Taxmageddon looms, but Voinovich sees a way out

Now that the election’s over, the country’s political conversation is changing fast. President Obama and Congress have less than two months to confront the budget crisis known as the fiscal cliff or, better yet, Taxmageddon. What will happen?

Former Sen. George Voinovich thinks it’s time for Obama and the Republicans to bargain: Medicare and Medicaid cuts in exchange for tax hikes on the wealthy.

“We’re trying to warn people about the cliff,” says Voinovich, the Ohio co-chair for Fix the Debt, a centrist group trying to lay the groundwork for compromise.

The Bush-era income tax cuts expire Dec. 31. So does the payroll tax holiday that boosted our paychecks two years ago. Big across-the-board cuts to defense and domestic spending are set to kick in Jan. 1. That double shock to the economy would probably plunge us into a new recession.

Confronting the cliff means confronting the parties’ 20-year disagreement on taxing the wealthy. Obama wants to let the Bush tax cuts expire for households making more than $250,000 a year. Republicans don’t. But Voinovich, a moderate Republican, thinks his party ought to strike a deal.

“[We have] to lay out the contours of reform of Medicare and Medicaid,” argues Voinovich. “Then we need tax reform, pro-growth, which would broaden the base, lower the rates, and raise revenues and reduce the deficit.”

But just when he starts sounding like Mitt Romney, Voinovich draws a distinction.

“That was one of the problems with Romney,” he says. “Romney said [tax reform would] be revenue-neutral. But most of us who’ve been around know that if you’re going to make cuts in spending, you also have to raise revenue. So those people in the higher bracket end up paying more money!

“Almost everyone I know that’s in that category says, ‘George, I’ll pay more taxes if you can guarantee me we’re going to get this ship back on an even keel.’ ”

During the campaign, Voinovich recorded a radio ad for Romney, in which he accused Obama of having a “deeply partisan vision” that kept him from working with Congress. But “neither party has clean hands,” he says now. Perhaps thinking of this Plain Dealer cartoon about his radio spot, Voinovich mentions Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.

“I think McConnell made it clear he wanted to defeat the president,” he says. “He has not been as cooperative as he should be.”

Obama and House Speaker John Boehner came close last year to the sort of “grand bargain” Voinovich supports. Voinovich thinks Boehner will ultimately stand up to the tea party wing of his caucus to avoid the fiscal cliff, even at the risk of losing his job as speaker.

“I really believe John Boehner would have given up his leadership to do the right thing,” Voinovich says. “I think [he] will do the right thing. I think John knows how bad things are.”

Voinovich thinks confronting the fiscal cliff may mean limiting popular tax deductions for home mortgages, charitable giving and health insurance. It’s an austere vision.

But he believes momentum is building for a compromise. “There’s a deep feeling that people in Washington have got to get their act together and get something done,” he says. “With the right effort, I think we can.”

Plain Dealer, mistrusting Romney, endorses Obama

Mitt Romney had a chance with them, but he blew it.

The Plain Dealer's editorial board endorses President Obama in today's paper, ripping Romney for foreign-policy "bluster," a "lack of policy details," and "frequent changes" in positions. "Which Romney would [voters] elect?" the paper asks.

The board was "sorely tempted to endorse Gov. Romney this fall," the piece says -- but the editorial, clearly written by committee, resists the temptation. The pro-Obama argument dominates 12 paragraphs, compared to 6 for Romney.

What happened?  The Republican convention, the debates, and Libya. Also, Obama's careful talk about Iran, delivered to the PD in person.

You could see the paper's editorial writers pretty much give up on Romney in September. After his convention speech, they complained he was too vague about his tax and budget plans and how he'd replace Obama's health care law.  When Romney blasted Obama right after the Libya and Egypt embassy attacks, the page declared he'd botched the facts and "flunked" a test of his character and ability to be commander-in-chief.

Romney's sudden move to the center in the first debate may have caught Obama off guard and impressed swing voters, but it didn't impress the editors. They cited "the reborn moderate of recent weeks" as yet another example of Romney's shape-shifting.

Before September, I didn't expect this.  I thought the Plain Dealer, which swung right to endorse John Kasich and Issue 2, might keep angling right and go for Romney.

But only a few paragraphs of today's editorial seem to bear the stamp of publisher Terry Egger, a Republican who pushed a liberal editorial page to the center in his previous job in St. Louis.  The pro-Obama grafs read like the work of editorial page editor Elizabeth Sullivan, a foreign-policy expert who wrote scathing critiques of the Iraq war. She knows that, even though domestic issues decide most elections, presidents have the most power over foreign policy, war and peace.

