REPUBLICAN SNEAK ATTACK

If you don’t understand how Republicans in Congress use stealth tactics to attack what they don’t like and what does not benefit their benefactors, you are in for a long, hard ride to the bottom of the barrel.

Wouldn’t it be great if we had a strong, independent consumer protection agency that would have the tools to detect and rein in the tricks, deceits and traps of the financial industry, like the fine print in their contracts?  Wouldn’t it be terrific to have a financial regulator in Washington D.C. watching out for families instead of banks?

Guess what?  We already have it, and it’s called the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (C.F.P.B.) created by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.  It is not as independent as one might like, but it does have potential to rein in the financial industry.

Fearful of its potential, Republicans (and some Democrats) in Congress made sure that it was not an entirely independent agency (its housed in the Treasury Department), that its rules are subject to appeal, its budget is capped by law, it is subject to Government Accountability Office oversight, and its executive officer must report annually to Congress. 

Even with those restrictions, three financial industry-courting Republicans are launching a sneak attack on the agency by targeting the very competent candidate to lead the agency, Elizabeth Warren (also attacked today by Sen. Mitch McConnell on Meet The Press).  First, they introduced three bills that would limit the agency’s potential: one, by replacing a single director with a five-member commission (guaranteed to obstruct rule-making); second, by lowering the number of votes that would be required to overturn a C.F.P.B. rule; third, by requiring Senate confirmation of the agency director.  These bills are intended to weaken the agency from its start, and to make it much harder to do its work.

Moreover, these bills have made it possible for the Republicans on the Financial Services Committee in the House to call the intended director before their Committee (when they hold hearings on any of the bills) and to harass her.  One House committee-watcher has said, “I cannot recall one witness treated so badly by so many.  Republicans on the Committee  are out to gut the consumer protection agency and to kneecap Warren.”

Why are the Republicans and Tea Partiers fighting so hard against this agency and its intended director?  Simple.  Consumer protection that is now scattered across at least 12 different federal agencies will be brought together in a quasi-independent Bureau that can regulate mortgage brokers, mortgage lenders and servicers, payday lenders, credit card companies, private student loan providers, and all banks with assets over $10 billion.  Mainly Republican campaign donors, patrons, and supporters are the heads of such financial institutions, so Congressional Republicans are under pressure to do something to stop this agency in its tracks.  Republicans in Congress are scared to death of the potential power of this agency and its director, not only because of its regulatory power, but because it draws its funding directly from the Federal Reserve, and only needs to go to Congress if additional funds are required.

President Obama needs to use a little stealth of his own and make a recess appointment of Ms. Warren to head the agency, and to get it underway.  Republicans may not like the idea of this agency, but consumers like us are going to love it!

Republicans Resist Available Government JOBs and Training

Republicans generally oppose government programs; they claim such programs make people less responsible for themselves, and more dependent on government to solve their problems and to provide funds as needed.  The GOP believes that most issues and problems and help should be addressed by and through the private sector.  Any help that desperate unemployed people might expect from government is being opposed or blocked by a party of ideologues who do not want any government-sponsored jobs program.  Indeed, this party is even reluctant to extend unemployment benefits for anyone out of work for more than 90 days. 

Of course, these same ideologues are often the first to feed at the government trough when they can benefit, or when they can benefit their home district or state which will ultimately benefit them when they campaign.  Their evident hypocrisy leaves the unemployed in a situation where no immediate help is forthcoming.  There will be no JOBs bill.  All that they will make available is their inadequate JOBs Plan, which gives unemployed persons one option: wait for private industry to start hiring again!

Amazingly, there are already several “job” or “job training” programs within various federal departments that could be used to help many people who are unemployed.  These programs could simply be expanded, without having to establish a new or tremendously expanded bureaucracy to oversee them.  Of course, instead of expanding them, the ideologues want to either consolidate them, under-fund them, or end them.

Corporation for National and Community Service

The Corporation for National and Community Service is a federal agency that engages more than five million Americans in service through Senior Corps, AmeriCorps, and Learn and Serve America, and also leads President Obama's national call to service initiative, United We Serve.  The long and painful Great Recession means there is an increasing need for poverty services at a time when there are decreasing resources for government and nonprofit organizations that provide these services. National service workers can play a role in addressing these disparities.

Some National Service programs create full-time positions that are—in most cases—jointly paid for by public and private resources.  National service programs are not designed as long-term career positions, but they have historically helped boost job creation by providing opportunities for difficult-to-employ youth, senior citizens and recent college graduates, while also building nonprofit organizations’ capacity to continue this important social service.

AmeriCorps State and National  The largest of AmeriCorps programs provides funds to local and national organizations and agencies committed to using national service to address critical community needs in education, public safety, health and the environment.    AmeriCorps State and National programs are open to U.S. citizens, nationals, or lawful permanent resident aliens age 17 and older. Members may serve full- or part-time over a period not to exceed 12 months.  Members receive a modest living allowance, student-loan forbearance, health coverage, and child care for those who qualify. After successfully completing their term of service, they receive an AmeriCorps Education Award of up to $5,350. This award can be used to pay off qualified student loans or to finance college, graduate school, or vocational training at eligible institutions.

AmeriCorps VISTA is the national service program designed specifically to fight poverty. VISTA has been on the front lines in the fight against poverty in America for more than 40 years.  VISTA members commit to serve full-time for a year at a nonprofit organization or local government agency, working to fight illiteracy, improve health services, create businesses, strengthen community groups, and much more.
In return for their service, AmeriCorps VISTA members receive a modest living allowance and health benefits during their service, and have the option of receiving a Segal AmeriCorps Education Award or post-service stipend after completing their service.  It is open to both young people and mature adults.

AmeriCorps NCCC (National Civilian Community Corps) is a full-time, team-based residential program for men and women ages 18–24, assigned to one of five campuses.
Drawn from the successful models of the Civilian Conservation Corps of the 1930s and the U.S. military, the mission of AmeriCorps NCCC is to strengthen communities and develop leaders through direct, team-based national and community service.  AmeriCorps NCCC requires an intensive, 10-month commitment. Members receive a living allowance of approximately $4,000 for the 10 months of service (about $200 every two weeks before taxes), housing, meals, limited medical benefits, up to $400 a month for childcare, if necessary, member uniforms, and a Segal AmeriCorps Education Award upon successful completion of the program.

Foster Grandparent Program:  Foster Grandparents serve children with special needs as role models, mentors, and a friend. Serving at one of thousands of local organizations—including faith-based groups, Head Start Centers, schools, and other youth facilities—they help children learn to read, provide one-on-one tutoring, and guide children at a critical time in their lives. Foster Grandparents, age 55 and older, serve up to 40 hours per week. Some volunteers with a low income can qualify to earn a tax-free, hourly stipend of $2.65 per hour. They also receive transportation reimbursement, pre-service orientation, training from the organization where they serve, supplemental accident and liability insurance while on duty, plus a meal while on duty.

Senior Companion Program:  Similar to the Foster Grandparent Program, the SCP serves older adults with special needs, especially helping persons who are frail to remain in their own homes. Whether giving families or professional caregivers much-needed time off, running errands, or simply being a friend, Senior Companions make a difference that strengthens and helps preserve an individual’s independence.  SCs also join with thousands of others to help control the rising costs of health care.   SCs are age 55 and older, serve up to 40 hours per week, and receive a stipend (if qualified), and other benefits listed for FGP.

