Vision for America–Part II

Following-up on my last Blog, it is important to continue to advocate for communal nurturing of children and youth.  Most important to that end is undoubtedly our educational system.  In order to discuss a Vision of education for the future, we need to see where we currently stand in this crucial area.  To that end, I turn to Tom Friedman and Michael Mandelbaum whose latest book,  “That used to Be Us: How America Fell Behind in the World It Invented and How We Can Come Back”, provides us with some statistics about our current system.

--today, in 8 other nations, young adults are more likely to have college degrees than in the U.S.  Only 42% of young adults in the U.S. have earned at least an associate’s degree; in South Korea that percentage is 58

--about 1 in 4 -- 25% -- high school students in the U.S. drops out or fails to graduate on time; that’s almost one million students leaving schools, and high school dropouts today are pretty much condemned to poverty and social failure

--75% of young Americans, between the ages of 17 to 24, are unable to enlist in the military today because they failed to graduate from high school or don‘t score high enough on the enlistment test, have a criminal record, or are physically unfit; this failure of our under-performing education system creates a national security burden, according to General Wesley Clark and Major General James Kelly

--College entrance exams suggest that just one quarter of graduating high school seniors are ready for college; 40% of incoming freshmen at community colleges have to take at least one remedial class during their first semester

--young Americans today have almost identical college completion rates as their parents; in other words, there has been no improvement in a generation

--by 2018, the U.S. economy will need about 27 million more college-educated workers, but at current graduation rates, the Center on Education and the Workforce predicts we will come up about 3 million short

--figures that emerge from challenged areas are bleak:  a study in Detroit found that 47% of adult Detroit residents - about 200,000 people -- are functionally illiterate; about half that number have their high school diplomas or a GED

--a 2004 study of 120 American corporations concluded that a third of the employees in blue chip companies wrote poorly and that businesses were spending as much as $3.1 billion annually on remedial training

In earlier blogs (see 9/26/10 and 10/6/10), I indicated some other shortcomings of our American education system which I won’t repeat here, except to say that many countries posted higher scores on the PISA (international tests) than did American students.  Friedman comments:

“We don’t think of education as an investment in national growth and national security because throughout our history it has been a localized, decentralized issue, not a national one.  Today, however, what matters is not how your local school ranks in its county or state but how America’s schools rank in the world.”

“To prosper, America has to educate its young people up to and beyond the new levels of technology.  Not only does everyone today need more education to build the critical thinking and problem-solving skills that are now necessary for any good job; students also need better education.  We define ‘better education’ as an education that nurtures young people to be creative creators and creative servers.  That is, we need our education system not only to strengthen everyone’s basics -- reading, writing and arithmetic-- but to teach and inspire all Americans to start something new, to add something extra, or to adapt something old in whatever job they are doing.  With the world getting more hyper-connected all the time, maintaining the American dream will require learning, working, producing, relearning, and innovating twice as hard, twice as fast, twice as often, and twice as much.”

In a past blog (10/22/10), I spoke about the “purpose of national public education” and concluded with a preliminary statement of purpose for public education that reflects what Friedman advocates.  With some slight revision, it went like this:

“To involve an entire community of teacher-learners (administrators, teachers, students, parents, volunteers and other interested citizens) in the teaching of traditional and foundational curricula (history, English, mathematics, science, language, technology); additionally, drawing out experiential learnings (through the arts, simulated games, and problem-solving) and discovering talents, concepts, beliefs, values and verities, in order to produce accomplished individuals, informed citizens, critical and independent thinkers, lifetime learners, cultural literates, world-class workers and competitors, and compassionate human beings willing to advocate for the welfare of the human family.”

My Vision for American education, then, starts with the necessity of a national purpose feeding into local strategies for public education.  National government, and the States, must act on this or we shall continue to fall behind.  My Vision includes a national dialogue and debate on this subject, to be led by the White House, culminating in a national White House Conference on Education that defines both the purpose and the strategy for public education in the 21st century.  I see a year-long period leading up to this Conference that would engage students, teachers, administrators, educators of teachers and ordinary citizens as delegates to state-wide and regional conferences leading up to the national conference.  This way, problems could be identified, broken down into issues and then fed into the national conference.  This is a massive undertaking similar to the White House Conference on Aging in 1981.  It would take much organization and targeting of the aspects that would go into the definition of purpose and strategy.  It would hopefully galvanize the country to focus on education as our “sputnik moment” in this century.

Secondly, since my Vision includes a national purpose for public education, it is important to look carefully and critically at the role of local school boards.

Out of the many tasks that have been delegated to school boards by the states, or which have accrued to them over time, three overlapping and somewhat contradictory responsibilities can be identified. First, the board is a policymaking entity and an elected body with a legislative and representative function.  Second, the board is an administrative agency that provides for the operation of the local school system and is ultimately accountable for the system's operation; an executive function. Third,  it has been granted some quasi-judicial powers, allowing it to investigate, render appeal decisions, and even hold hearings.

I do not for a second believe that we will ever see the national government replacing local school boards or state departments of education, but I do believe we need to see certain changes locally:

Policy-making should remain an important area in which school boards function; however, certain areas should become advisory only, such as in relation to the district's budget; performance indicators, and pupil assessment systems; curricular frameworks and standards for student achievement.  All of these require expert construction and execution, but they also require advisory input from the elected representatives of the people.