The president shrewdly courted the PD's endorsement. He granted the editorial board an interview before his September speech in Kent, spending an hour with them in the Kent State basketball coach's office.

Likely well-briefed on Sullivan's interests and opinions, Obama gave her a clear answer about his position on Iran: Basically, he'll attack Iran just before it actually builds a nuclear weapon, but not earlier.  Sullivan made that conversation into one of the best pieces I've read about Iran's nuclear program, a column that ought to be required reading on a national level.

Obama's measured responses to Iran and the latest Mideast turmoil reaped rewards with the PD. "Romney's tendency to bluster on foreign policy provides more cause for doubt," the editorial reads. "The United States cannot afford to be drawn into new wars without clear national interests at stake.... Obama has showed that he favors engagement over bluster."

Newspaper endorsements don't matter as much as they used to; there are fewer newspaper readers and undecided voters today. But this endorsement mattered to Obama, and he got it.

Roldo: Will Plain Dealer endorse Romney?

Veteran alternative journalist Roldo Bartimole is out with a prediction: He thinks the Plain Dealer will endorse Mitt Romney for president -- and maybe set off another controversy like the paper’s embarrassing 2004 non-endorsement.

He doesn’t explain his prediction, but his spider sense is tingling. I think he may be on to something.

The PD boldly will endorse Sen. Sherrod Brown for the U. S. Senate. A Democrat over Republican. Josh Mandel, Brown’s opponent, has been shooting himself in the foot. The Pee Dee has been taking note of these self-inflicted wounds. ...

Having shown itself as willing to nominate a Democrat, I figure the editorial board (which is a misnomer for “the boss” Terry Egger) will nominate Mitt the Romney for President. Making Republicans (and Kevin O’Brien) happy. …

I read the Plain Dealer’s editorials, just like Roldo does, and I think he’s catching on to a trend. But first, a little background, from Roldo’s column:

You may remember the debacle in 2004 after the board chose John Kerry as its Presidential endorsee. Oh, wait. Publisher Alex Machaskee then ordered it changed to the other guy – George Bush. After some internal wrangling, the PD choose the silliest way out. The paper punted. It didn’t endorse anyone. It made a fool of the paper nationally.

After Terrance Egger succeeded Machaskee in 2006, he was often asked about the 2004 non-endorsement. Though Egger is a Republican who nudged a liberal editorial board toward the center as St. Louis Post-Dispatch publisher, he reassured Clevelanders he wouldn’t pull a Machaskee.

“We will endorse,” Egger told a City Club audience in August 2006. “Whose decision that will be will be the editorial board’s. And I mean that.”

He was implying that, as publisher, he wouldn’t use his authority to overrule the rest of the board. (See my Jan. 2007 story "The New Dealer" for more on this.)

Sure enough, when the paper endorsed Barack Obama in 2008, the editorial carried an unusual tagline that named all the members of the usually anonymous editorial board who voted on the endorsement.

The PD’s endorsements have swung back to the right since then. The paper recommended John Kasich for governor in 2010 and endorsed last year’s Issue 2, also known as Senate Bill 5, which would’ve severely restricted the power of public-employee unions. Both editorials sounded strained, written by committee, like unsuccessful efforts to reconcile deep internal divisions.

The Kasich endorsement called on the governor to cut out his “Red Bull style” and his habits as a “Fox News provocateur.” And the pro-SB5 editorial was probably the paper’s worst-argued in years. Naively, it called for Kasich to go back to the bargaining table if voters approved SB5 to negotiate away its most divisive provisions. But the law would’ve given Kasich total victory over the unions, leaving them with no leverage and the governor with no reason to bargain. It was as if the Plain Dealer had no idea how power works.

Roldo implies Egger controls the endorsements. I don’t know if that’s true, but it’s safe to say that Egger is one of the board’s more conservative members. He’s likely to have played a major role in the Kasich and SB5 decisions.

Follow the trend from the last two years, and it’s easy to imagine the PD dismissing Obama as a disappointment and endorsing Romney, while trying to appease the dissenters with a rose-colored call for him to embrace his Massachusetts-moderate past once elected.

Editorial page endorsements aren’t as influential as they were in newspapers’ golden age, especially in presidential elections. A thousand voices are deluging Ohioans with screams and roars and tweets about Romney and Obama. Voters can make up their minds about a president without the Big Voice of the Big City Paper weighing in.

Still, Clevelanders’ reaction to the 2004 cop-out suggests they'll still care what the Plain Dealer says. Major endorsements let readers know where an editorial page stands, what its values are. And as Roldo says, the paper’s in an interesting position: it has a centrist editorial page in a Democratic metro area, so a Romney endorsement could anger a lot of readers.