Find out more at: www.nationalservice.gov

Office of Personnel Management:

STEP provides part-time federal jobs to students that can last as little as one summer or as long as the duration of a college career. STEP positions are paid. The work does not have to be related to one’s field of study.  To be eligible applicant must be in high school, college, vocational school, or graduate school, and must be a U.S. citizen or national in most cases.  If the hiring agency’s appropriation act permits non-citizen employees, and the  client is eligible to work under U.S. immigration laws, participation is allowed.

SCEP allows applicant to gain experience working for the government in a job related to his field of study. Most positions are paid and some also provide academic credit towards a degree.  To participate in SCEP, the hiring agency must have a formal agreement with client’s educational institution. SCEP positions are available to undergraduate and graduate students. Must be a U.S. citizen or national in most cases. However, if eligible to work under U.S. immigration laws, non-citizen applicants can participate in the program.  Successful completion of 640 hours of work within the SCEP program means a person is eligible to be hired to a permanent position without going through the traditional hiring process. Recent additions to the program allow agencies to waive up to half of the required 640 hours for students with certain job-related experience. 

The Presidential Management Fellows Program (PMF) is a prestigious two year program which is designed to prepare a participant for upper-level management positions in the federal government. Must be in the final year of a graduate program and must receive a nomination from applicant’s school before being considered for the PMF program.
For more, see www.opm.gov

Government needs to fill medical jobs and maintain the staffs at 153 Veterans Administration (VA) hospitals and 745 community based clinics, plus there are health care job vacancies at many other federal agencies. When you include civilian medical personnel at military hospitals and administrative personnel that are needed under the new health care legislation, many more are needed.
For more, see http://federaljobs.net/healthcarejobsva.htm

Job Corps of America Job Corps is a free education and training program that helps young people learn a career, earn a high school diploma or GED, and find and keep a good job. For eligible young people at least 16 years of age that qualify as low income, Job Corps provides the all-around skills needed to succeed in a career and in life.  Transitioning from the military and starting a new career can be challenging.  Job Corps can help also help Vets through the VETS Demonstration Project.

Preparation for work in nontraditional fields is a major pathway out of poverty for women, but the only federal grant program specifically designed to train women for nontraditional occupations is the Women in Apprenticeship and Nontraditional Occupations (WANTO), which is 17 years old, funded at only $1 million, and focused entirely on construction.

A number of states are using short-time compensation programs to prevent layoffs and maintain employment. Short-time compensation, also called work sharing, is an option within the federal-state UI system that provides some employers with an alternative to layoffs. Employers can reduce work hours instead of laying people off, and workers can collect partial UI benefits to help make up for lost wages. Seventeen states have short-time compensation programs. Some of these states have experienced a dramatic increase in the program’s use.

Congress should consider appropriating additional funds into the WIA Title I youth program to allow the extension of jobs and supports beyond summer for out of school youth ages 16 to 24. Congress should also consider an additional appropriation to reactivate Youth Opportunity (YO) Grants that are already authorized in the WIA legislation. These grants direct funding to areas of concentrated poverty to implement education, training and employment activities directed at getting disconnected youth connected to pathways to employment. 

Enough for now.  Republicans in Congress are simply short-sighted (or myopic) because of their so-called principles.  There are plenty of ways they could get jobs to people immediately, but they continue to resist, unsympathetic to the very basic needs of real people.  More next time on alternative approaches to this problem of JOBS.

Rhetoric: JOBs, JOBs, JOBs; Reality: NO JOBs

A Republican JOBs Bill?  Who do they think they’re kidding?  It’s an absolutely flagrant misuse of the word.  What their JOBs Bill really is: more profit for the rich and powerful;  more blatant attacks on the federal government as an unworthy source of jobs, and as an incompetent organization.  By the way, this isn’t the first time that the GOP has equated incentives, deductions, and exemptions for small and big businesses as a “Jobs Bill.”  In 2004, G.W. Bush signed the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 that was simply chock full of “goodies” for businesses (the tax breaks estimated to cost $143 billion over 10 years).  That “job creation” resulted in more layoffs, more closings, more shipping of jobs overseas.  In the latest rejuvenation of this formula for “creating jobs” we can expect similar results!

First, they say that “government should not try to create jobs by growing the size of government”.  On the surface, that looks like a reasonable statement, but it’s not because we need JOBs now, no matter from where they emanate.  Besides, adding government-sponsored JOBs does not necessarily mean an expansion of bureaucracy.  Several departments of national and state governments already have responsibility for job creation and training and they are not looking to expand their departments. 

Second, they say “it’s time for a new approach. Government should create an environment for private sector growth through fiscal discipline and pro-growth…policies.”  Then, they trot out all the old remedies that haven’t worked for the last 30 years; the same policies and programs that have widened the gap between the rich and the broad middle class in the last generation. 

Third, corporations are already boasting record profits, but they are not sinking profits back into their U.S.-based businesses.  Instead, corporations continue to close plants, lay off workers and ship jobs overseas where they can minimize wages, benefits, taxes and unionization.  In addition, they are currently sitting on nearly $2 trillion in profits, without turning that into jobs.  So, Republicans want to increase profits and earning-power for executives while not creating job one for the rest of us!  Their JOBs Plan is one of the biggest FARCEs ever perpetrated on the American people.  R U Bamboozled?

The first part of their proposal is to “live within our means” by requiring a Balanced Budget Amendment, a statutory spending limit, and deficit reduction. These ideas may have some merit in themselves as possible ways to deal with government spending, but not one of them can guarantee the creation of one JOB. 

Their second mantra is that “we must create incentives for our entrepreneurs to invest in the future, innovate and grow.”  Certainly a worthwhile objective, but how they say we get there is through the same old, tired canards that have not served us (the middle class) well in the past 30 years:
--Reduce business and individual tax rates (by which they mean the rates for the 1-2% at the top of the ladder who have been pocketing their gains at the expense of everyone else!);
--Make research and development tax credit permanent:  a worthy goal if targeted to the United States, and if made broadly available, not just to large corporations
--Extend and make permanent the Small Business Investment Tax Incentive: letting small businesses immediately write-off equipment purchases as tax deductions.  Unfortunately, larger businesses, by “branching” into smaller units, have been able to claim this deduction that they don’t deserve.  The definition of “small” businesses is key here.  To be totally fair, the same incentive should be given to the self-employed, so that they might grow into small businesses.    
--Reduce taxes on Capital Gains and Dividends: once again, who benefits the most? And who sits on the profits?  There is no incentive here for creating JOBs; just for making the rich richer!

They also want to remove burdensome regulations on businesses.  But that’s one of the big reasons why we got into the huge economic trouble we’re in: deregulation and less governmental oversight led to abuses in financing, mortgage-lending, banking, Wall Street investments, Big Oil gouging and lack of safety provisions, etc.  Government regulation is key to keeping the excesses of capitalism under control to the benefit of a broad working middle class.  This idea of deregulation is not a prescription for JOBs, but it is a prescription for robbery, fraud, and abuse.  Don’t buy any of it!  That being said, truly burdensome, poorly conceived, and biased regulations are not helpful to anyone. 

There does need to be a broader input mechanism for opinion, data, and suggestions for regulations from those immediately affected, and from those indirectly affected.  There does need to be a sunset provision on each set of rules and regulations so that they will be reviewed (and reformed) on a reasonable timetable.  Rule-making and regulation-formulation are the mode by which laws are executed.  There needs to be as much attention to this process as there is to legislating the laws of the land, because rules and regulations have the force of law.