Policy-making should begin with the articulation of a shared vision and mission for the school district, taking into consideration state mandates and federal mandates, followed by the establishment of  goals and strategic objectives. Evaluating operations and analyzing gaps between current outcomes and desired outcomes should then lead to the development and implementation of strategic plans for the accomplishment of key objectives.  This must be an on-going process, and it must include the evaluation of each particular district in relation to schools in other countries.  School boards should be able to develop a Vision statement of what a competitive, world-class education consists, and should not shy away from making that the basis of policy for their district!

All hiring and firing of teachers should be placed in the hands of principals and superintendents, with school boards acting as appeal mechanisms.  All school boards must include representation from students and parents.  All school boards must come up with ways to engender broader monetary support than simply by property owner taxation and federal and state support:  all citizens need to pay perhaps through a small value-added tax dedicated to education support; corporations and businesses and foundations must also donate substantially.

Finally, what we mean by quality education must include the following, in my opinion:

-- an emphasis on science and math beginning in Kindergarten
-- art & music as part of curriculum beginning in Kindergarten and continuing through all levels
-- reading skills begin in Kindergarten, but there must be a pre-K emphasis on reading, especially in the home
-- one-on-one mentoring beginning in Kindergarten; some mentors should follow child through other grades
-- K-6 must put emphasis on training and skill development, but must especially concentrate on training in creativity, problem-solving, critical thinking, use of technology, resilience, team functioning, innovation, collaboration and cooperation

And, we cannot ignore: 

--school buildings must be rehabilitated especially in poorer districts, so that learning environments are clean and inviting
--schools that are dangerous, badly staffed, educationally indifferent, and under-funded should either be reformed, closed, or made into a new configuration under new management, such as a charter school or specialized academy
--we have to raise the standards for all students, and emphasize that “average” is no longer acceptable. 
--we need more routes to good jobs, not just through college; we need high-quality vocational training
-- drop-outs must be reduced; one possibility: require community or national service for anyone dropping out of high school and include a required educational component
--everyone needs post-secondary education; high school education today needs to prepare graduates to attend a university, two-year college, or vocational college without remedial courses being necessary
--everyone in college must be prepared for the next step, which is to become a life-time learner with future personal educational goals defined before graduation

We can no longer tolerate average achievement, or getting-by, or dropping-out.  According to Tom Friedman, there are six things necessary to produce what the country needs: better teachers and better principals; parents who are more involved and more demanding of their children’s education; politicians who push to raise educational standards, not dumb them down; neighbors who are ready to invest in schools even though their children do not attend; business leaders committed to raising standards in their communities; students who come to school prepared to learn.  More on this next time.

MY VISION FOR AMERICA–Part I

In my last Blog, I asked: what is your Vision for America?  In line with that inquiry, I am submitting a start to  my own Vision.  I hope it will be a catalyst for others to consider what they also envision.  At any rate,  I have found it to be a worthwhile endeavor, forcing me to think beyond the day-to-day political debates that have become increasingly negative, partisan and arrogant; debates often lacking in, or stretching, the truth in an attempt to bamboozle the listening audience. 

To be fair, I would have to say that my Vision for America is rooted in my personal experiences, modified by many things, such as age, geography, other people and cultures as well as study, and some ability to understand what it might be like to walk in others’ shoes.  I cannot make claim, therefore, to great prescience or revelatory Vision, but only to my own unique, and yet somewhat communal, sense of what makes America great.  I suppose there are those whose experience is richer and more vast than mine, who could rightly claim that I am somewhat naïve or biased or idealistic.  I accept such criticism, but object only to the extent that we are all suspect in certain aspects of our opinions, simply because no one can claim a perfect vision or a perfect set of experiences upon which to draw, to reflect, and to opine.

So let us begin at the beginning.  I was born into a family that wanted me and who were supported in their desires and ambitions by rather large extended families and relatives on both paternal and maternal sides.  That familial support was enhanced by their many friends and acquaintances who cared about them and me.  It is perhaps not too quaint to say that I was very fortunate to be born to parents who had experiences and backgrounds that prepared them in some mysterious and primal way for parenthood, and for understanding how very important is the concept of family and familial relationships we develop with friends and neighbors and co-workers.  Hillary Clinton was right after all: it does take a community to raise a child.

I believe we are a nation that puts great store in those concepts.  We care about families; we care about each other; we care about strangers in need.  We care about our communities, and people volunteer to aid their communities, and others, to make our communities more caring and more cohesive.  We organize, we belong, we advocate in ways that some other countries envy.  Although we claim a “rugged individualism” from our forefathers and mothers, we also take pride in our ability to “come together” to care for one another, especially in times of trouble and catastrophe.

My Vision for America in this 21st century would, therefore, have to include right off the importance of the way we begin life, the importance of family, as well as the importance of communal relationships.  Where do we begin in order to enhance these concepts?

There are some who believe that life begins at conception, and they want an America in which abortion is outlawed.  While my own view is that life is precious and must be protected, and that abortion is most often repugnant, I know from personal experience that abortion must remain a viable choice in order to protect other lives.  In my opinion,  the right-to-life principle applied only to a fetus is a limiting and limited concept of life, because it leaves out all the others involved in that one life.  We have in our backgrounds a concept of the rightness of the sacrifice of one life to save many lives, and a principle of seeking the greatest good for the greatest number.  In some cases, I believe that the difficult choice to abort a fetus must be made in order to protect the lives of those already living: the mother, existing children.  It is too easy to suggest that mothers and fathers and children must sacrifice their lives for an unborn child with horrendous defects.  It is perhaps not just easy, but insensitive and glib to suggest that everyone should be able to live with whatever is visited upon them (such as rape or incest or certain death of a mother in childbirth), in order to maintain the life of a fetus above all. 

