Republicans In Another World? - you decide!

I heard something the other day that got me thinking:  are the rich and powerful (aided by the Republican Party) attempting to live in a parallel universe so they can avoid the reality of this world?  Possibly, if you consider some of the following:

Neo-conservative Republicans have been building a separate world for themselves and their sponsors -- Big Oil, Wall Street, Big Banks, Big Insurance, agricultural conglomerates, health monopolies and more.  The prevailing belief in this separate world is that the rich  are the people who are JOB creators as long as their taxes are cut to the bone, they are not restricted by regulations and regulators, they are able to take money from the middle class and workers and feather their own nests.  The conservatives have enabled the richest 1-2% to prosper while taking away or diminishing anything that represents help or aid for the “little people” the “lower classes” and the “needy”.

They believe that their universe will be much better when there is less government control, and fewer services, and less intervention in people’s lives.  In fact, the government in their world is not less controlling: it will try to control our thinking (science is bogus); our religious orientation (prayer and creationism in schools); sexual orientation (no gay marriages and mandated classes to change gays to straights); our ability to plan our own families (no more funding of Planned Parenthood and no choice on abortion); and our open society (limit immigration and no affirmative action).  They say they want to take back the government, but they really want a government of their own choosing in a parallel universe, apart from the realities that dog real people. 

In the real world are people who live from paycheck to paycheck (perhaps 77% of us).  In the real world are people who have to struggle to find health care that won’t break them with high premiums, inadequate benefits and restricted coverage.  For millions without health insurance, it’s worse because they must use emergency rooms and acute care clinics, or even neighborhood clinics run by volunteers, or simply choose not to seek care at all.  In the real world, there are people who are challenged by disabilities who need help and services that will enable them to reach a higher level of independence, if that’s possible.  In the real world are aged and retired persons who do not have “golden parachutes“, or pensions that are in the millions.  Millions of them get along day-to-day on just their social security checks.  In city after city, students attend schools that have inadequate buildings, less than adequate materials, if any, and over-crowded classrooms. In the real world, there are families with children who are homeless, there are war veterans who are homeless, there are mentally disabled and challenged people who are living on the streets, and there are millions of unemployed persons looking for work, and many people who have experienced foreclosure on their homes.

While America moves ever closer to being less than number one in health care, public education, care of the less fortunate, and many other categories, these conservative Republicans continue to speak of “American exceptionalism”, of no tax raises for the rich, of big subsidies for Big Oil and many others, of incentives for business, while opposing Medicare and Medicaid, and many other so-called “welfare” programs for the poor and middle class, wanting to raise the retirement age for Social Security along with establishing risk-laden private accounts for those who are approaching retirement.  It is obvious that these neo-conservatives live in a “Bizarro World” (an inverted world made famous by a Jerry Seinfeld episode) unlike the real world in which the rest of us must live.  "Making the rich pay higher tax rates is both overwhelmingly popular and necessary in these tough economic times. Cutting life-saving programs while saying new tax rates for the rich are off the table is an extreme position, completely out of step with the majority of Americans." (Economic Policy Institute)

Many Conservative Republicans live in such a bizarre parallel world where they have contact with their own kind, their own income level, and their own ideology.  They tend to live in communities or enclaves where they can control who attends their churches and their schools; their social events, and with whom they will associate.  More & more the rich (including over half of the members of Congress: Senators and Representatives) are walled off from the real world, literally and figuratively.  They have the finest houses; the finest schools; finest communities; isolated vacation spots; luxurious playthings; corporate & private jets; gated communities; exclusive stores catering only to them; private doctors, lawyers, accountants, maybe even lobbyists.  They touch the real world only when absolutely necessary; sometimes at events where they raise money for charities, although these are often just more of the same with only “their kind“ in attendance!