The GOP Plan calls for two measures that, they say, would help to create a “competitive” workforce:  reform of federal training programs and stopping “card-check”.  Once again, the GOP is using code words to cover their true intentions.   The intention is not to reform federal job training, but to gut it, so that it becomes a shadow of what it is.  They intend to do this by combining all training programs into one (smaller) program that then will present training on a very limited basis, unable to meet the needs of very different clients who have entirely different needs and issues.  So, they are advocating a situation where “one size fits all.“  Not at all what is needed.  AND YET, on the very next subject of  “Card-Check (a euphemism for “unionization”), they say specifically that the reason this is unacceptable is because it “creates a one-size-fits-all approach to wages and benefits.”  So apparently, it’s o.k. to have a one-size-fits-all approach to training, but not for an approach to wages and benefits.  Why is that, you ask?  Because in one case (training) it works to undermine job training, but in the 2nd case, it works against their anti-union ideology!

While making a brief reference to “the imperative” of educating our children to be the innovators, entrepreneurs and workers of tomorrow, the Republicans otherwise steer clear of the role of public schools in job preparation.  Are they prepared to take the steps necessary for enhancing public education so that our children can compete with the rest of the developed nations?  Not on your life.   Public education is a key priority in the training of leaders and workers, but the GOP and Tea Partiers are intent on privatizing education in this country so that government will no longer be able to exercise any control over what happens in our schools.  That means no strategic planning for the future jobs market, or for anything else that begins with a public education. 

The rest of the Plan is devoted to equally inane recommendations, most of which have more to do with political in-fighting than with JOB creation, i.e. increasing exports, doing more oil-drilling on the outer continental shelf and on federal lands, and addressing health care reform by malpractice reform, allowing purchase of insurance across state lines, risk pools for small businesses, and strengthening HSAs. 

All of which brings us again to the question: where are the JOBs?  The GOP speculates that the measures they propose will create an “environment” in which growth will occur.  But what if it simply doesn’t do that?  What if their provisions do what they have done before: create an atmosphere in which the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the middle class gets robbed and stagnated? 

What we need is a REAL JOBS plan.  More next time…

What About REAL Medicare Reform?

Republican Senator from Florida, Marco Rubio, told David Gregory today on Meet the Press that the Ryan Plan for Medicare is the best proposal available right now, and that anyone with a better idea should come forward and make a serious proposal. 

First, we need to ask: how much research went into Paul Ryan’s proposal to put Medicare on a premium-support (government voucher) basis?  Well, apparently not much, since the Congressional Budget Office made it clear that he didn’t take into consideration that his Plan would actually add to the total debt, cost more for seniors buying private plans, and that typical 65 year olds would be required to pay 68 percent of the total cost of their coverage (premiums, deductibles, other out-of-pocket costs), compared with the 25 percent they would pay under current law!

Second, Ryan’s Plan does nothing to solve the issue of affordable and effective health care for seniors (and for those who are younger but disabled). Although the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act passed in 2010 went only part-way toward reforming health care costs and provisions, it at least tried to do so in a timely manner.  Ryan’s provisions for vouchering premium support for Medicare would not take effect until 2022!  His changes to Medicare are really not intended to solve the problem of health care administration, but ostensibly to address the problem of debt reduction!  His Plan does neither and Sen. Rubio is much to blame for not proposing a better solution (other than denigrating Obama’s health care reform bill by which Rubio solves absolutely nothing). 

This is exactly what many have come to fear from Tea Baggers and Republicans (as well as some Democrats): they knowingly divert public attention from the real issues to political theater which is totally unproductive.  No wonder so many out here feel they are being bamboozled!

Third, perhaps Sen. Rubio has missed the fact that there actually are other proposals for addressing health care in this country (along with the national debt), at least one of which has not received the attention it deserves because of over-protection of private insurance giants and private drug companies by Congress, and because of the false bogey-man of socialism. 

Here’s what Physicians for a National Health Program have to say about a Single Payer System:

“Single-payer national health insurance is a system in which a single public or quasi-public agency organizes health financing, but delivery of care remains largely private.
Currently, the U.S. health care system is outrageously expensive, yet inadequate. Despite spending more than twice as much as the rest of the industrialized nations ($8,160 per capita), the United States performs poorly in comparison on major health indicators such as life expectancy, infant mortality and immunization rates. Moreover, the other advanced nations provide comprehensive coverage to their entire populations, while the U.S. leaves 51 million completely uninsured and millions more inadequately covered.

“The reason we spend more and get less than the rest of the world is because we have a patchwork system of for-profit payers. Private insurers necessarily waste health dollars on things that have nothing to do with care: overhead, underwriting, billing, sales and marketing departments as well as huge profits and exorbitant executive pay. Doctors and hospitals must maintain costly administrative staffs to deal with the bureaucracy.
Combined, this needless administration consumes one-third (31 percent) of Americans’ health dollars.

“Single-payer financing is the only way to recapture this wasted money. The potential savings on paperwork, more than $400 billion per year, are enough to provide comprehensive coverage to everyone without paying any more than we already do (underlining added).

“Under a single-payer system, all Americans would be covered for all medically necessary services, including: doctor, hospital, preventive, long-term care, mental health, reproductive health care, dental, vision, prescription drug and medical supply costs. Patients would regain free choice of doctor and hospital, and doctors would regain autonomy over patient care.

“Physicians would be paid fee-for-service according to a negotiated formulary or receive salary from a hospital or nonprofit HMO/group practice. Hospitals would receive a global budget for operating expenses. Health facilities and expensive equipment purchases would be managed by regional health planning boards.

“A single-payer system would be financed by eliminating private insurers and recapturing their administrative waste. Modest new taxes would replace premiums and out-of-pocket payments currently paid by individuals and business. Costs would be controlled through negotiated fees, global budgeting and bulk purchasing.”  >http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single-payer-resources>

It’s time to get serious about REAL HEALTHCARE REFORM, and a single-payer system like this is worth an in-depth look.  At least it would do what Senator Rubio and Congressman Ryan so inadequately proposed to do.  It would potentially replace Medicare and Medicaid, but this time, with a much better system available to all citizens!!

QUESTIONS TO PONDER

Will the off-year elections of 2010 go down in history as the culmination of the turning of the United States government toward something other than democracy?  Is the United States national government now an Oligarchy rather than a Democracy?  That is, are the richest 1-2% of the electorate dictating what will happen to the other 98-99%?  Interesting questions, but not necessarily the most probing.  Maybe we should ask more personal questions of ourselves to bring home what is really happening in our beloved country.  Consider then:

1)  Have your personal views ever been solicited by a Congressional Committee?
2)    Have you ever been asked to suggest or to write a piece of legislation or regulations that would benefit you or your business?
3)    Do you pay a lobbyist who represents your views (and wants) to your Congressman or Senator?  Do you have your own lawyer who finds legal loopholes that benefit your income or your business?
4)    Have you ever met personally with your Congressman or Senator, like on a golf course, at a special resort, or at a private dinner or party?
5)    Has your Congressman or Senator ever voted to help enhance your personal situation or business?  Or, more to the point perhaps: has your Congressman or senator ever not voted, or delayed a vote, or negatively impacted a piece of legislation that would have hurt you or your business?