On the other hand, one cannot say with any conviction that abortion is desirable as an easy solution for someone’s selfish reasons.  The idea of abortion on demand should be abhorrent to everyone.  Therefore, it must be clear that America as a nation should not advocate abortion, but must allow it as a choice in certain circumstances.   

So what is my vision for America in terms of this very controversial question?  My vision is that America will first of all, reach back beyond abortion to care for the children and youth of our nation in a way that will help them learn reverence for all life along with how to make difficult life-affecting decisions.  It would help for us to have the kind of sex education that would assist children not just in understanding their bodies, but  understanding all sides of issues such as contraception, abortion, and choice. At the same time, we must provide training in understanding how to make good decisions and solve problems that we face in this area.

Preliminarily, my Vision for America includes the idea of pre-natal care for all: i.e. every mother-to-be must have access to pre-natal care either freely delivered or at a reasonable cost for those who can pay.  Yes, that means more neighborhood clinics.  Yes, that means more doctors trained as ob-gyns.  Yes, that may mean either a government option for healthcare, or a mandate to private health insurance providers to include this benefit in all plans. 

Secondly, we need a (healthcare) plan that backs up our need for community involvement in raising children.  Not every mother, couple, or family has all it takes to nurture babies, raise children, or prepare teenagers for adult life.  My Vision for America sees a much greater role for mentors, for personal advocates, for independent living trainers, for foster grandparents, for tutors, for personal counselors and companions.  This mentoring needs to be made available to parents facing the birth of a first child and also to the children who are born.  We need more aides who will go into the homes of pregnant women to assist in pre-natal preparation and care, and more aides on birthing floors of hospitals, and aides who will follow the young family into their homes to make sure they start off positively and well with that new baby.  We need trainers to train in baby care and nurturing.  It would then be the parent’s choice to utilize or not utilize this service.

We need mentors and tutors and counselors available to children in every class room in this country.   We especially need classroom aides, and mentors, and foster grandparents, and volunteers who will give much needed individual attention and help to students who need such involvement.  But we also need parent tutors who will go into homes and teach parents how to teach their children.  Yes, we need this kind of interaction, of teaching life lessons, of advocating for children, of developing relationships upon which one can depend for positive feedback and encouragement.  We must have a Vision that emphasizes the real importance of children, not a false rhetoric about how important we think they are.

In the end, all kinds of health and educational services must be free to single mothers and mothers in poverty or with special needs; as well as to children for their needs.  We are not talking welfare here -- getting something for nothing -- we are as a society making investments in the lives of children and parents for future rewards for us all.  This is the short-sightedness of people who advocate the cutting of programs that help people: they see such aid only in terms of spending and providing welfare to people who they believe should take personal responsibility for themselves.  They do not understand the positive outcomes for society as a whole; for the health of the entire commonweal.   We are not talking welfare here; we are talking about protection, safety, training, growth and happiness for our parents and our children.  To do less is to continue along a path of neglect and half-measures for our families and their children.  The Vision here is of responsibility for one another; an active interdependence that enhances society and our cherished values of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

What is Your Vision for America?

This piece is inspired by a writer that I much admire.  In my humble opinion, he is one of our best, if not the very best, analytical  writers of our times.  He brings together past history and present events along with the thoughts and actions of individuals in a way that gives astounding insight into the world as it is, and as it is going to be.  I speak of none other than Thomas L. Friedman, author of “The World is Flat 3.0”, and more recently, of “That Used To Be Us.”  Tom has gotten me thinking about what politicians are doing to destroy our chances of being “all that we can be” in terms of scientific discovery, innovation and economic development.  In my estimation, our current crop of politicos not only has little idea of what “American exceptionalism” means in this new “flat” world -- a world in which more people and nations can plug-in, connect and collaborate with more equal power than ever before—but too often do exactly the opposite of what we need to live up to that  claim. 

Friedman says: “I insist that wealth in the age of flatness will increasingly gravitate to those countries who get three basic things right: the infrastructure to connect efficiently and speedily as possible with the flat world platform, the right education programs and knowledge skills to empower more…people to innovate and do value-added work on that platform, and…the right governance -- that is, the right tax policies, the right investment and trade laws, the right support for research, the right intellectual property laws, and, most of all, the right inspirational leadership -- to enhance and manage the flow with the flat world.” (emphasis added).

One basic -- the right governance -- is about all that politicians can talk about these days.  Republicans -- Tea partiers and  libertarians alike -- believe that the right governance is to have as little government intervention as possible, to go back to a time when government was smaller and less intrusive, to cut programs of government that they say are out-of-control, and to reduce spending.  Unfortunately, what they are talking about has little to do with the crisis that is brewing in this country:  the failure to deal decisively with the gaps that exist in science, education and governance.

As Friedman indicates, America was lucky to be the only economy standing after World War II, and we were also fortunate to have little or no competition for forty years afterward.  That gave us “a huge head of steam but also bred a culture of complacency” that really took hold in the 1990s when there was a profound tendency to extol consumption over hard work and investment, immediate gratification over long-term thinking and sacrifice.  “When we got hit with 9/11, it was a once-in-a-generation opportunity to summon the nation to sacrifice, to address some of its pressing fiscal, energy, science, and education shortfalls -- all the things that we had let slide.  But our president [Bush] did not summon us to sacrifice.  He summoned us to go shopping.”