So, yes, Clevelanders will pay attention to the paper’s presidential decision. Even if it says more about the editorial page than it does about Obama or Romney.

Update, 7/23: A Plain Dealer editorial yesterday called on Romney to release more tax returns.  "He is basing his candidacy largely on his success in the private sector and first-hand knowledge of job creation," it says. "Voters expect and deserve a look behind the curtain."  Hmm, is that a hint of skepticism?

Will Ohio reject half of health care reform? Or will voters reject all of it?

Well, that was a wild ride.  For politics junkies, yesterday was a huge fix -- the most anticipated, most important, most surprising Supreme Court decision since Bush vs. Gore, complete with a no-wait-yes reveal.

I was sitting in my doctor's office at 10:09 when CNN.com misfired and posted, "The Supreme Court has struck down the individual mandate for health care." I pulled it up on my phone. My doctor was mostly rooting for the health care law (he's from Canada), but even he got the breaking-news junkie gleam on his face when I told him.

I left and walked into the least boring waiting room experience ever, 20 Cleveland Clinic patients looking expectantly at a TV, reading the CNN captions.  Wait, CNN was saying by 10:16... some reporter was finally reading past page 2... not under the commerce clause, but under the power to tax... 

Thanks to Walter Dellinger, who should've earned thousands on InTrade for his prediction, I knew what that meant.

"Dewey Defeats Truman -- LIVE!" the Atlantic's Megan Garber called CNN's flub. 

The network flipped at 10:19. "Supreme Court upholds entirety of health care law," it announced.

That was pretty close.  But still not right.

The Court snipped one line out of the Affordable Care Act, but it's a big one.  It ruled the states can choose not to go along with the law's expansion of Medicaid. That could lead to a weird split in the country -- liberal states going along with all of health care reform, conservative states going along with half of it.

When I say half, I mean half.  You've heard that the new law will give 30 million people health insurance, right?  Well, today the New York Times ran a chart, based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, that says 22 million people will get health care coverage through new insurance exchanges, while 17 million will get it from the Medicaid expansion.  Now, that means 17 million would get it if their state goes along.

The Medicaid expansion will be 100 percent funded by the federal government -- for a few years.  Then 95 percent. Then 90 percent.  Even though it's a generous subsidy, conservative states that feel extra-cautious about their financial future (or, not as concerned about the uninsured as others) might decide to turn it down.  See this Washington Post story for more.

Gov. John Kasich and Lt. Gov Mary Taylor have strongly resisted the health care law. Yesterday they issued a statement saying they're "very concerned" about "a sudden, dramatic increase in Medicaid spending."

They're hinting that they might decide to turn down the federal money and not expand Medicaid to cover everyone in or near poverty in Ohio.  That could become a huge issue in state politics by next year.

But I'm a step ahead.  For now, the real question isn't, will Ohio's government say no to half of health care reform?  It's, will Ohio voters say no to all of it?

What I mean is, everyone says this election is about the economy and jobs.  But what if it's really about health care? 

The economy may decide the election, but the election will decide whether the health-care law stays or goes. Romney promises to repeal it.

Republicans in Congress think they only need 51 senators, not 60, to repeal parts of it. They need to pick up four Senate seats, and they have a shot.

Ohio's looking a lot like the ultimate swing state again.  It could clinch the presidency for Obama, or put Romney very close to winning.  So the future of the health care law may have passed from the Supreme Court's hands to Ohio voters'.

Romney, the CEO-candidate, talks business in Mayfield Heights

I went to see Mitt Romney’s speech at Landerhaven last night, and I think I saw why he’s having trouble connecting with voters.

We all know the story: Romney’s the Republican front-runner who can’t hold a lead. Conservative voters keep turning to other presidential candidates. Rick Santorum is now beating Romney in the polls in Ohio, in Michigan, and nationwide. The right says Romney isn’t really conservative; the left and right say he lacks core beliefs.

But last night, his problems seemed far away. Romney got an enthusiastic reception at the Cuyahoga County Republican Party’s Lincoln Day dinner. He laid out a fiscally conservative critique of President Obama and a conservative agenda that fits who he is and what he’s done.

“This president did not cause the recession, but he made it worse,” Romney argued. “This president is not the reason the economy is showing signs of getting better. He’s the reason it’s taken so long for the economy to show signs of getting better.”

