Democrats want President Obama’s campaign to release the vast, rich amount of data they gained throughout 2012 for use by statewide and local campaigns. I don’t think they should hold their breath.

From the candidates running in 2014 to the state Democratic parties to progressive advocacy groups, there is an intense behind-the-scenes lobbying campaign afoot to pry from Obamaland its groundbreaking voter database. The data is rich with intricate layers of information about individuals’ voting habits, television viewing tastes, propensity to volunteer, car registration, passions, email address, cellphone numbers, and social media contacts. The historical trove enabled Obama to connect with voters on a highly personal level and get them not only to vote but to actively persuade their neighbors to do the same.

Now that Obama has been reelected, other Democrats are falling over themselves to get their hands on these sophisticated indicators for their own campaigns.

Several top Obama campaign officials, who asked not to be quoted by name, said that no decisions have been made about the data, including where to house it and how to use it to benefit the party.

Those decisions likely won’t be made until closer to the president’s inauguration next month. Among the prime options being discussed by president’s political hands: setting up an independent, not-for-profit entity, run by Obama aides, to manage and keep the electronic files updated so the contacts could be used to further the president’s agenda. Handing over the names to campaigns is not high on the list right now.

Congressional campaigns didn’t get the Obama database in 2008 either, as the 2010 elections made painfully clear. Maybe there was some rationale there, to not dilute the value by handing it over. But the President won’t ever run for another election. And they didn’t exactly utilize the 2008 database to much of a positive effect in governing in the first term. That just sounds like an excuse to guard the data.

The campaign plans to create a “best practices” document that I guess would set guidelines for how to manage campaigns. But that’s a poor substitute for the physical data, which would give candidates a powerful leg up in the midterms.

Obamaland justifies this by saying that the data gained comes from some special attachment to the President, and maybe at a partial level, that’s true. But it speaks more to the demolition of Democratic infrastructure in favor of Obama’s internal networks. The President learned that, when you defund and de-emphasize the progressive infrastructure, suddenly there’s nothing in place to help with a legislative push. So campaign operatives who worked single-mindedly for the benefit of one person’s political future will then turn right around and wade into the governing arena?

MoveOn has downshifted into a glorified petition delivery service. I don’t see anyone rising up to offer an independent, ideological voice as a replacement. As long as the data remains locked up, and the funding channeled to one central source, progressives will have a hard time.

The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard by Jacob de Wet

When I checked last, Rolling Jubilee had raised $456K, and hoped to use it to wipe out over $9.1 million of debt. Unfortunately, there is a risk that some debt forgiveness will be treated as income by the Internal Revenue Service. Yves Smith gives a detailed description of the problems, and urges Rolling Jubilee to spend the money it takes to hire a serious tax lawyer. I agree with her that the FAQ on the site isn’t satisfactory, and I hope the organizers will deal with the problem.

Even if they don’t, many of the beneficiaries will be OK. You only get the income problem to the extent that forgiveness of debt restores you to solvency. The IRS uses a complex rule about solvency which you can find here. Generally, the test is whether your liabilities exceed your assets. Your assets include all of your retirement accounts, even though they can’t be reached by creditors, and any equity you might have in property that is collateral for a debt. Then, you have income to the extent that after the debt forgiveness, you are made solvent.

For example, suppose you have a debt of 50K and total assets of 30K. If a creditor forgives 10K of debt, you are still insolvent, so no income. If the creditor forgives 20K, you are still not solvent, and again, no income. If the creditor forgives 25K, you have income of $5K. Obviously that isn’t a good thing.

Rolling Jubilee will not file the form the lender is supposed to file when it forgives debt. They may not be able to contact the debtor to say that they have forgiven the debt. In that case, the debtor might have income but not know it, and neither would the IRS. That defeats the point of forgiveness of debt, because the debtor is still worried about the debt. Still, it might solve the income problem unless the IRS forces Rolling Jubilee to file the forms. That is a major point raised by Yves Smith.

If Rolling Jubilee can find the debtor, there is another alternative. Suppose the debt is a deficiency balance from a bad mortgage loan. Forgiveness could easily be big enough to restore the debtor to solvency. The best solution in this case is for Rolling Jubilee to reach out to the debtor to find out how the mortgage came into existence, how the debtor was treated during while the mortgage was in default, and how the foreclosure was handled. It is highly likely that the debtor has valid defenses to the debt. It may have been a fraud from the outset, the debtor might have been abused by the servicer in the foreclosure process, and the foreclosure itself may have had serious defects. It is highly likely that the debtor has several potential defenses to the debt.

In this case, Rolling Jubilee and the debtor can enter into a settlement agreement in which both sides release each other from all claims. In that situation, there is no debt forgiveness. Instead, each side gives consideration to the other to avoid litigation and serious loss. The situation can be improved if the debtor provides a statement of assets and liabilities and a budget showing that collection of the amount owed is highly unlikely. It is further improved if the debtor pays something towards the debt. That money can be used by Rolling Jubilee to offset the expenses of reaching out and settling, or even to buy more debt.

The first purchases are of medical debt. In some cases that could be enough to restore a person to solvency. It too can be settled along the same lines. There may be defenses even to medical debt, because of the billing practices of the medical community or because the hospital screwed up on collecting from an insurance company. There are more novel defenses, such as duress, in that the person wound up getting treated while frightened by illness and unable to protect herself from predatory billing and overtreatment. Hospitals and doctors bill differently depending on a number of factors, so that may give rise to a defense.

Even if there are no valid defenses, there are delay and litigation possibilities and there are grave difficulties in collection. In this case, the financial information and a reasonable settlement amount will justify the settlement, producing no income. It has the added benefit of giving the debtor an opportunity to pay the debt relief forward, which is very important to many people.

Rolling Jubilee is a great idea and I hope it has legs. It could open the door to a discussion of the place of debt in a violently unequal society.

Jon Walker, out in the noonday sun

It was 72 degrees fahrenheit yesterday in the nation’s capital. It was so warm I was actually able to enjoy an outdoor dinner party in the middle of December. To say this is unusual for the District of Columbia would be an understatement — the average temperature for this time of year is normally 20 degrees lower. The weather in DC is downright freaky.

I found it both interesting and very sad that just weeks after an “unusual” devastating hurricane and during an “unusual” winter heat wave, the only long-term issue Congress is debating is actuarial projections from a budget office that has a rather poor track record of predicting the future.

While the east coast is directly experiencing the effects of climate change in both minor and highly destructive ways, there is almost zero focus on trying to address the issue from our political leaders. It shows how completely hollow the rhetoric about “addressing the deficit” truly is when they say it’s all about helping the younger generation.

While Congress fights about just how much more they should force old people to pay for basic health care in 2024, the world is slowly burning. Our real long-term problems are ignored in favor of focusing on the fake ones.