And today, what do many of the politicians in Washington, and elsewhere, want us to focus on?  Certainly not on science, education, infrastructure and informed management of government, but on the following:

-- The government-hating crowd is leading us astray at a time when we need a strong central government that can call us to sacrifice, to innovate, to build and re-build, and to acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to compete in this new world.  The manufactured problems of government intrusiveness and failures is exactly what we don’t need right now.  What we do need is increased collaboration of government with business, labor, educational institutions, and programs of national significance that will re-build our crumbling infrastructure once again into the best in the world. 

-- The deficit-hawks are losing sight of where our tax dollars need to go in order to re-build our competitiveness.  Yes, of course, we need to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse, but where have you seen any meaningful criteria assigned to those categories?  Is it wasteful to spend money to repair and renovate our public school buildings so that children have an inspiring atmosphere in which to work?  In some cases yes; in some cases no.  The problem is, we fail to define parameters for knowing what is wasteful.  More to the point, politicians have failed to define for us the areas in which we need to invest, and why such investment is important to our future.  Take for instance, cuts to the NASA space programs; we have defined where we can cut, but not where we need to invest.  What NASA programs should be strengthened or begun because they can increase our scientific skills and innovation as a country?  Has anyone even asked that question?

-- And what about education: how have the politicians and leaders of this country dealt with that?  Well, first there was “No Child Left Behind” which touched just one aspect of our educational spectrum, that of accountability, testing, grading.  What a colossal misappropriation of time and energy and dollars!  At a time when we should be setting challenging goals for training students in math, science and engineering, we are instead focusing on test scores!  In a time when we should be training students in critical problem-solving, in flexibility, in creative thinking, in human interactions that are critically needed in this flat world, we are worried about schools that fail to test well!

--Lately, we have the Obama administration’s attempt to “race to the top.”  But the definition of that race, the elements of it, the goals and purposes, remain murky at best and are unknown to the average American without whose commitment no progress will be made toward a lasting and meaningful reform of public education.

-- At this time, when the skills and commitments needed in order to compete in this new world of technological innovation are critical to our future as a country, we cannot be eliminating programs and supports that are needed in advancing those competencies.  We cannot afford to cut back on Pell grants; we cannot afford to shorten the school week or school days; we cannot afford the laying off of thousands of teachers as though they are expendable and as though it will not weaken our public school system; we cannot talk about the elimination of the Department of Education; we cannot afford a curriculum that eliminates subjects like art & music that add to the creativity which is essential to living in a world of global competition; nor can we ignore or question scientific method and conclusions and substitute someone’s mythical ideas about creation or how humans got here in the first place.

-- And where are we on energy?  Republicans think tax breaks for oil companies, drilling in Alaska and off-shore, hydro-fracking for natural gas in the Marcellus shale, and using clean coal and atomic power will solve our energy problems.  They are, once again, leading us in the wrong direction, and spending money on 20th century concepts that will not solve one of our major 21st century problems.  We need innovation, and cut-backs on research and development to help solve a budget deficit will not bring innovation and new industry like energy-efficient homes and factories, electric cars and alternative fuel sources. 

-- We are probably no better off when it comes to infrastructure building and re-building.  Will President Obama’s new jobs plan bring some real activity in this area; will we invest in better school buildings, faster trains, safer bridges, roads, and airports?  It’s anybody’s guess, but the deadlock in Congress does not bode well for addressing the overwhelming needs we have in these last two areas.

Friedman made the point about 9/11 being an opportunity to call the nation to sacrifice and to address some of the gaps in education, science, energy, and governance that are becoming critical in this new age.  But, we have dithered, and governance has turned into rhetoric without depth, into talking points made without walking points enacted, into opposing without reasoning, into ideologies about principles with minimal ethical content, into government-hating when we desperately need governance reform.

I would only add, that we have lost Vision.  We know that we are spending too much, both individually and as a government, but still, we have great resources.  We know that we have a tremendous capacity to assess and address whatever problems we may face.  We are an exceptional nation, but saying we are exceptional is entirely different from actually demonstrating our talents, our resolve, our innovative spirit, our ability to recover from set-backs, our tremendous capacity to succeed. 

What we need right now is a Vision of where we need to be as a nation in the future.  Obama has tried to define it in certain areas like education and energy and healthcare, but has failed to present a vision like John F. Kennedy did when he called for us to place a man on the moon in ten years.  No one else has come forward to offer a real vision of the future.  Conservative politicians have, in fact, a vision of moving backward -- they want to return to the past as a way to confront the future, which is absolutely sophomoric and oxymoronic.

The ancient questions-- Who are we?  Why are we here at this time? Where are we going? -- are questions we must address once again in our never-ending mission to be a nation that leads and that heals the world.  We need someone to come forward who will tell us who we are as a people; to show us what purpose we have as individuals and a people at this time in history, and finally, we desperately need someone to tell us where we need to be as a nation in the rest of the 21st century.  If the world is as flattened as Friedman claims, perhaps the answers will come, not from political leaders, but from individuals who are plugged-in and collaborating with each other by electronic means.  What is your Vision for America?

RE-BUILDING THE AMERICAN DREAM

The time has come to use this BLOG to present something that is not of my making.  It is something I had a small part in.  I was one of the 25,000 people who came together in small groups throughout this country in early July to rank ten top priorities for action that could hopefully help to rebuild the American Dream.  My group met in a small city near my home.  It was a group of 15 persons dedicated to an endeavor that began under the aegis of about 80 progressive organizations.  We met for several hours to share our concerns and issues and then to rate the issues as we thought best.  I am happy to report that our group reflected most of the top ten choices that ended up as part of the Contract.