Romney charged that several of Obama’s policies had hindered businesses from hiring people, from health care reform to deficit spending to regulations of the oil, coal and natural gas industries. He promised instead to repeal the health care law, approve the Keystone pipeline to Canada, and “cut spending, eliminate programs, shrink government as a share of the economy from 25 percent to 20 percent and finally balance our budget.”

It’s a classic conservative argument, and Romney is a classic type of Republican: a CEO candidate. A former corporate executive, he thinks government doesn’t understand business and ought to get out of its way.

Obama “never worked in the private sector,” complained Romney, who ran the private investment firm Bain Capital before he was governor of Massachusetts.

“A lot of people in government, they’re never had the great fortune of working in a regular job, in a regular enterprise, and seeing what it’s like to try to make a product or sell a service. They haven’t had the experiences that many of you -- most of you probably in this room -- have had.”

Romney’s argument that he understands the economy better than Obama because of his business experience may be a powerful weapon during an economic downturn.

But his business experience is also his weakness. I noticed something strange about Romney’s speech: He talked to the audience like they were all fellow businesspeople.

“If you’re in the private sector, as most of you are in this room, you don’t have a choice about being fiscally conservative,” he said. “If you’re not fiscally conservative, you’re broke, you’re gone. [Other] businesses [will] put you out of business! You know how to be conservative!”

The tickets to last night’s Republican Party dinner were $50 to $75 -- not cheap, but affordable for a wide range of people. “Parma Republican Club,” read the sign on the table closest to me. But even when Romney tried to aim his message at employees and employers alike, it sounded like a chamber of commerce address.

“What you do is harder than what government does,” Romney said to applause. “If you mess up big time, you lose your job, you lose your investment, lose the jobs of other people. The private sector is not forgiving.”

Romney's message connected at Landerhaven, where he was among conservatives who believe in pro-business, laissez-faire politics, whether they own a business or not. But I wonder how much this message will resonate with people who’ve already lost their jobs or are underemployed.

CEO candidates can’t count on as much support today as Romney’s father did in the 1960s. It’s not just that Tea Party voters are pushing the Republican Party to the right. It’s that the working class has become more Republican.

“Reagan Democrats” aren’t Democrats anymore. They’re conservatives. They don’t like government, taxes, or liberalism. But they’re populist conservatives. They’re not eager to vote for a guy who reminds them of their boss.

Romney needs to get better at talking to people who are suffering from the economic downturn. But part of his problem goes deeper than rhetoric or style. His defense of the “unforgiving” private sector may turn double-edged on him.

The president’s campaign has already filmed attack-ad footage of steel workers who lost their jobs after Bain Capital took over their mill. Obama’s stump-speech line about not going “back to the same policies that got us into this mess” aims the poor economy back at the Republicans and financial-firm executives. In a bad economy, a campaign between a liberal-activist president and a CEO-challenger will be a clear, clarifying fight and a close call.

Voinovich on debt talks: House Republicans 'would rather lose than win'

When the debt ceiling talks in Washington collapsed this weekend, I thought of George Voinovich. I interviewed the former senator June 2 for the current issue of Inside Business, and I asked him about the fiscal future of the country.

"Bleak," he said. "They'll fiddle-faddle around."

Voinovich sketched out a mostly prescient preview of the debt ceiling talks. House Speaker John Boehner "has a problem, because he has a bunch of newer members who really are not dry behind the ears, and many of them, because of their positions, would rather lose than win," Voinovich said. "He’s got to try to keep that group together.

"So I think that the House will increase the debt limit temporarily." (Even that hasn't happened so far. Democrats reject a temporary fix.) "They will then say they’re going to have a 'conversation' about dealing with the debt. The conversation will go nowhere because they will not agree to new taxes.

"The fact is you cannot get the job done without increasing taxes."

That quote there highlights the difference between Voinovich and most Republicans in Washington today. Many House conservatives have refused to raise the debt ceiling without severe spending cuts, but they refuse to raise any taxes to deal with the debt. Voinovich is a different kind of conservative. He's a deficit hawk. Confronting the debt is his top priority, and he'd be willing to raise taxes as well as cut spending to do it.

Freed from life in Washington, Voinovich sounds as frustrated with his fellow Republicans in the nation’s capital as he is with the Democrats. In my interview with him, he explains why he often calls President Obama a socialist. But he also blasts fellow Republicans in Washington for not listening to regular people and putting partisan battles ahead of the good of the country.

To read Voinovich's thoughts in the July-August Inside Business, click here.

Kucinich convinces House to vote on Libya

Dennis Kucinich might be a gadfly, an "outlier," a radical solo act in Congress, but you can't say he's ignored. Not after today, when the House is finally, belatedly, debating the war in Libya.