If you answered “NO” to most of these questions, you have to ask yourself who can answer “YES” ?  It’s very simple.  The rich and powerful can answer YES to every question because they have been given, or taken, special privileges that are not available to the ordinary citizen.  The rich and powerful, like CEOs of major companies, or wall street brokers, or bank execs can “buy” access to their government representatives that you can’t afford.  Your access to your representatives is limited to writing letters, making phone calls, protesting in the streets, and voting.  Some among us believe that this is the way it should be: that the rich have earned their right to call the shots, while the rest of us should support them because they know what is best for all of us! 

YOU don’t have any real access beyond the basics, because the government of this country does not, at the moment, belong to you!  It is totally in the hands of the rich and powerful: both houses of Congress have a majority of millionaires; the Presidency has been occupied by a millionaire for some time now (and the current Cabinet is afflicted with the same oligarchical malady); the Supreme Court has millionaires in the majority (and some of them live in gated communities to separate themselves from YOU). 

And, guess what, it’s your own damn fault, because you have allowed our electoral system to become a system tilted toward electing millionaires when few others can afford to run unless they raise scads of money from the very people who have it, and who want to “buy“ access!  Ask any politician what the bane of their existence is: raising money, is the answer, and money is at the heart of the corruption of our democratic system.

But, back to the questions:

6)    How much of your household income do you spend on necessities: housing (mortgage & maintenance), food, clothing, medicine, all taxes and government fees, transportation, child care, work-related expenses?  How much of that budget do you spend on luxuries: vacations, recreation, club memberships, fine jewelry, art work, “baubles”, collector items like cars, a yacht,  redecoration of your home, etc.?
7)    Can you pay a lesser rate on a portion of your income, say up to $50,000? 
    Can you hide any of your income in overseas bank accounts where taxes are much less? 
8)    Can you deduct for all of the depreciation of a (work-related) piece of equipment at once instead of over the 20 years it actually takes to depreciate (computer, cell-phone, car)?
9)    When did you last receive a raise in pay or a bonus or have an enhancement made to your benefits like health care or pension?
10)    How many in your household have to work to make ends meet?   How many are finding it almost impossible to find a job?  What kinds of temporary or permanent jobs have you had to take to keep afloat?
11)    How much have you had to cut back on in the last decade to make ends meet?
12)    How much debt is your household carrying right now?

These are not questions to be taken lightly.  Do your answers scare you at all?  Do they make you angry, frustrate you, discourage you?  Does it make you the least bit worried that the majority of those in positions of power in this country are not feeling what you feel as you answer these questions; that they are not even having to concern themselves with these questions because they can afford the necessities and the luxuries?  That they are getting bonuses, stock options, pension securities, and Cadillac health plans that you can’t even imagine? That they have special tax breaks that are not available to you?  That when they lose a job because of poor performance, they get a multi-million dollar settlement package that enables them to retire with ease?  That they haven’t had to cut back to “make ends meet” because they have done just fine while the rest of us are taking it on the chin (and everywhere else) during these hard economic times?  And does it bother you at all that the rich and powerful are dictating monetary and economic policy and legislation that continues to benefit them, while cutting back on, and zeroing out, programs that help the middle class and the poor? 

How long do you plan to take the abuse, the condescension, the arrogance of people in power who refer to the other 98% percent of us as “the little people”, the “small people”, “unfortunates”, “lower classes,” and who rant and rave about “welfare cheats” and “those who ought to stand on their own” or “pull themselves up” and make “something of themselves”? 
How long will you stand for the loss of your right to earn a decent wage while those in power cut back on union bargaining rights, and bemoan the audacity of government workers like police, firemen, teachers, health care workers, bargaining for adequate wages, benefits, and pensions. 
How long will it be before you realize that every time the rich and powerful gain another loophole, or privilege, or incentive, or tax break to their benefit that you lose because you have to make up the difference in retail prices or taxes you pay?  In the last 30 years, the rich have gained more money, more riches, more access, more clout, more power while you have gained very little, not only in access and clout, but in wages: just about an additional $300 (adjusted for inflation) over that same span.

But, you did gain some other things caused by those same powerful owners of government: higher (total) taxes; higher prices but less buying power; more inadequate schools; loss of housing; higher interest rates on credit cards; restricted loans from banks;  fewer consumer protections through regulation and legislation; health care insurance premiums up and benefits restricted; health care adequacy down; prestigious private schools for them, diminished public education for you.  You can fill in many of the blanks yourself because you know exactly what has been taken from you.

How long will it take before you realize that our wonderful unique representative democracy has been stolen out from under us by an Oligarchy that rules our lives in much the same manner as the dictators and oligarchs of certain Middle Eastern countries?  The Tea Party missed it entirely, targeting government as the culprit and supporting more robbery (of them and us) by the Oligarchs and Plutocrats.

How long will it take before you realize that nothing short of a revolution will reclaim what has been lost? 
A revolution that requires peaceful demonstrations, constitutional amendments, electoral reform, and term limits;
A revolution that denies the oligarchs the loopholes, breaks and privileges that they now enjoy;
A revolution that requires of the rich (and the rest of us) the responsibilities of liberty and of power: to help the poor, the disabled, the disenfranchised, the prisoner, the elderly, etc. etc.
A revolution that opens up the records and transactions of government - and those of the contributors to legislators - for all to see;
A revolution that does not involve us in preemptive warfare or any more unjust military excursions into other countries, all of which rob us of young lives, money, and prestige as well as our sacred honor, no matter how upright, decent, and dedicated our brave military men and women may be.

How long will it take?

WHAT DO PROGRESSIVES WANT?

If former Senator Russ Feingold’s latest effort -- ProgressivesUnited.org -- is any indication, the initial mission is quite focused, as indicated by the following Mission Statement:

“In January of 2010, the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision greatly expanded the corrupting influence of corporate special interests. It's time we fought back. Launched one year after that decision, Progressives United will:
--Empower Americans to stand up against the exploding corporate influence in Washington, especially since the Citizens United decision.
--Hold our representatives accountable to every constituent, regardless of economic class or insider access.
--Support national, state, and local candidates who stand up for our progressive ideals.

Progressives United aims to build a massive grassroots effort dedicated to mitigating the effects of, and eventually overturning, the Citizens United decision. It is an organization that works to provide means for individuals to stand up to the big money special interests ruling Washington. We will work to ensure that elected officials are held accountable to their constituents and are not beholden to corporate interests. Additionally we will work to elect leaders at all levels of government who will stand up for progressive ideals.
We will also closely monitor all elected officials, calling them out when they are acting against what is best for their constituents in order to benefit a special interest. And we will ensure that campaign finance is a prominent issue in the 2012 campaign; we want all candidates to take a strong public stand on campaign finance reform.
Progressives United is dedicated to opposing corporate dominance over our elections. We will work every day to ensure Abraham Lincoln’s words that we are ‘government of the people, by the people, for the people’ remain true.”

Right now, there is a website connected to Progressives United that is asking people to help build an agenda for this new endeavor.  Strangely enough, there are many items suggested there that this Blog has advocated in past publications, and  there are others worth mentioning, as well.  The following list is a summary of what I regard as the most plausible and interesting of these proposed Progressive agenda items.