What follows is the Contract for the American Dream as it is found on the internet address included at the bottom of this entry.

“I HAVE A DREAM. IT IS A DREAM DEEPLY ROOTED IN THE AMERICAN DREAM.”
– Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., 1963 March on Washington
 
“We, the American people, promise to defend and advance a simple ideal: liberty and justice... for all. Americans who are willing to work hard and play by the rules should be able to find a decent job, get a good home in a strong community, retire with dignity and give their kids a better life. Every one of us – rich, poor or in-between, regardless of skin color or birthplace, no matter their sexual orientation or gender – has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
That is our covenant, our compact, our contract with one another. It is a promise we can fulfill – but only by working together.

Today, the American Dream is under threat. Our veterans are coming home to few jobs and little hope on the home front.  Our young people are graduating off a cliff, burdened by heavy debt, into the worst job market in half a century. The big banks that American taxpayers bailed out won’t cut homeowners a break. Our firefighters, nurses, cops and teachers – America’s everyday heroes – are being thrown out onto the street.

We believe: AMERICA IS NOT BROKE. America is rich – still the wealthiest nation ever. But too many at the top are grabbing the gains. No person or corporation should be allowed to take from America while giving little or nothing back. The superrich who got tax breaks and bailouts should now pay full taxes – and help create jobs here, not overseas. Those who do well in America should do well by America.

AMERICANS NEED JOBS, NOT CUTS. Many of our best workers are sitting idle, while the work of rebuilding America goes undone. Together, we must rebuild our country, reinvest in our people and jump-start the industries of the future. Millions of jobless Americans would love the opportunity to become working, tax-paying members of their communities again. We have a jobs crisis, not a deficit crisis.

To produce this Contract for the American Dream, 131,203 Americans came together online and in their communities. We wrote and rated 25,904 ideas. Together, we identified the 10 most critical steps to get our economy back on track and restore the American Dream:

1. INVEST IN AMERICA’S INFRASTRUCTURE.
Rebuild our crumbling bridges, dams, levees, ports, water and sewer lines, railways, roads and public transit. We must invest in high-speed Internet and a modern, energy-saving electric grid.  These investments will create good jobs and rebuild America. To help finance these projects, we need national and state infrastructure banks.

2. CREATE 21ST-CENTURY ENERGY JOBS.
We should invest in American businesses that can power our country with innovative technologies like wind turbines, solar panels, geothermal systems, hybrid and electric cars, and next-generation batteries. And we should put Americans to work making our homes and buildings energy efficient. We can create good, green jobs in America, address the climate crisis, and build
the clean energy economy.

3. INVEST IN PUBLIC EDUCATION. We should
provide universal access to early childhood education, make school funding equitable, invest in high-quality teachers, and build safe, well-equipped school buildings for our students. A high-quality education system, from universal preschool to vocational training and affordable higher education, is critical for our future and can create badly needed jobs now.

4. OFFER MEDICARE FOR ALL. We should expand
Medicare so it’s available to all Americans, and reform it to
provide even more cost-effective, quality care. The Affordable Care Act is a good start and we must implement it – but it’s not enough. We can save trillions of dollars by joining every other industrialized country – paying much less for health care while getting the same or better results.

5. MAKE WORK PAY. Americans have a right to fair
minimum and living wages, to organize and collectively bargain, to enjoy equal opportunity and to earn equal pay for equal work.  Corporate assaults on these rights bring down wages and benefits for all of us. They must be outlawed.

6. SECURE SOCIAL SECURITY. Keep Social Security
sound, and strengthen the retirement, disability, and survivors’ protections Americans earn through their hard work. Pay for it by removing the cap on the Social Security tax, so that upper income people pay into Social Security on all they make, just like the rest of us.

7. RETURN TO FAIRER TAX RATES. End, once and
for all, the Bush-era tax giveaways for the rich, which the rest of us – or our kids – must pay eventually. Also, we must outlaw corporate tax havens and tax breaks for shipping jobs overseas.  Lastly, with millionaires and billionaires taking a growing share of our country’s wealth, we should add new tax brackets for those
making more than $1 million each year.

8. END THE WARS AND INVEST AT HOME.
Our troops have done everything that’s been asked of them, and it’s time to bring them home to good jobs here. We’re sending $3 billion each week overseas that we should be investing to rebuild America.

9. TAX WALL STREET SPECULATION. A tiny fee of
1/20th of 1% on each Wall Street trade would raise tens of billions of dollars annually with little impact on actual
investment. This would reduce speculation, “flash trading,” and outrageous bankers’ bonuses – and we’d have a lot more money to spend on Main Street job creation.

10. STRENGTHEN DEMOCRACY. We need clean,
fair elections – where no one’s right to vote can be taken away, and where money doesn’t buy you your own member of Congress. We must ban anonymous political influence, slam shut the lobbyists’ revolving door in D.C. and publicly finance elections. Immigrants who want to join in our democracy deserve a clear path to citizenship. We must stop giving corporations the rights of people when it comes to our elections. And we must ensure our judiciary’s respect for the Constitution. Together, we
will reclaim our democracy to get our country back on track.”

Having read this Contract, it is my hope that you will go to the site address below and either sign your name, or commit yourself to work for its principles and actions.  Almost 296,000 have already signed.