Right now, the House is debating Kucinich's bill that would force President Obama to end U.S. participation in the NATO air strikes in Libya in 15 days. It's also debating House Speaker John Boehner's hastily written alternative, which calls on Obama to justify the operation to Congress and prohibits introducing American ground troops. Votes are set on both bills today.

It's a major shift from a few weeks ago, when Congress looked ready to give up on the War Powers Act with barely a whimper. The controversial 1973 law says presidents have to stop military actions after 60 days if they don't get approval from Congress. No president has ignored the War Powers Act like Obama has with Libya. The 60 days came and went last month, with hardly anyone in Congress raising a fuss.

But Kucinich pushed ahead with his bill, which started attracting a surprising amount of support from Republicans ready to stand up for Congress' power to declare war. Take a look at this Washington Post story on the Libya bills, which calls Kucinich "one of Congress' perennial outliers," but says his bill attracted "much broader support than expected."

Boehner almost found himself outflanked. He had to pull Kucinich's bill off the House floor Wednesday out of fear it might pass. "Boehner argued that it would be politically dangerous to essentially turn over the floor to Kucinich," the Capitol newspaper Roll Call reported yesterday.

Kucinich responded with a letter yesterday arguing that his bill is the real way to defend the War Powers Act and Congress' war-making authority.

This may not actually affect the war much. That Washington Post story also says Obama shows no intention of changing his approach with Congress on Libya. But Kucinich at least helped Congress stiffen its spine and assert itself about presidents making war. He made himself a force in the Libya debate -- or rather, he forced Congress to even have a debate about the war.

Update, 2:05 p.m.: Kucinich's bill was voted down, 265-148. Boehner's bill passed, 268-145. Interestingly, more Republicans than Democrats supported Kucinich's bill. 3:05 p.m.: Here's the Post story on the two votes.

Kucinich will vote yes on health care

It was a moment of truth for Dennis Kucinich: Would he preserve his progressive purity by voting down the biggest progressive reform of our time?

No. He's changed his mind: He's voting yes on the president's health-care plan.

"This is not the bill I wanted to support," Kucinich said at a Capitol press conference this morning. "However, after careful discussions with President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, my wife Elizabeth and close friends, I’ve decided to cast a vote in favor of the legislation."

Notice how his wife ranks up there with the president and the speaker of the house? The health-care talks in the Kucinich household must've been as weighty as Dennis' high-pressure ride with Obama in Air Force One. The young, striking Mrs. Kucinich doesn't just help her husband by attracting press cameras and coverage. She's become his conscience, an adviser who reminds him what he stands for -- and tells him when compromise isn't a sell-out, but a wise strategy.

"In the past week it has become clear that the vote on the final health care bill will be very close," he said at a 10 a.m. press conference at the Capitol. "I know I have to make a decision, not on the bill as I would like to see it, but the bill as it is." (See the Plain Dealer and The Hill for more coverage. Or, read his full remarks here.)

After holding out for government-run health care longer than most anyone, Kucinich has accepted something Sherrod Brown has been reminding progressives for months now: Reform in America is almost always accomplished step by step, not all at once.

"If my vote is to be counted, let it now count for passage of the bill, hopefully in the direction of comprehensive health care reform," he said today.

At the last moment, on the verge of either making himself irrelevant at a moment of great change or actually scuttling it, Kucinich proved that even he knows how to compromise.

Obama pressures Kucinich in Strongsville, on Air Force One

Dennis Kucinich flew to Cleveland on Air Force One with Barack Obama yesterday, and the president spent the flight pressing stubborn Dennis to vote for his health-care reforms. Up on the podium in Strongsville, Obama turned up the pressure with a smile. He name-dropped Kucinich, an audience member shouted, "Vote yes!" and Obama turned and said, "Did you hear that, Dennis?"

But Kucinich has already said he's voting no on the Democrats' health-care bill. {See update below.} His Sunday Plain Dealer op-ed lays out his reasons why: Forcing people to buy private health insurance, without giving them a publicly-run option, risks exposing more people to insurance-company abuses.

Kucinich is taking a huge risk. Voting no will preserve his reputation as a champion of government-run health care -- and his self-image as a solitary hero. But it'll anger his progressive allies and donors across the country. They'll see what many Clevelanders saw in 2007 when I wrote my Kucinich profile, "The Missionary": His solitary far-left stands can make him irrelevant when progressives try make real but incremental change. Markos Moulitsas, founder of the left-wing blog Daily Kos, says Kucinich should face a Democratic primary challenge in 2012 if he votes no and the bill goes down.

