So there's a school in the richest country on Earth that doesn't have money for toilet paper or lightbulbs for their students. Total travesty. Elsewhere ...

As real unemployment reaches 13.6 percent, demand is rising for poverty relief all over the country as many states have been forced to cut vital social services due to budget shortfalls. Many families will be pushed right off a financial cliff.

Still, there's some good news. If you live in Vermont, that state has expanded food stamp eligibility and removed asset testing. This means that households on the edge and with little money coming in won't have to put their houses up for sale, move, and then pawn any valuables before they get assistance. When the recovery comes (cross your fingers) it will mean they can get back on their feet that much faster. And if you live in a region where winter heating is a must, Venezuela's Citgo will continue heating oil aid to low income US residents.

Do you think enough help is on the way from the incoming administration?

Obama's stimulus rollout hasn't received such a glowing reception so far. The reaction from Democratic Senators has ranged from disappointed ("like trickle-down" - Harkin) to guarded ("...nothing written in stone" - Reid). Smart economists like Krugman have two central concerns: the overall size of the package is too small, and the included tax cuts won't help the economy (or appease enough Republicans to justify their inclusion).

Krugman's column today didn't mince words, either:

Whatever the explanation, the Obama plan just doesn't look adequate to the economy's need. To be sure, a third of a loaf is better than none. But right now we seem to be facing two major economic gaps: the gap between the economy's potential and its likely performance, and the gap between Mr. Obama's stern economic rhetoric and his somewhat disappointing economic plan.

Asked about such criticisms today, Obama said he holds "no pride of authorship" and is open to ideas:

There's two interpretations to what might be going on. The optimistic take says that Obama's letting Democrats and Republicans alike tweak parts of his proposal, work through the legislative process, and emerge with a productive consensus package that everyone can take credit for. The pessimistic interpretation says that Obama undershot, doesn't have much room to increase the package, and hasn't quite adapted to his role as quarterback - because letting Congress off the leash will just produce an inadequate package. We'll know soon.

From the diaries - Todd

You know how some politicians are fond of saying "you can't solve a problem by just throwing money at it." Well, here is a problem you can solve by throwing money at it. Send in a contribution to save Soapblox now!.



More in the extended entry.

Rod Blagojevich has been impeached:

In a historic vote, the Illinois House has impeached Gov. Rod Blagojevich, directing the Senate to put the state's 40th chief executive on trial with the goal of removing him from office.

The vote by the House was 114-1 and marks the first time in the state's 190-year history that a governor has been impeached, despite Illinois' longstanding reputation for political corruption. Rep. Milt Patterson (D-Chicago) was the lone vote against impeachment.

A spokesman for the governor said he won't resign.

Next up: Blago goes on trial in the IL Senate.

Next week, when the Senate convenes, it will begin the process of setting up a trial of the governor in which each of the 59 state senators act as judge and jurors.

A total of 40 senators are needed to convict Blagojevich, which would remove the governor from office and make Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn the state's new chief executive. A trial is expected to take at least three weeks.

Defiant as always, Blagojevich says he "looks forward" to a trial.

Update [2009-1-9 12:2:37 by Todd Beeton]:The roll call of the impeachment vote is HERE and you can watch the closing statement and roll call of the vote over at Progress Illinois.

Obama snubs Dean, says the title of Jonathan Martin's Politico piece. I doubt that Obama himself knew that Howard Dean was not invited to attend the introduction of incoming DNC Chair Tim Kaine. Obama shows up, someone else does the scheduling. But between Robert Gibbs and Rahm Emanual, there is enough hostility toward Dean for that person to get the cue for this type of childish act.

And yes, the blow-off was intentional. As the AP notes, "Democrats with knowledge of the situation, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid angering the Obama team, say Dean won't attend the event at the request of Obama advisers." That is also the confirmation I received from current DNC officials. "If he had been asked to go to that event, he would have been there," Jim Dean, the chairman's brother, noted twice in an interview.

The reaction I read among bloggers:

John Aravosis:

Yea, it must seem odd to the netroots activists with Deaniac roots, that got on board with Obama in the primaries specifically to defeat the Clinton's, now watch the political clique of Clintonites be engulfed within the Obama administration, while Dean gets the private shaft and the public boot. Perhaps the viewpoint that Clinton & Obama are 'the same' is now being learned.

Steve Benen:

Well, look. The numbers of us online and active that were around when Dean was big, in the '03-'06 era, are a small minority compared with the numbers now engaged-- even within the blogosphere. We know what Dean did, and that without his leadership and embracement of the netroots people-powered 50 state strategy, victory in '06 would never have happened. It did, and it laid the groundwork for Obama's in in 2008-- that's his legacy, and its a fine one.

Kevin Hayden:

haha, Kumbaya... The Chicago Way has arrived in DC. Yea, and there's a special election for Rahm Emanuel's Chicago CD that the netroots ought to engage.