HTTP://CONTRACT.REBUILDTHEDREAM.COM

Wake to Reality Now or Regret It Later!

In my last BLOG, I discussed the way things will be if the Republican Right-wing radicals take over all branches of the federal government, particularly in relation to our veterans.  A certain hypocrisy and perverseness will become the order of the day, as Republican right-wingers, in contrast to their anti-government stance, make use of the power and machinery of that very government they so oppose, to force upon others their own agenda and philosophy.

For all that they will do to diminish the role of government in certain areas -- entitlements and social welfare programs, in particular -- the Right Wing will counter that very concept by using the machinery of government to interfere and intervene in ordinary people’s lives: to influence the thinking and direction of social policy; to take from the poor and middle class to give to the rich, and to enhance their ascendancy and dominance over the affairs of this nation. 

Look at another brief example of right-wing hypocrisy and perverseness: the use of the power and mechanisms of national government to impose the religious outlook of a minority upon the majority.  Yes, I am talking about the bent of right-wingers toward the theology/philosophy of Christian Evangelicals.  Republicans hate government intervention in social issues -- like civil rights, affirmative action, equal pay for women, a broad safety net for the poor --that have roots in other religious traditions and tenets.  But, what do the radical Republicans want to impose upon the average citizen through legislation and regulation?

--prayer in schools;
--no choice on abortion;
--avowing homosexuality as a choice that is sinful, according to scripture, and that must be renounced or punished;
--declaring God on the side of the USA no matter what;
--a suspicion bordering on rejection of science, especially in terms of evolution and climate control;
--Creationism must be taught in schools;
--entire curricula will be re-written to reflect evangelical points of view;
--a secular government is an abomination; (evangelical) Christianity should pervade all aspects of government;
--a push toward dominionism: “that Christians have a God-given right to rule all earthly institutions. Originating among some of America’s most radical theocrats, it’s long had an influence on religious-right education and political organizing… Think of it like political Islamism, which shapes the activism of a number of antagonistic fundamentalist movements, from Sunni Wahhabis in the Arab world to Shiite fundamentalists in Iran.”
(www.thedailybeast.org).  Bachmann and Perry both have ties to this fringe group.

If that doesn’t disturb you, then perhaps you need to understand that the radical Right will use government power and authority to diminish and minimize the role of government in your life.  In other words:

--no more Post Office; get your mail some other way;
--impotent labor unions; they will destroy them or reduce them to non-entities;
--no more protections for workers; no more bargaining rights
--minimal regulation of businesses, banks, corporations, mortgage lenders, wall street firms, etc..
--diminution or destruction of consumer protection programs and/or agencies like the E(nvironmental) P(rotection) A(gency), FEMA, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the new Consumer Financial Protection Agency;
--the decrease of investment in science will result in less research for making life better for all.  The NASA budget has already been reduced, and reductions in the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, Department of the Interior, and the National Institutes of Health will all affect scientific inquiry, innovations, and new protections for the citizenry;
--reduction in first responder grants to FEMA raises the question as to whether that agency will be there in adequate force when natural disasters strike (which could be anywhere, just like Hurricane Irene!);
--job-training programs will be cut and consolidated across 12 agencies which means that they will inadequately train for special needs and requirements, so don’t count on job training programs being helpful in your search for a new job or career!
--Community Development Funds to rehab houses in low-income neighborhoods, the Public Housing Capital Fund depended on for repairs to public housing, and the HOPE IV program that aims to revamp severely distressed public housing, are all on the chopping block, so look out if you are one of millions who can’t afford other than public housing;
--add to this attack on low-income persons who live in public housing: cuts in the WIC program that provides food and formula for low-income families, cuts in the federal COPS program that helps local police develop crime-fighting strategies and technologies, or millions in cuts from programs that help juveniles avoid the criminal justice system, and you have a recipe for disaster, especially in low-income communities;
--and what do you think will happen to the high-speed rail under those cut-thirsty Republicans, or to the rest of our infrastructure?
--public education is going to be headed toward demolition with an emphasis on charter schools, billions of cuts to school districts with needy students, cuts in Title I grants, and inevitable cutting away of Head Start, as well as the destruction of the federal Department of Education;
--and then there’s health care:  destruction of Medicare and Medicaid, and repeal of the recent health care Act would be inevitable, but there’s more: diminishment of community health centers, cuts in grants to states to enroll more children in the CHIP program, and of course the phase-out of funding for Planned Parenthood.

Is this the kind of nation you really want?  If not, stop being bamboozled by the radical Right-wing, and wake up to reality.  There is existing legislation proposed, or already passed, in the House of Representatives that will force their particular views on the majority, implement draconian cuts to national government structure and many more of its programs, within a very short period of time.    

The Republican Master Plan is to move this country “Back(ward) to the Future” by imposing immediate austerity measures.  If voters put Republicans in control of all branches of  the federal government in 2012, we will quickly become a nation similar to what we were in the early 20th century (or even the late 19th century) because of their backward-trending (“regressive”) actions, described above.

That was a time when efforts by religious communities and other non-profit organizations were all that were available to take care of the poor, the homeless, the sick, orphans, widows and the elderly because government-sponsored programs were inadequate or non-existent.  Those past efforts by humanitarian agencies were commendable, but too many social needs and problems were not addressed, large numbers of people fell through the cracks, and many lives were adversely affected. While non-profits still have a vital role to play, their efforts will be entirely insufficient given the expanding needs in this century.