Last night on MSNBC, Rachel Maddow was interviewing U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown, and she mentioned Kucinich in her question about a public option. Without talking about his colleague, Brown drew a distinction between Kucinich's approach and his.

"You understand how progressive movements work," Brown said. "When Social Security was passed in the '30s, it wasn’t all that great at the time. When Medicare was passed, it was good but not great. So much of what we’ve done on abolishing child labor, on safe drinking water and clean air, worker’s compensation and minimum wage: We passed a decent bill and improved on it decade after decade."

Check out this video, with Obama making his case in Strongsville at 0:30 and pressuring Kucinich at 3:38, and Maddow's question to Brown at 8:32.

{Update, 3/17: The pressure worked. Kucinich will vote yes.}

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Mansfield: "Skip, You Mouthed Off"

President Obama is having his climactic beer tonight with Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr., and James Crowley, the Cambridge cop who arrested him. In honor of the occasion, I'd like to recommend an opinion piece on The Daily Beast by local columnist Mansfield Frazier, whom Cool Cleveland recently photographed looking badass on a motorcycle.

How's this for a great headline? "Skip, You Mouthed Off." Frazier pulled off the tough feat of saying at the same time that 1) unfair treatment of black men by cops is very real and 2) the professor should've cooled off and complained later. And he did it with more humor than any other writer I've seen tackle this story. (Well, maybe Mansfield's tied with the writers of The Onion.)

Mansfield's been on CNN talking about his column with scholar Michael Eric Dyson, who called him "one of the great writers in American society right now, especially on politics and culture" (see below, starting at 1:50) and on NBC's Today Show (see farther below).

By the way, what beers are the president, professor, and policeman drinking? Bud Light, Red Stripe and Blue Moon. Update, 7/31: Gates switched to Sam Adams Light (good Massachusetts beer). Vice-president Joe Biden joined in and had a non-alcoholic Buckler.

Rep. Fudge: Let Americans travel to Cuba

Last weekend, on WVIZ's Feagler & Friends, I got to debate U.S. Rep. Marcia Fudge's trip to Cuba. She went to Havana as part of a Congressional Black Caucus delegation and said U.S.-Cuba relations ought to improve.

Most of the commentary I've read about this trip had an old-time Cold War feel to it: The Black Caucus is soft on Commies! -- that kind of thing. But this week, Raul Castro, Hillary Clinton and President Obama all said they want to start a new era of serious talks and better relations. Now, Cleveland's newest congressperson looks like she was ahead of the curve.

Yes, I agree our representatives should bring up human rights and political prisoners when they visit undemocratic countries. Yes, smoking a cigar with Cuban president Raul Castro seems kind of decadent (unless you think of it as a peace pipe).

But let's not just criticize the theatrics of the visit. Fudge brings up a serious issue (check out her letter to the Plain Dealer): She's co-sponsored a bill to repeal the law that makes it illegal for most Americans to travel to Cuba.

Because Cuba is a neighbor, 90 miles from Florida, and a Cold-War flashpoint that made both the right and the left froth at the mouth, and because anti-Castro Cuban exiles form a voting bloc in a swing state, Americans live with a double standard: we can travel to Communist China and Communist Vietnam, but we can't spend a dime in Communist Cuba.

"Open or free travel encourages the free exchange of ideas, which has been known to silently tear down walls, both literally and figuratively," Fudge said in a a statement last week.

Here's Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times arguing for lifting the travel ban, an article from Foreign Policy that says we shouldn't, and Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post, who's reported from Cuba 10 times, saying we should lift the ban but not trust Cuba.

What's it like to visit Cuba? Here's a vivid story Jesse Tinsley wrote about Havana for the Plain Dealer last year.

More inaugural blogging

On Cleveland Magazine's main blog, intern Michael Bartlett has a report from the inauguration simulcast at the Palace Theater in Playhouse Square.  Check it out.

'Change has come'

"Change has come," read the headlines on the Plain Dealer's front page and the Washington Post web site this morning. It's a quote from President-Elect Barack Obama's speech in Chicago last night.

It's not just a turn of Obama's campaign slogan. Obama was echoing "A Change is Gonna Come," the Sam Cooke song and civil-rights anthem.

Cooke wrote the song in 1963 as a reply to Bob Dylan's "Blowin' in the Wind" and a response to his arrest after he tried to stay at a whites-only hotel in Louisiana. Here's the third verse and chorus:

I go to the movie, and I go downtown

Somebody keep telling me "Don't hang around"

It's been a long time coming

But I know a change is gonna come

And here's Obama's line in the speech last night:

"It's been a long time coming, but tonight, because of what we did on this date, in this election, at this defining moment, change has come to America."