1)   Overturn Citizens United decision. 
--a constitutional amendment 
--outlaw corporate spending on election process 
--pass the DISCLOSE ACT requiring  corporations to reveal their contributions

2)    Campaign Finance and electoral reform. 
--limit amount that can be spent on all elections 
--public funding of all elections 
--abolish PACs 
--abolish the Electoral College

3)    Restrict Lobbying. 
--prevent all lobbyists from interacting with members of Congress (unrealistic) 
--prevent monetary inducements for members of Congress
   
Comment: I find little of substance in these proposals.  I have called for constitutional amendments that would:
    --prevent members of Congress from receiving any compensation, privilege, emolument, gift or any other form of contribution from any entity that could benefit by particular legislation or committee process.
    --I believe this needs expansion into preventing any influence on the writing of regulations
    --restrict the revolving door of legislators becoming lobbyists or legislative consultants for a period of five years after leaving elective office; and this needs to be expanded to cover civil servants and appointees, as well as judges.

4)    The rich -- individuals and corporations -- must be made to pay their fair share. 
--the richest 2% must pay their fair share 
--rescind the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000 
--remove the FICA tax cap 
--establish a Minimum Tax for corporations at about 20-25% (my recommendation) 
--close corporate loopholes and tax shelters

5)    Turn the attack on the middle class into an assault on the power of the rich. 
--pass the Employee Free Choice Act 
--recall Wisconsin Republican Senators 
--reform Wall St. and investment banking by stricter regulation 
--put bankers, investors, mortgage CEOs, etc. on trial for criminal offenses 
--eliminate Big Oil subsidies 
--no more tax breaks for companies who outsource 
--restrict subsidies and low-interest loans to large agricultural conglomerates 
--raise awareness of corporations that avoid paying taxes or receive large tax breaks 
--expose the activity of the Koch brothers to put a ‘face’ on corporate corruption 
--use media to fight back against right-wing lies and distortions 
--boycott products of corporate supporters of right-wing agenda

6)    Fight for single-payer universal health-care for everyone. 
--stop corporate efforts to block real health care reform

7)    End foreign wars and bring our troops home. 
--stop sending money and arms to dictators and thieves 
--cut defense spending

8)    Make education reform a priority. 
--divert defense spending cuts to education

9)    Use media to promote Progressive agenda and to promote fair and factual information. 
--reinstate the Fairness Doctrine to stop corporate propaganda 
--use media, social media and DVDs to influence young people for the future 
--protect the internet from government intervention 
--break up corporate mass media ownership 
--strengthen the hand of the FCC 
--develop a website and our own media sources 
--promote media sources that promote in-depth reporting and analysis 
--enact a ‘Truth in Broadcasting’ law like that in Canada

10)    Progressive groups need to unite
   

This is a Ten Point Program that most progressives (at least on this particular website) seem to endorse.  What’s holding us back from working together and forming a Progressive Coalition?  If you want to help, please go to the website below (by copying or typing it into your browser) and add your own agenda item(s), or vote for those already listed (and don’t forget to check out ProgressivesUnited.org).

http://agenda.progressivesunited.org

A MORAL CRISIS, PERHAPS?

The United States is facing a crisis in social values!  Some may think that such a crisis has to do with being too lax in regard to abortion, homosexuality, and crime.  Others may think it means that we are not giving greater support to the 2nd Amendment, to cutting national and state budgets, and limiting spending on social programs.  Even more may think it simply concerns loyalty to God, family and country.  But, none of these constitute the values crisis of which I speak.

What it does have to do with is a more than obvious deviation from the Judeo-Christian tradition of the enormous value given to caring for the poor, the downtrodden, the widow and the orphan, the stranger and the prisoner, the afflicted and the needy.  Churches and synagogues have moved farther and farther away from their own heritage -- and from Biblical principles -- in these areas.  Moreover, our national governmental entities, that were purportedly built on Judeo-Christian laws and principles, have essentially been moved to support a wholly different theology or ethic: one of prosperity for the few, backed up by a system that now actually discriminates against the poor, the afflicted and the needy.  Instead of a system of equal justice and non-discrimination, we now have a system that supports the perpetuation of rules and laws that take from the poor to enhance the standing of the rich.  Instead of righteousness “flowing down like living waters” we are dealing with a “trickle-down” theory of benefits to the middle class and the poor and the downtrodden. 

As more proof of the moral bankruptcy of the radical right, we now have in Congress a bill known as HR 1, in which are found some budget cuts that will have a devastating effect upon those who need help the most.  A recent letter received regarding this spells out some of the devastation:  “when Congress can seriously debate forcing veterans into homelessness and cutting food aid to pregnant women and children, while giving tax breaks to billionaires, something is very, very wrong.” 

To go a bit further, a recent column by Mark Bittman in the NY Times points out the following:  “I stopped eating on Monday and joined around 4,000 other people in a fast to call attention to Congressional budget proposals that would make huge cuts in programs for the poor and hungry.  Who are — once again — under attack, this time in the House budget bill, H.R. 1. The budget proposes cuts in the WIC program (which supports women, infants and children), in international food and health aid (18 million people would be immediately cut off from a much-needed food stream, and 4 million would lose access to malaria medicine) and in programs that aid farmers in underdeveloped countries. Food stamps are also being attacked, in the twisted “Welfare Reform 2011” bill. (There are other egregious maneuvers in H.R. 1, but I’m sticking to those related to food.)  These supposedly deficit-reducing cuts — they’d barely make a dent — will quite literally cause more people to starve to death, go to bed hungry or live more miserably than are doing so now.”

Too many Americans now hold fast to attitudes that show disdain or fear in regard to the less fortunate, as did that well-dressed Tea Party demonstrator who yelled and screamed near-obscenities at a counter demonstrator who was obviously less fortunate than he and who was, in fact, disabled (perhaps you saw the incident on your TV evening news last summer!).  They fear the poor as different and dangerous, regarding them generally as dirty and apt to act in a criminal manner.  Even more vividly, such Americans view the poor, the immigrant, the unfortunate, the handicapped as indecent, filthy, impure, gross, lewd, coarse, disgusting, bawdy and offensive!  Not all Americans feel this way, mind you, but enough of them to warrant the judgment that too many now buy into this set of adjectives.

Moreover, a suspicion prevails that the less fortunate are simply lazy or inferior and that their condition is their own fault.  Thus, the principle is now expounded in many quarters that the poor should be able to pull themselves up “by their own bootstraps.”   Unfortunately, these same expounders keep finding ways to put obstacles in the path of the less fortunate so that they have a Herculean task if they try to pull themselves up to another level.  Let us count the ways: removal of funding from community action groups; removal of access to free legal aid;  school-aid formulas that send disproportionate amounts of aid to suburban districts while inner-city districts deteriorate; destruction of bargaining rights for the working poor who join unions; cut-backs for inner-city health clinics; the limiting of health-care access to those who can afford it; the encouragement of  large grocery chains to avoid building within ghettos, keeping food prices there higher than average; punishment of  the homeless as vagrants; attacking of Medicare and Medicaid as well as healthcare reform; privatizing of social security or getting rid of it altogether.  Need we go on? 