Just ask yourself: when was the last time you bumped into a multi-millionaire or billionaire on vacation, in a grocery store or drug store, at the movies, shopping in Target or Wal-Mart, on the street, at a party, in your doctor‘s office or in your local hospital?  There's a reason they’re not where you are.  They simply can afford the most luxurious and exclusive services and products; such as vacations: “from top hotels, to homes in Monaco or the Seychelles, to private islands in the Caribbean.” (RichLiving.co.uk)

Many of them don‘t even fly on public airlines any more.  “So what does it mean to charter an aircraft? You pay for exclusive use of the aircraft rather than for the seats individually. This means that you are not restricted to a schedule. You decide when to fly, with a wide choice of departure and destination airports.  The benefits of this are a more comfortable journey, and your choice of airplane. A private jet can be booked at short notice, and will wait for you if you are delayed. The biggest benefit of all is the privacy, especially for celebrities. You can board almost immediately upon arrival at the airport via a VIP lounge, and disembark just as quickly and discretely at your destination, straight into a waiting chauffeur driven limousine” (RichLiving.co.uk)
   Inside of a Hawker-125 800 private jet.

Luxury motor yachts have long been associated with the rich and famous.  Everyone has seen pictures of these big boats docked in Monaco, Florida and at other exclusive locations around the world.

Yes, my friends, “exclusive” is the operative word: “excluding, or tending to exclude all others; shutting out other considerations, happenings, existences, etc.  given or belonging to no other; not shared or divided; sole.  Excluding certain people or groups, as for social or economic reasons; undemocratic.  Dealing only in costly items; being the only one of its kind.  Not including or allowing for; ignoring.”

Finally, we come to what may be the ultimate symbol of exclusiveness: the gated community; the guarded penthouse or patrolled grounds; the protected communities.

The former first lady of Alaska, Sarah Palin, recently bought a home in Scottsdale, Ariz. for $1.695 million, according to reports. The gated home was previously sold one year ago for $803,650, according to public records. (Photos courtesy of Trulia. By Jessica Dickler)
 

The great room has double-height ceilings, a stone floor and a carved stone fireplace. The staircases feature wrought iron railings.  And you thought that money you spent for one of her books was a good investment?  It was -- for her!

Maybe that is something we need to take away from this:  the money that many millionaires and billionaires have accumulated comes from YOU in the form of tax breaks and incentives for them; in the form of your purchasing of their overpriced products and services; in the form of political contributions to them or their cronies; even in the form of investments, since the labor of many of you contributes to the success of businesses and services in which their investments are made.

The accumulation of wealth in this country is not done simply by being enterprising and innovative.  It is done on the backs of ordinary people who have contributed their lives, energy and labor so that 1-2% of our total population can become rich.  It is, then, somewhat disingenuous to say that the rich deserve what they accumulate.  They can be worthy of  riches only by paying their fair share in taxes; by giving (a lot!) back through charities, and by seeking to be fair and just in all their dealings.  A Tall order that too many have simply abandoned in their quest to live in a separate world, where luxury, exclusiveness, and power are all that truly matter. 

Defending Public Servants

On his father’s birthday, David Goodfriend on MSNBC paid tribute to him (and to all public sector employees) for spending a lifetime (or a good portion thereof ) serving the interests of fellow citizens.  What he made clear is something that must be re-iterated for all the ordinary citizens who believe the ranting of the radical Right-Wing.  Public employees are not the cause of our economic woes; they are not earning exorbitant salaries and benefits attributed to them by that same cadre of bamboozlers; and, they are not the bumbling bureaucrats nor the wastrels they are made out to be by the Right-wing.

I am writing today as a person who has worked in the private sector (retail); in a small business (print shop); as (technically) self-employed; as a federal employee for a summer;  in a community action agency; and finally for 25 years as a government (state) worker.  I have, during my varied work-life, from the age of sixteen to age sixty-two, been both a union and non-union worker, in both the private and public sectors. While I did receive an adequate salary and benefit package as a state worker, it was not extravagant, and neither is the pension I now receive.  As a matter of fact, I probably received a better benefits package (adjusted for inflation) when I was self-employed in a religious institution than when I entered state service, simply because a house was provided and maintained free of charge (and property taxes paid), in addition to receiving health insurance, life insurance, pension at no cost to me, along with very flexible sick, personal, and vacation time, and emergency help (one time with car payments) when absolutely needed.   

In accord with this personal experience, I present a few thoughts today as a contrast to those who disparage public employees.

1)   People are human no matter in which sector they work.  There are good employees and bad employees; there are very dedicated employees and some who are not so dedicated;  there are very active employees and there are lazy employees.    There are some who go out of their way to be helpful and useful and there are others who go out of their way to be unhelpful and useless.  There are some who are there just to collect a paycheck and a pension; there are others who are there for the satisfaction of knowing they did a good job, brought help to some people, saved or influenced a life, or changed things for the better.  Supervisors are no different:  they are as varied as just described.  Some are tyrants and some are mentors; some coach and some belittle; some cheerlead  and support while others take delight in criticizing everyone. 
   