The negative stance of Republicans toward government aid programs will essentially shred the social safety net, forcing millions of fellow citizens into uncertain and inadequate situations.  That policy was not sufficient in by-gone days, and it definitely won’t work now!  National problems involving our most vulnerable citizens require strong federal solutions, not negative and inadequate responses! 

Don’t allow a minority of radical conservatives to force their distorted views on the rest of us!  Challenge their policies now or regret it later!

Just Think of How It Could Be….

Just think: if a Republican from the current gaggle of GOP presidential candidates is actually elected President of the United States, and Republicans keep the House and re-take the Senate, we can look forward to seeing some things we haven’t seen in a long time, and which we will regret! 

--The Destruction of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, as well as many other programs that assist the broad middle class, as well as the poor and those with special needs;
--Global warming exacerbated and air pollution near industrial areas unregulated enough to cause increased lung diseases, especially in children
--Health insurance returned to levels that exclude significant numbers; that restores high premiums, poor coverage, penalties for pre-existing conditions, and drug prices that spiral completely out-of-control
--A national government that is dependent on state development of safety-net programs that because of state economic troubles, will be entirely inadequate;
--A return to the time when individuals, churches and other religious communities and non-profit organizations had to take care of the poor, the homeless, the sick, the orphan, those with physical and mental handicaps, the widow and the elderly because government-sponsored programs were entirely inadequate or non-existent;
--A return to segregated “neighborhood” schools and the further diminishment of a national public school system;
--A federal government so denuded of funding and power that robber-barons in industry take over virtual control of all aspects of people’s lives;
--A time when women who chose to abort a pregnancy were either harmed in the attempt by amateur abortionists or faced arrest along with sympathetic doctors
--A return to the militancy of the last century that sees America’s military might as the key to its hegemony throughout the world.  As was true of the Cold War era, American militarists exhibit: a belief in a contest between good and evil; a tendency not to use reason, but to spread alarm; to freely concoct dangers when real ones are unavailable; to exaggerate others’ power, and an impulse to create monsters where none exist. They disparage not only the agencies of diplomacy but disparage diplomacy itself. 
--The Department of Defense budget will be swollen to obese proportions; the funding of overblown and unnecessary weapons systems will be perpetuated and enhanced in order to give lucrative contracts to certain corporations (and thus to individuals) who have been “supportive” of Republican (and Democratic) career politicians who generally represent conservative (militarist) viewpoints.  President Eisenhower’s warning about the “military-industrial complex” is all too relevant!

While over-spending on defense, Republicans will do as they have so often done: ignore or diminish the amount of help and aid given to veterans, and those returning immediately from Iraq and Afghanistan.  Why?  Because their ideology which is ever-so-strong on national defense is ever-so-weak on supporting government programs which assist those who need a helping hand.  Their mantra is simple: let those with problems find their own means of solving them; we can’t have the government giving hand-outs to everyone in need. 

“Remember Michele Bachmann’s attempted $4 billion cut from disabled veterans compensation? Well, ‘they’re ba-ack…’ Except this time they are looking to cut away at our VA healthcare.
Republican Paul Ryan and the House of Representatives are looking to end VA healthcare for over 1.3 million veterans who are Priority 7 & 8. These veterans are the least disabled veterans using the system, usually with disability ratings of 0 percent or no service-connected disability. According to the Congressional Budget Office “Option 35,” the cuts would leave 130,000 veterans with no healthcare alternative. This means veterans with conditions not recognized by the VA, like certain diseases from Agent Orange exposure, would have to pay for healthcare out of pocket if they had no other service connected disability.
“Currently, the VA spends over $4 billion yearly to treat these vets, despite co-pays intended to offset the expense. Ryan’s cuts are intended to save $6 billion off the VA’s tab and $62 billion over the next 10 years. Instead of merely increasing the co-pay or taxing Wall Street, Congress wants to just cut your benefits out, all together.”
(From www.disabledveterans.org by Ben Krause)

And so, let us count the ways that the Republican contrarians will fail to support our long-time and short-term veterans of foreign wars:

--they will neglect the VA hospital and treatment system, as they have done many times before, most recently under George W. Bush, when Walter Reed Army Hospital came under much scrutiny for its terrible conditions and treatment of our injured men and women in uniform;
--they will minimize, and cut funding for, the treatment for mental disorders that plague so many of our returning warriors; they will scoff at diagnoses of TSD and TBI and “battle fatigue” because they believe in their heart-of-hearts that many of these cases are just “faking” it, or are just not strong enough to overcome their problems, or are trying to avoid being sent on another tour of duty;
--they will never produce a G.I. bill that helps young vets with college or technical training; that helps with finding a job; that supports their families in times of need; that supports low-income housing and housing maintenance;
--moreover, they will continue to cut or diminish programs like food stamps, unemployment compensation, college loans and grants, housing loans, home heating, affordable health insurance, that could be of help to some of these young families;
-- they will use the machinery of government to engage in wars that are futile and costly, not only in terms of human life but in terms of resources and treasure, while sacrificing bright young lives to their bellicose attempts to preserve the honor and position of our nation when neither are at stake;
--they will make use of government bureaucrats and appointees to discourage veterans from completing training or rehabilitation that is costly.  Here’s Ben Krause again:

“The following is a list of a few of most common fish stories given by Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors to deny veterans access to Chapter 31 benefits:
1. Veterans with high disability ratings usually fail to complete their training.
2. You cannot use Voc Rehab if you are Individually Unemployable (IU).
3. Veterans with families have a harder time completing their programs.
4. Voc Rehab will not pay for graduate school.
5. If you have a job, you do not qualify for Voc Rehab.
Lies – all lies. In a VA Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) Training Module Study Plan…the majority of truths to the lies can be found. “
 
--they will in all likelihood, given their stand that states are closer to the people and that states can do a “better job“, consider the devolvement of responsibility (as they want to do with Medicaid) for the care of veterans to the states, in order to minimize the debt of the federal government; which will, of course, exacerbate the problem of providing adequate care for our veterans, which is a national problem and responsibility!