By echoing the song, Obama acknowledged that his election showed America can live up to the civil rights movement's moral ideal.

I've embedded a video of the speech above (the line comes at 2:10), followed by Cooke's recording of the song from YouTube. Or, you can read the transcript of the speech here and read the lyrics here. Here's Wikipedia's entry about the song.

Obama wins

Barack Obama and Joe Biden won the presidential race last night, 52 percent to 47 percent in the popular vote, and a likely 364-174 total in the Electoral College.

The painting above is the latest work from Michelangelo Lovelace, the Cleveland artist I profiled in the September issue. It's a tribute to Obama and Biden, titled "Stand Up and Be Counted." For a larger version, click here.

My prediction

Last night a friend took bets on which states Obama and McCain would win. The winner of the bet wins $20.08. Here's my prediction, mapped out.

He also asked for a popular vote prediction. I said Obama 51, McCain 44.

We'll see how I did!

Palin in Lakewood

Sarah Palin spoke this morning at the Lakewood Park bandshell, promising lower taxes and energy independence if she and John McCain are elected.

"Only John McCain has the experience, wisdom, and courage to get this economy back on track," Palin said. McCain will have a "pro-private sector, pro-business agenda" and will confront the $10 trillion federal debt with a spending freeze in all categories except defense and veterans' and seniors' benefits, she said.

The vice-presidential candidate also promised tax relief for "every American and every business" under a McCain Administration. She promised to lower income taxes, double the deduction for families and cut the capital gains tax.

As she and McCain have for weeks, Palin tried to cast doubt on Barack Obama's often-repeated pledge to cut taxes for people making less than $250,000 a year. Obama would reverse earlier tax cuts for those making more than that. "Now is the worst possible time to even think about raising taxes on you and your small business," Palin told the crowd. She claimed Obama's $250,000 figure was shifting lower, and that an Obama spokesperson recently said only people under $120,000 would get the cut. (She was likely referrring to a recent quote from New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson. Here's a summary of Republican talking points on this question.) Many audience members behind her were wearing oval stickers with the name "Joe" on them, a reference to "Joe the Plumber," the suburban Toledo man who challenged Obama on his tax plan.

Palin promised to make the country energy-independent through increased domestic production of oil, natural gas, and coal. She said Obama plans to bankrupt the coal industry, citing a January interview with the San Francisco Chronicle that has gotten new attention in recent days. In the quote, Obama suggests that his proposal to limit greenhouse emissions would make new coal plants economically infeasible unless they use new clean-coal technology.

"We have the domestic solutions right here," Palin said. "We'll drill, baby, drill, and mine, baby, mine!"

The Alaska governor also pledged more federal support for education of special-needs children, while hinting at her ticket's opposition to abortion. She and McCain, she said, share a "vision of America where every innocent life counts and every child is cherished."

Warning against putting Democrats in control of the presidency and both houses of Congress, Palin attacked U.S. Rep. Barney Frank's recent call for a 25 percent cut in defense spending. "This is a time of multiple conflicts and obvious danger, still, to the homeland," Palin said. "Do they think the terrorists have changed their minds?"

Palin ended the rally with praise for McCain and swipes at Obama's eloquence. McCain, she said, "inspires us not just with words, but with heroic and trustworthy deeds."

The opening act at the rally was Shauna Carter (not sure I have the spelling right), a country singer from central Ohio, who sang heartfelt ballads accompanied by a guitar player.

U.S. Sen. George Voinovich introduced Palin and her husband, Todd. "She has energized our base like nothing I have ever seen!" Voinovich said. He said he'd talked to "lots of Democrats who say Obama is too far to the left and with no executive experience, and [they ask,] how [is] a person who was a state senator and hasn't completed his first term in the U.S. Senate qualified to be president? ... It's not a question of whether Sarah has the experience to be vice-president of the United States, it's whether Obama has the experience to be president of the United States."

Obama in Cleveland

Barack Obama spoke to tens of thousands of people at Cleveland's downtown Mall this evening, from supporters who waited all afternoon to get close to the stage to football fans who stopped by after the Browns game.

Obama led with the economy. "The last things we can afford is four more years of the same old tired theories," he argued, "when no one in Washington is minding the store, so Wall Street goes crazy, and lobbyists block [needed] regulations." He acknowledged John McCain's break with George W. Bush on the issue of torture, but claimed that where the economy is concerned, "He hasn't been a maverick; he's been a sidekick."

