The OPM public option alternative

From today's Washington Post:

One potential alternative [to a true public option] being discussed Sunday would create a national coverage plan operated by private insurers but run by the Office of Personnel Management, which administers health coverage for federal workers. Senators participating in the talks said the OPM idea had been well received across the ideological spectrum . . . Under the Office of Personnel Management idea, national plans negotiated by the agency would be offered through state-based insurance exchanges that the Senate bill would create for small-business workers and people who do not have access to affordable coverage through an employer.

The cost of donating Mr. Obama's nobel - are the limitations on charitable donations too excessive?

From a letters to the Editor in today's Washington Post:

The most interesting aspect of President Obama's Nobel Prize money [is that, unlike] many countries, the United States considers the money accompanying Nobel Prizes to be ordinary income, and, hence, subject to taxation. Also, the U.S. tax code limits the amount of charitable donations that are deductible. So, if Mr. Obama gives away all his prize money [as he said he will], it will cost him a lot of extra money. And, finally, Mr. Obama is already on record as wanting to further reduce the charitable deduction. Will his current situation change his view on this?

State of the estate tax debate

From 'Extend the estate tax,' in today's Washington Post

In one of those fiscal time bombs left from the Bush administration, the estate tax, having gradually dwindled, is set to be eliminated entirely next year - only to spring back to life, full-force, in 2011. Unless something is done, 2010 will be the year to throw Mama from the train, tax-free. This would be terrible policy, not to mention unkind to Mama. The least bad, hold-your-nose alternative would be to set the tax permanently at its 2009 level, exempting the first $3.5 million of any individual estate - $7 million for a married couple - from taxation. At this level, 99.8 percent of estates are not subject to the tax. Claims of 'death tax' foes notwithstanding, a tax at the 2009 level would have scant impact on family farms or family-owned businesses. In 2011, according to estimates from the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center, only 100 such entities would have to pay any estate tax, and virtually none would have to be liquidated to pay the tax. Nonetheless, the estate tax would continue to bring in badly needed revenue even at this level: $206 billion over the next 10 years. This is the hold-your-nose solution because it is excessively generous to the wealthiest Americans at a time of fiscal emergency. Making the 2009 level permanent would drain nearly $400 billion from the federal treasury from 2012 to 2021 compared with letting the estate tax revert to the rules in effect in 2001, when the tax was set at 55 percent with a $1 million exemption per person. In a perfect world, which is to say not the 111th Congress, the tax would be set somewhere between the 2001 and 2009 levels.

Gay marriage being pushed too hard?

From today's New York Times:

The New York State Senate decisively rejected a bill on Wednesday that would have allowed gay couples to wed, providing a major victory for those who oppose same-sex marriage and underscoring the deep and passionate divisions surrounding the issue . . . The defeat, which followed a stirring, tearful and at times very personal debate, all but ensures that the issue is dead in New York until at least 2011, when a new legislature will be installed. Since 2003, seven states, including three that border New York, have legalized same-sex marriage. But in two of the seven - California last year and Maine last month - statewide referendums have restricted marriage to straight couples, prohibiting gay nuptials. Pollsters say that while support is generally building for same-sex marriage, especially as the electorate ages, voters resist when they fear the issue is being pushed too fast.

TDB | The transition to competence

The word is that Obama will pick Arizona governor Janet Napolitano to head the department of homeland security. And in one simple but smart move, the Bush-created department that has for seven years existed without a raison d'etre is given new life and new purpose. It will - get this! - protect the homeland! The queen of a border land will now be queen of borders.

MAKES SENSE, NO?

It's a small move, but symbolic of how far from competence the Bush administration has been for these many years. Even though so much good can be done with a pragmatic (as opposed to ideological) spirit, some clear headed people, and a bit of dedicated thinking about basics, the present administration 'process' never considered these virtues.

Anyway, it's nice to see the return of plain American solutions driven competence...

...and (somewhat similarly) the rise of an American leader who can't imagine life without his blackberry.

MY GOD - HE'S ONE OF US!

TDB | In Case You Need Another Reason

Another reason, that is, to feel confident about the upcoming Obama administration.

Whatever you may think of Exxon, you can't fault it on management grounds. It is widely considered the best company in the world, speaking strictly in financial and management terms. More people in the know have confidence in the 'Exxon way' than in any other set of practices. And it just so happens that the 'Exxon way' is almost identical to the 'Obama way':

What might be called the Exxon Way can be summed up in three ideals: discipline, patience and long-term vision.

Team Obama adhered closely to these ideals during the campaign, to great effect. If an Obama administration can do the same (and there's ample evidence to suppose confidently that it can) the US could see competence coming from Washington for the first time in nearly a decade.

ike/Speaking Generally

Colin Powell is appearing on Meet the Press Sunday and the expectation is that he'll endorse Barack Obama. Powell's admiration for Obama has been evident since early 2007 and he has openly discussed the "electrifying" nature of an Obama presidency.

By and large, political endorsements are overrated. But Colin Powell, long-viewed as a dissenting but participatory voice in the Bush administration, adds credibility to Obama's foreign policy bonafides.