The point to make is that the public sector and the private sector are both flawed because human beings are flawed; but both can produce much of value for the rest of us because human potential is also unlimited.

2)    The public sector is not limited to “bureaucrats”.  The picture painted too often is that government employees are bureaucrats who sit around all day planning ways to increase “red tape”; to regulate and destroy incentive; to decrease efficiency, and to spend money in an orgy of inefficiency and ineffectiveness.  Nothing could be further from the truth, in my experience.

First of all, budgeting for efficiency and effectiveness was a watchword, at least in my agency.  In fact, “do more with less” was almost a battle-cry!  I know of few departments, or agencies, or units, or teams that were there simply to spend money.  They were there mainly to carry out their specific mission as efficiently and effectively as possible.  In fact, most supervisors were required to evaluate their individual team members on how effectively they carried out their assigned goals and objectives with the resources available.

And that brings up the “aimlessness” that is often charged or implied against public sector workers.  Most cadres of workers - whether a team or unit or office - had goals and objectives to meet, as did individual workers.  In my case, I not only had to develop a set of  these for the state, but was required to submit a yearly Goal Plan and evaluation report for the federal government which oversaw my project/program. 

Secondly, public employees are not limited to desks.  Some are in laboratories, others in schools, others fighting fires, and others on the front lines of being first responders to emergencies and citizen needs; and others outdoors following postal routes or policing hiking trails.  And, let us not forget the armed services personnel - all recruited, trained, commissioned, and paid for by government funds, and overseen by one of the largest bureaucracies in the world--the Department of Defense.  Moreover, armed services personnel not only fight for their country, but many are doing all kinds of construction and re-construction for the welfare of other nations and their populace.

Finally, let us not forget that many government personnel fall under a large heading of “field agents.”  They spend a major portion of their time in cities, in rural areas, throughout this country (and abroad), attending to the needs and welfare of others:  CIA, FBI, EPA, FEMA, SBA, ATF, etc.  Departments of Agriculture and Interior even have some field agents; and how about all those forest rangers attending to all those national parks, preserves, historic sites?

3)   Public employees, as a whole and on average, are not over-compensated, as some would have you believe.  This is especially true now that states, in particular, have begun to reduce pension and health benefit packages; in addition, pay freezes are prevalent in states and the federal government.  But even when I was in the public sector, being paid at a management level, the compensation was not out-of-line with comparable positions in the private sector.  In fact, a number of my colleagues complained that they could be making much more in the private sector; and some did make the move to the private sector for an increase in salary and benefits. 

Not even at the highest appointed positions in the federal government are salary and benefits out-of line.  Think how many private sector CEOs and others come into government as high-level appointees, complain of the sacrifices they are making, and soon return to the private sector in order to rake-in what they were missing in their short tenure!  And just to tweak politicians a bit, where do they go when their legislative tenure is ended?  To the “well-compensated” public sector?  Not likely; more often than not to the private sector (often in firms they dealt with in Congress) where they can feather their nests in a manner that is too often outrageous! 

Of course, if you simply compare apples to oranges, you can make a case, as some do, that the public sector is a better deal.  But, in order to do that, you have to skew the comparison, rather than make it straightforward.  For instance, if you take from the civil service list of jobs a certain kind of clerk that is really a top-level office manager and compare that with an average clerk’s salary in the private sector, you have rendered a false comparison that will favor the public sector job as higher-paying.  In other words, just comparing jobs from civil service lists, without researching the job qualifications, duties, special provisions and requirements, can yield a false comparison with the private sector.  In my own case, my position paid a higher salary than private sector jobs of the same title simply because my job involved many more personnel to supervise, a statewide rather than city- or county-wide responsibility, and a much larger budget to oversee.  This is not to say that there aren’t jobs in the public sector that pay more than comparable jobs in the private sector, but they are nowhere as plentiful as the public sector detractors would have you believe.