Defending his tax plan, Obama took a shot at McCain's alliance with "Joe the Plumber" on the issue. He said, "99.9 percent of plumbers make less than $250,000 a year," which means their taxes would be cut, not raised, under Obama's proposal. "This is what they [Republicans] do in every election," he claimed. "They use ordinary people and make them afraid, so they can protect the fat cats."

Obama claimed his plan to stimulate the economy by spending federal money on infrastructure -- roads, bridges, rail, fiber optic networks -- would create 2 million jobs. He proposed spending $15 billion a year on renewable energy, which he claimed would lead to 5 million jobs (indirectly, he must mean, since that'd be $12,000 per job over four years).

He sounded like a New Democrat, a centrist in the Bill Clinton mode, when he pitched his program as a third way between old, false choices. "It's not about big government versus small government. That's the old way of thinking. We need a better government, a more honest government, a competent government." On Iraq, "We don't have to choose between retreating from the world and fighting a war without end."

He cracked some jokes at Dick Cheney's expense. "Yesterday, Dick Cheney came out of his undisclosed location. He hit the campaign trail, and said he is delighted to support John McCain." Not only did he use Cheney's endorsement to assert that McCain would continue Bush Administration policies, he got to play off the vice-president's dour public image -- he said it was "interesting to picture Dick Cheney being delighted."

Rain started to fall. Obama ad-libbed. "A little rain never hurt anybody. Sunshine is on the way. We've only got two more days of these clouds."

Update: The PD has a video of highlights from the rally.

Springsteen opens for Obama

I think any smart politician would want Bruce Springsteen vouching for him at campaign events. The singer's six-song set and speech at Barack Obama's rally in downtown Cleveland today were plain-spoken and stirring.

Springsteen, appearing solo with an acoustic guitar, started his set with "The Promised Land," a 1978 song about resolve in the face of adversity. Next came "Youngstown," a stark ballad that mentions Northeast Ohio in the first line, followed by "Thunder Road," the classic first track from the Born to Run album. He sang the last line, "We're pulling out of here to win," to huge cheers.

With his wife, Patti, Springsteen sang a song he hasn't released on an album yet, dedicating it to Obama. "I'm working on a dream/Though it can feel so far away," went the chorus. He got the crowd singing on "This Land Is Your Land," and even sang one of Woody Guthrie's less-known verses, set "in the squares of the cities" and in a "relief office" -- noting the moment and evoking the Great Depression.

"For 35 years, I've been writing about what it means to be an American," Springsteen told the crowd. He said he believed in "economic and social justice, America as a positive example in the world, truth, transparency, and integrity in government," and a right to a job and a living wage. "Today those freedoms have been damaged and curtailed by a reckless and morally bankrupt administration." His songs, he said, have often measured the distance between the American Dream and reality. "I believe Senator Obama has taken measure of that distance in his own life and in his work." He finished his set with "The Rising," a poetic redemption song, the title track of the album he wrote in response to the 9/11 attacks.

A friend listening elsewhere in the crowd, inspired, texted me to read the words engraved on Public Hall behind Springsteen. He asked me to quote them on the blog, thinking them appropriate for the occasion. They read: "A monument conceived as a tribute to the ideals of Cleveland and builded by her citizens and dedicated to social progress, industrial achievement, and civic interest. Patriotism, progress, culture."

Update: Lots of video of Springsteen's performance on YouTube today, of varying quality. Here he is peforming "This Land Is Your Land" and "Thunder Road." Go to youtube.com and search for Obama, Springsteen, Cleveland for more.

Obama, Springsteen downtown on Sunday

Barack and Michelle Obama are appearing on the downtown Mall on Sunday. The rally starts at 3:45 p.m., with gates opening at 2 p.m. Bruce Springsteen is opening for Obama with a solo acoustic set.

This could be a huge rally, even bigger than John Kerry's election eve rally at the same place in 2004, especially because, as The Professor points out, Obama's campaign is probably timing this with the Browns game in mind. The game starts at 1, so a stadium full of people will be emptying out around 4:15. Let's hope the tailgaters who stop by the rally aren't too rowdy.

Update: If you're going to the rally, take the Rapid. The Browns crowd and Obama crowd will completely fill downtown. "There won't be parking," the Cleveland police spokesman warns in the Plain Dealer today.

(Photo by Alex Hempton-Smith, from Flickr)

McCain and Obama in Northeast Ohio

John McCain stopped by the Renaissance Cleveland Hotel downtown today for a private meeting and comments (read them here) before a small audience. The Plain Dealer has a quick story and a sharp-looking slideshow online about his visit.

Barack Obama was in Canton giving a new speech his campaign billed as a "closing argument." Here's the PD's video of parts of the speech, and a transcript of what he said.