, with well-entrenched interest groups standing opposed to movement in either direction.
Comcast to Cut the Cord with Time Warner
Comcast is dropping its merger with Time Warner after a year of regulatory pushback, according to Bloomberg. The news wire's unnamed sources say there will be an announcement tomorrow.
In today's changing media landscape it is not really clear what the preemptive breakup of a media megacorp (formed from mere media titans) will mean for consumers, especially in the face of Verizon's push to slim down its bundled offerings, the new ala carte service from HBO and the continued expansion of Netflix's original programming. As more and more people cut the cord, the market for traditional cable TV is eroding, and more consumers opt simply for an Internet connection.
Even without that, Comcast dropping its deal probably will have no impact at all for the average cable subscriber, given the already segregated monopolies allowed individual cable companies. So, unless you own stock in either of these companies, this is pretty much just more status quo in a rapidly changing market.
Can Low Self-Control Turn You Into Edward Snowden?
Be very wary if your employer asks you to take a test and then says please put on this cap. The cap could have sensors measuring your “self-control,” which researchers at Iowa State University have connected to—cybersecurity.
Yup—this wasn’t about eating the last cookie, having sex with a stranger, or taking a hit from some unknown new drug just because your friend said it was an amazing experience. The test measures how long someone hesitates before doing something risky or wrong.
Hmm. Maybe I’ll wait a few seconds before robbing that jewelry store! If they waited, the researchers determined that the employees were considering the consequences of their actions and therefore had higher self-control than those who simply filled their duffle bag with whatever bling was in sight.
Those with higher self-control were deemed better cyber security risks than the low self-control group.
But who knows? Maybe the high group was just casing the joint and calculating how much they could carry without getting caught. Or maybe they were searching for the largest unflawed diamond in the case that could be hidden in their pocket!
So much for brainwaves.
These Students Are Making Even More Than They Expect After Graduation
College students who major in STEM fields generally know that they can make more money than their peers once they graduate, but they don’t know how much more.
Turns out, those students majoring in science, technology, engineering and math, actually have starting salaries that are higher than expected, according to a new report by the National Association of Colleges and Employers.
Engineering majors, for example, expect to earn $56,000, but actually receive 15.5 percent more than that, with starting salaries average nearly $65,000. Computer Science majors expect to make around $51,000, but receive 22 percent for an average starting salary of $62,000.
Chemistry majors have the largest gap between expectations and reality: They expect to earn an average of $39,000 but take home an average $58,000 in their first year, a 51 percent increase.
Related: The Closing of the Millennial Mind on Campus
The typical college graduate in 2014 received a starting salary of $48,000. Liberal arts and humanities majors had the lowest starting salary, with an average of just $39,000, according to NACE.
Not only do STEM majors enjoy higher salaries, but they can also expect more job security and better job prospects. All of the top 25 jobs recently compiled by U.S. News and World Report fell into either a science- or math-based discipline.
Still, not everyone has the interest or aptitude to excel in a STEM career. A third of those who begin their college career majoring in those fields end up transferring to a difference study area, according to a recent report by RTI International.
Will Obama Send a Smoke Signal About Weed?
The resignation of Michele M. Leonhart, chief of the Drug Enforcement Administration, just one day after 4/20 -- which is sort of Thanksgiving for stoners -- offers President Obama an opportunity to replace her with someone who shares his relatively benign view of marijuana.
The right appointment might also be a gift to Hillary Rodham Clinton since it would signal to younger voters that it's not just libertarian-leaning Republicans like Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky who want to decriminalize the use of pot.
Representative Early Blumenauer, an Oregon Democrat, told The New York Times that Obama should appoint someone who "understands the federal approach to marijuana isn't working."
Related: How to Stop Cyber Attacks: Let Workers Smoke Pot
The flashpoint that led to the departure of Leonhart after a 35-year career at the D.E.A. was a congressional hearing that revealed agency agents in Colombia had taken part in parties with prostitutes paid by drug cartels. But Leonhart, who has lumped marijuana in with crack, meth and heroin, found herself at odds with the President, who has called pot no more dangerous than alcohol.
“Hopefully this is a sign that the Reefer Madness era is coming to an end at the D.E.A.,” Mason Tvert, the director on communications at the Marijuana Policy Project, told Bloomberg Politics.
How to Stop Cyber Attacks: Let Workers Smoke Pot
What’s true for the government is true for business. FBI Director James Comey thinks you can’t hire top tech talent with a ban on weed. It all started in the Reagan administration, which imposed a no-hire policy for applicants who toked up within the past three years. Good luck with that.
In 2014, Comey raised the issue during a speech: “A lot of the nation’s top computer programmers and hacking gurus are also fond of marijuana. I have to hire a great workforce to compete with those cyber criminals and some of those kids want to smoke weed on the way to the interview.”
That’s not the only reason the government can’t hire competent programmers and white hat hackers. They come at a high price, there’s a shortage, and they hate red tape and bureaucratic annoyances. For some lawmakers, though, it’s easier to get lost in the weed than try to reform the federal hiring process. That’s why Gerry Connolly (D-VA) and Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) have two proposals in the House requiring info from the intelligence director on how classifying pot as Schedule 1 narcotic crimps the feds recruiting efforts.