4)    Finally, public employees find satisfaction in serving the public welfare, not in gouging the taxpayers.  Public employee motivation, in my experience, is generally of a positive nature.  Most of the people with whom I worked were dedicated to the welfare and well-being and independence of the persons whom they served, who happened to be persons with mental retardation and developmental disabilities.  Many, like myself, were often in the field, examining their programs and trying through various means to improve upon them in order to bring greater benefit to the users of their services. 

In the twenty-five years that I served with this particular agency, I saw great accomplishments: huge numbers of residents of large institutions (especially children) transitioned to community living;  self-advocacy increased among the served population; more and better services available to the adult cohort; numbers of small residences built, more apartments utilized and family placements made; large institutions closed; normalized living realized; a larger voice for parents; integrated education in public schools; heath care enhanced and drug interventions restricted; zero tolerance of abusive actions toward the people served.   Suffice to say that momentous changes occurred during the years I served in this agency, and they occurred because public employees not only did their jobs, but stood up as innovators, as advocates for the people they served, and even as whistle-blowers in circumstances where this was necessary.

Instead of vilifying public employees, attacking their bargaining rights, their jobs and their benefits, politicians need first to examine the results of public service and advocate for those who do their jobs well, who contribute every day to the well-being of individuals, communities and the nation.  Politicians, of necessity, must continue to find ways to save taxpayer dollars, but should not, in the process, diminish the accomplishments, the inventiveness, the dedication, the sacrifices, the motivations of public employees.  They are teachers, first responders, soldiers, doctors, nurses, researchers, inventors, life-savers, neighbors, and patriots.  They are, above all, partners with all of us in helping citizens realize the freedoms, the opportunities, the benefits and the hopes that are the well-spring of our representative democracy.

Time for Some Private Sector Responsibility

The main emphasis of Republicans in Congress on JOBs is that it is the private sector that creates jobs, and that it is government’s responsibility to create an atmosphere favorable to job creation by cutting taxes, providing incentives, and unburdening business from restrictive regulations and rules.  That’s basically their plan for job creation.

As it stands now, the private sector has been granted some of the lowest tax rates ever on upper incomes; incredible incentives and tax breaks (such as new equipment depreciation and tax deferments on profits earned overseas); huge subsidies; lowest rate in decades on capital gains and on inheritances.  Let’s just say that the atmosphere under Republican conservative ideology over the past thirty or more years, has powerfully favored business interests, but not the interests of the middle class, whose wages are flat, and in many cases, non-existent.  It is the richest 1% in this country that have benefited far beyond what others have experienced.

So why, may I ask, have we not seen corresponding job growth?  One reason is that big corporations are multi-national and they have found that their largest profits are being earned in other countries.  Example: Coca-Cola, 80% of whose profits are earned outside the United States. 

Another reason, of course, is a stagnant economy, and deep recession, caused in large measure by Republican laissez-faire attitudes, resulting legislation and lack of regulation which brought about the recession in the first place.  Add on their two wars in the Middle East, as well as tax-cuts for the richest 2%, and we have a recipe for disaster. 

The Obama administration gets blamed for over-spending and causing more debt, but that spending was predicated on stimulating the economy and trying to correct for the neglect and profligacy of the Reagan, H.W. Bush and G.W. Bush administrations.  A debate still rages as to whether the “stimulus” was a failure, as Republicans allege, or whether it saved millions of jobs (of teachers, policemen and firefighters for example) as the Democrats allege. 

Supposedly, these factors have combined to scare off  investment in old and new industries, new jobs, new ventures. 

Meanwhile, the private sector is sitting on $2 trillion in profits, and doing nothing for the country with that money.  Are they in cahoots with Republicans in Congress who are sabotaging the passage of any bills that might have to do with  job creation?  Senator Schumer (D-NY) is on to something when he surmises that there may very well be a conspiracy to prevent a turnaround in the economy in order to prevent President Obama’s re-election.  I have believed that for some time: that those sitting on enormous profits will suddenly make them available to hire, to invest, to push the economy forward when it will either serve to elect a Republican President or right after a Republican President is elected.   

We have come down to the real issue here.  What has the private sector done for us lately that will get us out of this economic mess?  They’re getting the breaks, the incentives, the subsidies, the favorable regulations, making enormous profits, and yet they have produced few jobs in this country.  And here’s the rub: the Republicans (who say that government can’t produce a job-turnaround; that it can only be done through the private sector), are blaming the President for lack of job growth, even as they block his job-production bills.  You can’t have it both ways!
 