We have come to a point where the rich and powerful have decided that government, and corporations, should promote, not the welfare of the people, but the avaricious attitudes and acquisitiveness of themselves, and their cohorts.  They believe the outright acclamation that “greed is good.”  They hire lobbyists to do all they can to get legislation passed that favors their class, their position, their companies, their way-of-life.  Their large companies, making billions each year from a captive consumer population, give back as little as possible to their government or their society, many paying less than 5% in taxes, and giving less than 1% to charities.  Even their churches - and they do love their churches - fail, to a large degree, to support anything other than their own congregations, structures and activities.  The Biblical mandate to support the poor and less fortunate falls on deaf ears and hardened hearts.

The Bible contains more than 300 verses regarding the poor and social justice, as well as  God’s compassion and deep concern for both of these.  It is more than simple compassion that God exhibits, however, for in many of those verses, He is depicted as being on the side of, and walking in the shoes of, the poor and the weak.  This flies in the face of the tepid response of most churches and synagogues to the call for support of the poor.  It challenges our growing belief, stoked by the rich and powerful, that the poor should lift themselves up, or that the government should stay out of social programs and let “faith-based” communities take care of the needs of those less fortunate.  With the growing crisis in all areas of poverty and need, those solutions are bound to bring about an enormous calamity!

One more important attitude or principle must be addressed: the attitude that “rugged individualism” should be the norm for our society.  Again, such a principle flies in the face of the biblical attitude that we are responsible for the well-being of each other.  It flies in the face of the principle that the people of God are a united entity, and that our outcomes and our destiny and our salvation are not tied just to individual belief and action but to the quantity and quality of a society’s response as a whole.  The society that the bible envisions is an interdependent one, with a mutual responsibility placed upon all of us to care for each other.  The “contract theory of government” from John Locke, that motivated many of the Founding Fathers, is clearly built upon these principles.  The Declaration of Independence enshrined such principles in our nation’s fabric by asserting that:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident:
that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

It is incontrovertible that Government, deriving its powers from the consent of the governed, is seen here as the instrument by which people in a society might achieve their God-given, natural rights.  Today, we hear far too often that government should not secure the rights of all the people to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, but rather that government should be limited in its scope and that poor people should be on their own in their quest for a better life.  We do hear constantly a drumbeat that focuses on special privileges for the rich and powerful, and that secures those privileges through the moneyed system of unlimited campaign ads by third parties, through well-paid lobbyists working to influence legislation and regulations in favor of large corporations, through special junkets, parties and campaign contributions for officials to spur their vote in the right direction, and through a revolving door of public office to private sector positions that enhances the ability of the rich and powerful to get what they desire, but not what is good for society as a whole.

Against all of this stands the message of a Book that has, in the past, inspired the foundations of our democracy and many of the progressive movements that have expanded civil and economic rights for the American people as a whole.  Lately, the overwhelming message of that Book seems to have been lost in a 30-year onslaught against the very fabric of our Democracy.  Radical right-wing conservatives, under the guise of religiosity and “values” issues, have despised and denuded the vehicle by which people might achieve rights and support, and some protection against the forces of oppression and injustice, of hate, of discrimination, of taxation without representation, of the diverting of wealth from poor to rich, and the granting of special privileges to a chosen few.  As a result, we now have a Plutocracy (governance by the wealthy) that is also an Oligarchy (a privileged few dictating to the vast majority).

We are in a crisis of governance, and as in all such crises, it is a good idea to return to our roots and to ask:  what can we learn from one of the primary foundations of the Judeo-Christian tradition that can inform the further progression of our rights and liberties?   More next time….

A Challenge to Progressives

It is perhaps premature to speak of a new Party, although it is more than tempting, to
say the least, to want to attack the existing parties who have delivered the middle and working classes into a huge abyss.  Paying down the debt by cutting programs that basically benefit the middle class, the working class, and those least able to help themselves, is leading us down a path that has historically under-cut the health and growth of a number of countries.  A resulting oligarchy or plutocracy is not a sustainable form of government -- look at the Middle East for verification.  The oppressed rights of the majority come bubbling to the surface, as they did somewhat in the Tea Party movement in this country, except that the bamboozled of that movement chose the wrong target and actually strengthened the hand of their plutocratic (rich) oppressors rather than
throwing them out!

As Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson try to make clear in their classic work, Winner-Take-all Politics, the main work needed right now is reform of the political and economical system, not the winning of elections.  To do that, progressive reformers will have to take a long-term view, and will have to relentlessly pursue, in the face of a formidable opposition, an agreed-upon set of principles.  Teddy Roosevelt was right when he said, “the supreme political task of our day…is to drive the special interests out of our public life.”  As Hacker and Pierson conclude: “reformers of a century ago shared the conviction held by the Founders that democracy was the rule of the many, not the all-powerful one or the fortunate few.  It will have to be so again.”

It is clearer than ever, right now, that the forces of the few are attempting to undermine the rights, entitlements, programs, policies and structures that bolster the middle and working classes.  One cannot ignore the fact that Republican radicals in states such as Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Michigan, and elsewhere -- and in the Congress -- are hard at work giving special breaks and concessions to the rich and powerful while destroying collective bargaining rights, targeting  budget cuts from programs that benefit the poor and middle class, working to undermine public education, targeting the voting rights of young people, attempting to change the definitions of rape, to destroy the right of a woman to choose, and to promote fear by targeting the President’s background, the Muslim community, and immigration of “illegals.”   

At the same time, by failing to address the overwhelming need for jobs, public education reform, alternative energy programs, the housing crisis, the reigning in of Wall Street and big corporations, as well as the need for tax code reform, these forces are eroding our democratic institutions and programs at a much more rapid pace than we have ever experienced.
The system is working against the 98% of us who are under an arbitrary $250,000 of annual income.  If a majority of Progressive organizations fail to work together on this, we can soon be on the outside looking in watching the oligarchy operate to prevent any of us from making any difference in the commonweal.

So, I issue a challenge to groups like: 
MoveOn.org, Public Citizen, AARP, NAACP, ACLU, NOW, Human Rights Campaign, Planned Parenthood, Participatory Politics Foundation, Green Party, PIRG, the Working Families Party, Democracy for America, People for the American Way, Progressive Policy Institute, Common Cause, Center for the Study of Responsive Law, America Coming Together, Americans for Democratic Action, Center for Public Integrity, Citizens for Tax Justice, Citizens for Independent Public Broadcasting, Mother Jones, The Progressive, AFL-CIO, SEIU,  ACORN  -- and on and on and on (see www.sourcewatch.org for a much more comprehensive list). 

It is my considered opinion that Progressive forces must work on several levels at the same time with the following priorities:

1)    concentrate their primary efforts on reforming the system: structural, systemic reform must be at the top of everyone’s list!
2)    assign secondary priority to their long-cherished policy and program priorities (like the environment, alternative energy, and even human rights);
3)    give third place to establishing a Progressive Party (or Green Party, or Peoples’ Party, or whatever), and winning elections (although this becomes a higher priority if a win in an election somewhere would actually advance the primary effort).

I have suggested that the first step in this battle of reforming the structure is to seek constitutional amendments (see most recent blog).  While the outcome of this action may not be seen for a decade or two, it is imperative to start the process NOW.  Had Common Cause, at its founding some 30 years ago, sought constitutional amendments for it’s main concerns -- electoral reform and lobbying reform -- we might not have the situation quite like it is today in those two areas.  I do not mean to take anything away from their accomplishments over the years, but I do mean to challenge their strategy: the pursuit of short-term goals without equal emphasis on long-term changes that would fundamentally re-structure our political and economic systems.

