So after a week-long brouhaha Apple Inc has decided to permit the release of a new iPhone application called iSinglePayer.

The application enables users to see which US legislators have received political contributions from which limb of the anti-healthcare-reform lobby, and then to phone up the representative at the touch of a button. The application's data is supplied by the Center for Responsive Politics.

The link between industry money and political process has never been more transparent.

• 5 Comments

A Newsweek article argues the new Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission should play the role I was advocating for a truth and reconciliation commission to bring daylight and justice to the events leading to the financial crisis.

Michael Hirsh argues:

we don't necessarily need a parade of Wall Streeters headed to the Big House. What we do need, however, is a parade of witnesses who will provide what's been missing so far in this crisis—a prominent outlet for public outrage. In the last nine months, the Obama administration and the grandees in Congress have been designing solutions without much input from the outside, often using experts from Wall Street (especially "Government Sachs"). It's pretty much been a closed system.

Like I said, we need some public, inclusive, truth and reconciliation.

• 6 Comments

This is seriously worrying. The US Supreme Court is to create an opportunity to revisit curbs on corporate spending on political advertising.

You might think the army of former insiders hired by the healthcare industry to lobby for private interests in healthcare reform at a cost of $1.4 million per day was already sufficiently invasive of democracy.

The current US Supreme Court, however, is using a narrow case arising from the previous presidential election to raise the possibility of rolling back controls on corporate financing of election advertising, essentially threatening to hand deep-pocketed corporations a blackmailing tool against any elected official who is reluctant to pursue their particular legislative agenda.

If these constraints are rolled back you can kiss goodbye the last vestiges of "By the people" US democracy.

• 0 Comments

It is just one more step in the process of getting the Waxman-Markey climate-energy bill passed, but it is an important step.

You might think that getting a sufficient number of liberals to agree on legislation to brig into being a price for carbon emissions would not be hard, but the behind the scenes effort to get enough votes has been tough.

Sticking points have been Democrats that have recently taken seats from Republicans in more conservative parts of the US, and Democrats representing farming constituencies who stand to have their environmental impacts brought into the carbon count fully for the first time.

Nancy Pelosi is credited with having organized the strong arming.

If the agreement sticks, a vote on Friday should see the bill pass in the House of Representatives.

• 0 Comments

In a speech to lawmakers, the US president argued the law was needed because clean energy technology held the key to economic prosperity.

Calling the legislation historic, he said the adoption of the Waxman-Markey Bill would underpin energy security as well as tackle carbon pollution.

• 6 Comments

The Congressional Budget Office review of the cost to consumers of proposed climate change legislation shows a cost much lower than GOP talking points.

Republicans including GOP House leader John Boehner have quoted an increase in annual energy costs per householdas high as $3,128 by 2015, and the conservative think tank the Heritage Foundation took the bidding up as high as $4,300 per annum.

The CBO - a non-partisan office - arrived at the figure of $175 for an average household by 2020.

Republicans insist the CBO figure does not attach enough weight to the export of jobs abroad to countries that do not cap their emissions.

• 0 Comments

The Washington Post reports on the splits within the Democratic party over terms of the climate change bill currently before Congress.

An interesting insight into legislative horseplay.

Did I say "interesting"? What I actually meant to say was "depressing".

• 0 Comments

The financial sector was the lead campaign contributor to half of the 12 Senate Democrats who voted against bankruptcy legislation reforms last week.

The Center for Responsive Politics carries the numbers.

The bill before the US Senate would have allowed bankruptcy judges to permit some homeowners meeting strict conditions to renegotiate their mortgage repayments.

The banks have been committed opponents of the bill from the start, even though, as The American Prospect blog notes:

"primary home loans are the only loans that a bankruptcy judge can't change (he or she can modify loans for second homes, cars, boats, etc.)"

Democrats that dislike the idea of a court having any power over the terms of a contract may well next target the court's powers in relation to other assets, which as the Prospect blog continues, begs the question: what is bankruptcy court for.

• 0 Comments

The Capital Eye blog at OpenSecrets.org sets out links to information showing which sectors have paid how much money to which political campaigns.

The blog explains that it is difficult to fully understand this week's hearings on climate change in the US Congress without this data, including:

• "Overviews of federal campaign contributions by the energy sector over time. This breaks down into contributions from electric utilities, the mining industry and oil and gas companies. Automakers and the agriculture sector, among others, will also likely want to offer input as energy-related legislation moves forward. And, of course, we can't forget the environmentalists and alternative energy producers, who now appear to have a more prominent seat at the table.
• These industries also try to peddle influence by lobbying the federal government. Take a look at how much the energy sector, electric utilities, the mining industry and oil and gas companies spent on lobbying in 2008. For automakers, go here; for the agriculture sector, go here; and for environmental groups, go here.
• How much have individual members of Congress received from these industries? OpenSecrets.org can show you: energy sector, electric utilities, mining industry, oil and gas companies, automakers, agriculture, environmentalists and alternative energy producers. Play around with the dropdowns and slider menu to change the timeframe or see totals to specific members of the House and Senate. 
• Check out which industries gave the most to members of the various 110th energy-related committees (111th coming soon) by going here and selecting any of the following: House Energy and Commerce Committee; House Select Energy Independence and Global Warming Committee; House Science Committee; Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee; Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee; and Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
• House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Subcommittee on Energy and Environment Chair Ed Markey (D-Mass.) penned the cap-and-trade global warming bill before their committee this week. Take a look at their individual profiles to see where these two are getting their money, here for Waxman and here for Markey.
• For a look at how the various industries tried to influence energy-related legislation in the past, take a peek at Capital Eye's 2008 Power Struggle series and 2007 Power Play series."

• 0 Comments

Perhaps for reasons of propriety, bank donations to politicians have fallen even as new regulatory constraints are being debated.

The Bloomberg article mentions Bank of America Corp. and Wells Fargo & Co in particular.

• 1 Comment