So, it is way past time to call out the private sector and to demand to know: what have you done for your country lately?  Yes, my friends, as July 4th approaches, it comes down to a question of patriotism, defined as “love and loyal or zealous support of one‘s own country.”  In this economic crisis, are corporations and businesses acting for the good of their country and the zealous support of their fellow citizens, or are they intent only on producing outrageous profits, and political power, for themselves? 

Remember, that the Supreme Court has ruled in Citizens United, that these entities are equivalent to private citizens in terms of  having free (political) speech, but isn’t the logical conclusion of that very bad decision that these entities also have the responsibilities of citizenship?  If that’s so, then we have every right to expect them to perform certain civic duties, one of which is to care for and about the unemployed.

So, I propose the following:

1)   Responsibility- it is the civic duty of the CEO-class to create jobs.  They cannot simply sit there, as though helping the country get through this crisis is someone else’s problem.  It isn’t.  They must step up, put profit-mongering in a lesser place, and create jobs simply because the country needs them now, and needs them desperately!  Not only that: they have a responsibility to do something to show that they care for the plight of the unemployed.  They might start by giving a larger percentage of their profits to charities that are trying to assist the homeless, the unemployed, the hungry.  It is a crying shame that corporations are well-known for their lack of charitable giving, even though they make a big show of what little they do in local communities (primarily to enhance their corporate image with the public).  If you don’t believe me, take a look at Forbes.com lists, and note the number of corporations (such as Target, Wal-Mart and Exxon Mobil) who give less than 2% (many give less than 1%) of their total profits to charitable causes!

We need some creativity in this recessionary atmosphere.  How about a contest amongst corporations to see who can guarantee the delivery of the most jobs in urban and rural areas?  How about internships for young people; part-time jobs for the chronically unemployed, that will incorporate job-training?  How about creating jobs in the local community that concentrate on fixing up school buildings, mentoring students, increasing the number of aides in schools (and hospitals)?  Talk to Bill Gates and Warren Buffet; consult with Bill Clinton:  maybe they can provide some ideas for corporations from their vast experience in philanthropy.  Come on; we need corporations and businesses to stand up and make a real difference in these very difficult times.

2)   Accountability - how about having the Chamber of Commerce collect and deliver a monthly report to us on how many jobs were created by the private sector in each month.  Included could be how many ways businesses attempted to create jobs; what innovations were attempted; what businesses did for the unemployed.  And, how about a contrasting report from every corporation and business on how much they have provided toward lobbying, to buy 3rd party ads, to influence legislation or regulations in their favor.  If you’re going to use profits to control the way the people’s business is conducted, you must be accountable to them.

Moreover, why can’t we have a report from each Republican legislator and presidential candidate as to how many guarantees of jobs they have gotten from the private sector each month.  Mitt Romney says he would do a better job than President Obama has done at creating jobs.  Let him come forward with some of his rich friends - they could appear together on television - and let the CEOs, in front of the viewers, sign a guarantee as to how many jobs they will create in this country.  Then let them tell us where and how they will produce those jobs so the unemployed can sign up!  In fact, how about all of those millionaire Republican presidential candidates providing such guarantees?  Give us some accountability: prove that you can guarantee jobs, and that the CEOs will actually put them forward NOW!

Finally, to be truly accountable citizens, how about every corporate CEO declaring a  moratorium on shipping jobs from the US to other countries?  That would certainly be a substantive indication of the extent of their patriotism.
   
3)   Recognition and commendation - those whose actions are commendable in terms of job creation and care of the unemployed should receive national recognition of their efforts.  Again, perhaps the Chamber of Commerce could promote this.

In the face of Republican opposition to government stimulus -- and to government-created jobs -- we have no alternative but to press the private sector for greater attention to domestic job creation.  Tell us what you are doing with your government breaks and incentives that we fund through our taxes.  Increase your voluntary giving to families in need.  Stop sending jobs overseas until this economy is back on track.  Be accountable by daring to reveal how much you give to political parties, lobbying, and 3rd party TV ads.  Be a good corporate citizen.  Show us your patriotism.  If you aren’t willing to act on any of these responsibilities, then be prepared to be singled out as an unpatriotic citizen of our society!