Further, I have proposed that a neglected branch of Government -- the People --  must be given priority.   It is time to make provision for this important branch of government to have an equal say in this process, particularly since the average citizen has much more education and political experience and involvement than at any other time in our history.  In fact, many citizens have more ability, life experience, and education than do some of those who claim to be our representatives.
Citizens must be EVERYWHERE their tax dollars are being spent.  Every government-supported or contracted entity must have ordinary citizens involved in their operations in some way: as advisors, as auditors, as members of boards, commissions, committees, etc.    The time has come for this “representative democracy” to expand its representation so that ordinary citizens are advocating for other citizens at every level of  government.

There are several strategies (in no particular order) that ought to be considered by a Coalition of all Progressive organizations in changing our system and in moving toward a new Party structure:

1)    Work to establish a Consumer Protection Department within the cabinet.  Advocacy for the middle class and the poor must be a Coalition priority, because the continuing warfare against the middle class means the destruction of our government and of our society.
2)    Establish a Coalition “watchdog” group  to reveal the inner workings of  lobbyists and other interest groups (Chamber of Commerce, for example) who favor the rich; expose the results of  congressional “drift” (inaction) that favors the rich when no opposition is forthcoming;  mount subtle attacks on the rich and powerful by revealing ownerships, extravagances, eccentricities, debauchery, etc.;
mount attacks on rich corporations as well to reveal: price-gouging, environmental destruction; power-plays, exorbitant profits and how they affect consumers; lack of charitable giving; effects on ordinary people, etc.
3)    there must be a serious attempt to either establish a Progressive medium with its own Progressive commentators and reporters to rival FOX News; or there must be a concerted effort to push sympathetic media outlets toward investigating and reporting on current lobbying efforts to distort the system, on unfair funding of elections, and on the co-opting of our political entities by the oligarchs to their own ends; 
4)    Progressive “think tanks” (such as: Progressive Policy Institute; Center for the Study of Responsive Law; The Liberal Institute) must join together in efforts to offer their best ideas for strategies, policies, programs needed to “take back our government” from the oligarchy that is now in control;
5)    Every time Congress makes concessions or gives incentives to the rich, Progressives should propose specific cuts in Congress’s own budget; emphasize their waste of taxpayer funds; go after executive & judiciary secondarily;
6)    To fight fire with fire, a lobbying firm dedicated to Progressive principles should be hired to lobby for our cause
7)    Co-opt the rich (individuals and corporations) wherever possible but not if principles would be compromised; emphasize money for party-building;  get pro-liberal PACs on board
8)    Make inroads by getting select people appointed to insider government positions; find sympathetic career workers in government; use both to re-write rules and regulations to favor Progressive principles;
9)    Weaken both major parties by turning their cherished positions into detriments: Republicans’ tax cuts for the rich; Democrats’ failure to reform healthcare to a one-payer system, for example.
10)    Concentrate on winning one primary campaign for national office (upset one Blue-dog Democrat)
11)    Target one big issue:  government structure overhaul in order to cut waste and duplication of services (must be couched in this way to appeal to a broad consensus of voters).
12)    Target specific groups to gain advocates and voters: independents, the poor; minority populations; working class; middle class suburbanites; women; young people in grade schools, high schools and colleges, parents of 3-year-olds, etc.

And, a few more ideas, in no particular order:
13)    pay-as-you-go rules enforced
14)    address payroll taxes
15)    hearings held; litigation against finance abusers on Wall St., etc.
16)    give the SEC subpoena power
17)    get rid of “carried interest” provision in tax law

This Coalition; this Progressive Movement, must have a clear and consistent message: favor the middle & working classes; support and involve the poor; challenge the rich; consolidate and restructure government (thereby reducing the deficit);  fair but strict regulation of business; protect middle class incentives (like college grants & loans) and  entitlements; consumer protection; increase citizen participation and representation in government; favor collective bargaining rights.

The time to get started is now.  There are apparently hundreds of liberal and progressive organizations out there, all working on their own agendas and ignoring the fact that a Coalition or a new Party is the most effective way to attack the powers that have taken over our democratic institutions.  Who will step forward to lead this long-term effort?  How many will be willing to work on a focused agenda that may mean subsuming their own pet projects?  We cannot delay; we cannot equivocate; we cannot afford to drift along with the rising tide of oligarchy.  The time is now.  In the words of a great Progressive of another era, Teddy Roosevelt, we find the message for our time as well:

“We are standing for the great fundamental rights upon which all successful free government must be based.  We are standing for elementary decency in politics.  We are fighting for honesty against naked robbery.  It is not a partisan issue; it is more than a political issue; it is a great moral issue.  If we condone political theft, if we do not resent the kinds of wrong and injustice that injuriously affect the whole nation, not merely our democratic form of government but our civilization itself cannot endure.”
_______________***__________________

More Thoughts on a New Party Platform

I have suggested some very basic components for a new Party platform.  Before we discuss strategies for actually making this Movement into a reality, I want to add a few ideas that might also be included in this Progressive Party platform, although these – along with what I have already proposed – are not definitive.  They are given as initiators of discussion, not as principles set in stone.

We must return to the idea of sunset dates on all programs, contracts, loans etc. that are strictly enforced (unlike the temporary tax breaks for the rich which were not allowed to expire in 2010) except perhaps in times of emergency.  There are literally hundreds of programs, commissions, offices, jobs, contracts, etc. that were set-up to be temporary that have, instead, gone on and on, draining money that could be spent elsewhere to greater effect.  Take agricultural subsidies, insurance, loan programs, and government fertilizer production, or some DoD weapons research and production, as  examples!

All government programs must be required to meet goals and targets: must be RESULTS-ORIENTED.  All tax-payer money must be tied to accomplishments: every governmental entity, and those quasi-public agencies that receive governmental funds, must be made to set an annual goal plan tying action steps and outcomes to the use of funds.  Goal plan accomplishments should serve as a vehicle for audit, budgeting, and cut-backs, in other words, for accountability.

Education is primary:  even defense must take second place to education.  A new national Purpose for Education must be defined and then local school districts must decide how to meet that Purpose.  Otherwise, we cannot expect improvement in our educational standards. 
    The means of funding education must change.  There must, for example,  be an assessment against the properties of corporate entities (by making them equivalent to individual citizens as to political speech rights, the Supreme Court has also made them responsible as citizen equivalents for what happens outside of elections; ergo, they are equally responsible for supporting education).

Innovation and entrepreneurship must be encouraged, such as: 
    --The use of  national guard and DoD to solve internal problems and to meet needs of society thereby protecting the country;
    --Bartering amongst citizens to trade services especially among the poor is worth some consideration
    --All citizens must do some form of national service; all must give back to support the poor and the vulnerable of our society; including the poor themselves, and even prisoners

--We must encourage more R&D in all sectors.  Gov. investment in innovation and entrepreneurial pursuits is crucial.

Tax reform -- every tax loophole that favors the rich must be excised;  reasonable rates and fair incentives for all levels of income are preferable.  

Consumer protection has to be a major priority, along with confrontation of Wall St., Big Business, banking practices, etc.

Military intervention must not be the primary response to foreign relations-gone-bad, to threats, to provocations.  We have fallen into a black hole, from which there is little hope of escape, by supporting a strategy of preemptory aggression against countries who harbor terrorists.  It has resulted in a fiasco: militarily, diplomatically, and economically.  We must reject that concept and return to the concepts of war as a last resort; of Peace Corps missions in other countries; of foreign aid that builds people power, not plutocrat or dictatorship power; of foreign aid that is tied to agreed-upon measurable outcomes and not to manipulation.