As for Howard Dean's next step, I've heard he is going on an international speaking engagement tour, and also is planning on getting involved in the battle for universal healthcare, either through some known advocacy group, or through DFA. Well, if Obama really screws up, by staying put in Iraq and putting 40,000 more troops into Afghanistan, maybe Dean will once again be the outsider voice that tells the truth on behalf of progressives. With that in mind, it's certainly not a strategical move in line with the 'Team of Rivals' Obama administration narrative.

There's another issue that has been boiling up, about the "firing" of the 50 state organizers. The truth is in-between. They all had contracts through the end of the election, like most organizers. The bigger concern, that the 50 state strategy goes on, under Obama via Kaine, seems to be the issue.

I'm sure it will, but entirely under the auspices of the Obama organization being brought in, which will likely make OFA 2.0 quite an efficient centralized machine-- with similarities with how the Bush ran the RNC during his presidency (effective but very top-down)? How will the states react to the development? Probably pretty well, as long as the DNC continues some sort of funding of their activities. Probably not well, if the Dean vision of decentralizing the power away from the DNC, and to the states, is effectively reversed back to the pre-Dean era Clinton strategy of centralizing the money within the national DNC.

Update [2009-1-9 11:9:24 by Jerome Armstrong]: DFA has begun a petition for the DNC under Tim Kaine to "Reinstate the 50 State Strategy."

Update [2009-1-9 11:27:41 by Jerome Armstrong]: Flashback, to May 12th, 2004. Howard Dean, then Chair of DFA, sends out an email announcing the first ever "Dean Dozen":

Maybe this will have a good ending, maybe not too.

Conservative Matt Lewis reports that we may need to add one more name to the list of purple state Republican Senators opting against reelection bids in 2010: George Voinovich.

... In other news, I am hearing rumors coming out of Ohio that Senator Voinovich is seriously considering making an announcement next week that he won't be running for re-election. According to my sources, Rob Portman would likely be the Republican to replace him. This also opens up the GOP gubernatorial nomination for former Republican Congressman John Kasich.

I have been saying for quite some time that Voinovich could be in for a rough time should he decide to try for another term in the Senate, and early polling indicated that either Congressman Tim Ryan or Congresswoman Betty Sutton has the potential to give Voinovich a run for his money. Perhaps, then, Voinovich is seeing the writing on the wall -- much like Mel Martinez of Florida and now Kit Bond of Missouri -- and moving into retirement.

Even if Voinovich doesn't retire, this could be an upper tier race. But with Voinovich out, Ohio becomes one of the premier races of the cycle, with a relatively deep bench for the Democrats to go up against a Rob Portman or a John Kasich on the Republican side. With Voinovich in, this race still probably leans Republican, though with him out it moves right into tossup status.

Update [2009-1-9 8:36:3 by Jonathan Singer]: More from The Columbus Dispatch, which ledes as follows: "Sen. George V. Voinovich reportedly is considering not seeking re-election in 2010, well-placed sources in the Republican Party tell The Dispatch."

The UK Guardian is reporting that the "incoming administration will abandon Bush's isolation of Islamist group (Hamas) to initiate low-level diplomacy" according to sources within the transition team.

The move to open contacts with Hamas, which could be initiated through the US intelligence services, would represent a definitive break with the Bush ­presidency's ostracising of the group. The state department has designated Hamas a terrorist organisation, and in 2006 ­Congress passed a law banning US financial aid to the group.

The Guardian has spoken to three ­people with knowledge of the discussions in the Obama camp. There is no talk of Obama approving direct diplomatic negotiations with Hamas early on, but he is being urged by advisers to initiate low-level or clandestine approaches, and there is growing recognition in Washington that the policy of ostracising Hamas is counter-productive.

"The opportunity calls for us in this country to invest in our children and their health and their education, and all of the -- to reduce the deficit, to reduce the deficit if we had those resources." Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi

Well, well, well, will wonders never cease? After being in a fog, and not the San Francisco kind, for the past two years, the Speaker of the House has a moment of clarity:

Pelosi told reporters today that she "couldn't be more clear" in opposing some Obama advisers' wish to wait for the tax cuts on the highest income earners to expire in two years, as they are set to do under current law. "Put me down as clearly as you possibly can as one who wants to have those tax cuts for the wealthiest in America repealed," she said.

Pelosi said the income tax cuts to the highest earning Americans -- which were decreased from 39.6 to 35 percent as part of the 2001 Bush tax plan -- have been "the biggest contributor to the budget deficit," which now stands at $1.2 trillion for fiscal year 2009. That deficit figure does not include the impact of the pending stimulus measure, which will cost around $800 billion, nor does it include estimates for supplemental spending bills that will come later this year to finance the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Put me down as well as one who supports rescinding the Bush tax cuts. Now. Economic fairness, fiscal discipline and economic growth are sometimes conflicting goals. But not in this instance, not at this moment. Repealing the Bush tax cuts immediately is not just the fairest policy option but also the most fiscally responsible given the severity of the deficits we confront but also the most efficient in terms of a progressive tax scheme.