Briefly, we must also list:
--Alternative energy sources must be our quest;  
--Incarceration reform is a necessity: we can no longer simply punish.  Every incarcerated person must be involved in education and community service in some way; perhaps, as part of their sentences.
--We must work with universities and technical and professional schools, and business & labor leaders to determine what we must do to train and prepare  the work force for the future. Re-training is an on-going need; schools have to do more “adult education”!  Labor Unions must change primary focus: from wages and benefits to training, re-training, acquiring of skills, world competition.   

This is not a definitive “platform”, nor an exhaustive list of priorities.  It is merely a starting point for consideration of what a new Party might do.  Without a real challenge to the current political parties, our hope for reform and re-vitalization of our government is a feeble hope. 

Time to enlist in the on-going struggle for democracy.

A New Party?

A NEW PARTY?

The two current political parties -- Republican and Democrat -- have allowed themselves to become part of a system that seduces them into supporting special privilege, access, and power to people who can afford to “pay to play”.  Neither party is able to break this cycle.  In fact, the use of foreign funds for election campaigns, of lobbyist funds for junkets and parties, of PAC funds to win close electoral races, of inside information that enables some to prosper, and of a revolving door that sets some up with cushy jobs after their terms are over -- all of these maneuverings have negatively affected our system of government.  It stinks, and everyone knows it, but they are unable - or unwilling - to do anything about it.  The Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United, allowing corporate entities to overwhelm our elections process with third party ads, has essentially put a stamp of approval on this destruction of our democracy. 

Unless something drastic is done, we will never see a change in this mess.  Something drastic must be the advent of either a new political party, or a coordinated Movement, that will harness some of the upset and anger of the Tea Party movement and merge it with the outrage of the Union Protests in Wisconsin.  Can it be done?  Who knows, but it’s worth a try.

What might be the platform of such a party?  I offer the following elements as a starting point:

1)    Amendments to the Constitution:  in order to change the basic structure of our system
--Term Limits for Congress and the Courts
--Balanced Budget,  line-item veto, and 2/3s vote for raising taxes
--Disallow all corporate entities from contributing to campaigns; only small contributions and fed. Funds allowed; maximums imposed on every race and on individual contribution amounts
--No more earmarks
--Disallow funds as emoluments or gifts from lobbyists to legislators 
--5-year restriction on former government employee lobbying or consultation
--Disallow congressional rules that require other than majority vote on legislation or procedures
--Congress may not exempt itself from laws it legislates
--Ordinary citizens shall be involved in auditing and oversight of all governmental entities
--Add petition by the people as a way to have Congress call a constitutional convention. 
--Involve ordinary citizens in non-political commissions to re-structure districts based on population.

2)    The primary focus of this new Party must be on the branch of Government most neglected by our system: the People of The United States in whose name the Constitution was established in the first place, and about whose rights the first Ten Amendments clearly speak.  Amendment X particularly speaks of the people as having powers not already delegated to other governmental entities. Amendment XIV extends the people’s power in that no State may abridge the privileges or immunity of citizens; may not deprive any person of life, liberty or property and demands due process and equal protection be available to all citizens.  Amendments XV, XIX, XXIV and XXVI protect the right of citizens to vote.

    Although the constitution refers to the people in the context of governmental branches, it does not set forth a specific check that they have as an entity on the other branches.  For that reason, constitutional amendments are necessary to allow citizens to serve inside all areas of government.  Once that is done, legislation can be used to define and expand the role of citizen advocates/representatives.

    This new party must not allow the government of the people, by the people, for the people to perish.  Therefore, this Party must advocate for the right of citizens to be on the inside of governing.  They must be EVERYWHERE their tax dollars are being spent.  Every government-supported or contracted entity must have ordinary citizens involved in their operations in some way: as advisors, as auditors, as members of boards, commissions, committees, etc.    The time has come for this “representative democracy” to expand its representation so that ordinary citizens are advocating for other citizens at every level of  government.
    Thus, the name of this new Party ought to be something like:  “The Peoples’ Party” or “Citizens’ Party.”

3)    This new party must concentrate its efforts on attacking the current locus of power and corruption that is capturing our lawmakers, dismantling governmental protections for ordinary people, and taking over the management of our government entities through their use of corrupt monetary power.   The right wing radicals have unfortunately thrown a veil over this center of power, and blamed government rather than the barons of Wall Street, Multi-national corporations, and financial entities, for the scary economy that we find at present.  They are wrong-headed and their bamboozling of the people is contemptible. 

    Let’s be clear:   since about 1980, there has been a Plan afoot to make the rich richer; to take over political power so that this could happen.  It started quietly in 1980, when the administration of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush “began a massive decades-long transfer of national wealth to the rich.” (Roger Hodge, The Mendacity of Hope ).  It is incredible that right-wing Republicans have tried to convince us that government has engineered a massive transfer of wealth to middle and poorer classes through programs that address human needs, like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Health Care Reform. As with too much of the rhetoric of the far right, this is hogwash.  The flow of wealth is entirely toward the rich.

    Consider points made by Bill Moyers in an article titled: “The Rule of the Rich”:
    A)--between 2001 and 2008, about 40,000 US manufacturing plants have closed, and six million factory jobs have disappeared over the past 12 years, representing more than one in three manufacturing jobs.  The free market at work?  No, wage repression at work!
    B)--since 1980, while the economy continued to grow for most of that time, the average income for 90% of all Americans increased by just $303 in 28 years.  A small percentage at the top level -- maybe 2% -- benefited handsomely, and continue to do so in hard economic times.
    C)--that fraction at the top earns more than the bottom 120 million Americans; by 2007, the wealthiest 10% were taking in 50% of the national income;
    D)--while sales fall, and lay-offs continue, profits in big corporations are rising, and there is a profit accumulation that is obscene in many cases.  As the chief economist at Bank of America told the NY Times: “There’s no question that there is an income shift going on in the economy.  Companies are squeezing their labor costs to build profits.”
    E)--an article in a recent Wall Street Journal described how the super-rich earn their fortunes: with overseas labor, selling to overseas consumers, and managing financial transactions that have little to do with the rest of America.
    F)--the rich have formed their own financial culture increasingly separated from the fate of the rest of us.  Little wonder “that so many of them are hostile to paying more taxes to support the (ever-crumbling) infrastructure and the social programs that help the majority of American people.”
    G)--all of this is the outcome of thirty years of policy decisions about tax law, industry and trade, and military spending; policy decisions  paid for by the 1-2% who used their vastly increased wealth to assure that government -- under Republicans and Democrats alike -- did their bidding.
    H)--the ratification of this plan came in Jan. 2010 when the Supreme Court in Citizens United ruled that corporations are equivalent to “persons” who have the right to speak out during elections by using their wealth to purchase political ads.  Our government and our elections have been bought off by a Plutocracy, which is the rule of the rich; political power controlled by the wealthy: the privileged few who make sure that the rich get richer and that the government helps them in that Plan and Mission (could also be described as an Oligarchy).

    This newly proposed party of the People (or Coalition of Progressives) must never be taken in by the Plutocrats.  Power and privilege never give up anything without a struggle, and a People’s Party must be willing to enjoin that struggle.  More thoughts next time…