Is this what YOU want?  If it is, be sure to vote Republican because it’s becoming clearer from bills passed in the House, including Ryan’s Budget, that this is exactly what you will get!  On the other hand, if you believe that America stands for something better than this, you have no choice but to vote against right-wing Republicans!

Focus on Solving Present Problems

Republican conservatives have stolen the focus of national debate.  Rather than solving immediate problems like unemployment and loss of housing, Congress -- and the White House -- are being held hostage to a manufactured problem: that of deficit spending and debt ceiling.  This is not unusual;  conservatives have often shifted the focus of national debate to the subject of deficit spending to avoid dealing with the real issues that confront the citizenry of this country. 

They did it in the 1940s when FDR tried to cap wages for the rich, and to increase the amount of taxes the rich had to pay in order to help pay for the War effort.  They did it again in the 1960s when LBJ was attempting to balance “Guns and Butter” trying to fight a war and forge a Great Society to address the needs of the poor and dispossessed as well as the inequities that existed between the races.  The battle over the deficit, culminating in a surcharge and spending cuts in 1968, ended Johnson’s efforts to build new social programs.  Ronald Reagan used the issue of deficit spending to rise to power, as did the congressional Republicans in the 1994 midterm elections.  And, of course, most recently, Republicans (and the Tea Partiers) have used dire warnings about deficits to curtail President Obama’s progressive agenda.  The terrible irony is, of course, that Republicans -- like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush -- have a terrible record when it comes to balancing the budget!

One can address this tendency of Republican conservatives to derail progressive agendas by their dire predictions and warnings about deficit spending, in several ways.  One would be to point out that FDR learned from his 1937-38 acceptance of reducing the deficit as important to righting the Depression economy that not only didn’t it work, it created chaos.  FDR’s reversal to large deficit spending in order to stimulate jobs and housing and individual welfare, along with his early pre-war and war years spending (and his insistence on higher taxes, particularly on the rich) helped to create a robust economic recovery as well as a successful war effort, besides creating a broadly prosperous middle class.     

But I want to go in an entirely different direction and pick up a thread of thought that I have mentioned before.  Both Republicans and Democrats tend to want to focus their attention on ideology rather than on problems to be solved.  And, unfortunately, they often do this by focusing attention on predictions of future consequences rather than on the necessity of present-day problem-solving.  They also have a recurring tendency to “kick the can down the road” so they can avoid making decisions that are needed in the present.

It is my contention that the Congress and the White House need to devote themselves to living “in the present” rather than trying to live in the future.  One caveat to this opinion: laying the groundwork for future problem-solving while solving present-day problems is not the same as trying to predict the future and then trying to resolve those predicated problems.

What do I advocate?  I suggest that we concentrate our efforts on solving problems confronting us right now, with a problem-solving method.  Although I am no expert in this realm, I have had training and experience in the matter, which is probably more than can be said for the majority of members of Congress and the Executive branch.

So, putting aside the issue of deficit spending for the moment, what is the major problem that the American people have identified in most polls?  This is really the first step in problem-solving: to identify the problem(s) to be solved.  Sometimes this requires research into what people are saying, or probative questioning that helps identify and  narrow the problem.  In some cases, a problem needing to be addressed is quite clear.  I would venture to say, in the present case, that it is JOBs.  Many would say that the problem is that “there are no jobs,” or that they “can’t find a job,” or that “jobs are scarce,” or that “no one is hiring.”   Certainly we can take from this that the jobs problem is multi-faceted, so that in order to deal with the issue of jobs, we must define the problems more carefully.

That is the second major step of problem-solving: defining the problem(s) in a precise manner in order to propose precise solutions that speak to the exact problem rather than to something else (Congress has a penchant for dealing with diversionary or secondary problems, although some special Commissions have approached a more exact standard).

Let’s take a stab at defining one of the problems (all stats are made-up): 
“People can’t find jobs in the electronics field because they need training.” Too general.

“It is estimated that 2.3 million people cannot find jobs in electronics because they are lacking in the requisite skills.”  Not precise enough.

“One million people in the New England states cannot find jobs in the electronics industry because they lack skills in computer programming, electronics manufacture, or use of software programs.” Probably much better: it quantifies the problem, specifies a location, and identifies the skills needed.  Someone more versed in this problem might be able to be more specific, but hopefully you get the idea.

At this point, or even before this point while trying to clarify the problem, the problem-solvers may need to research the problem further by doing some fact-finding.  Congress and Executive advisers could be very helpful in this step, but so can many other experts and ordinary citizens.  During this step, breaking a larger problem into smaller, more precise, problems may become necessary.

Once a problem to be addressed is clearly defined, the next step is to: generate as many potential solutions as possible.   (By the way, here is where the myriad of committees in Congress could be most useful - gathering the potential solutions to a specific problem from experts and ordinary citizens).  The key to this step is to avoid premature judgments of the efficacy of any proposed solution, but to allow as much freedom of expression as possible.  The winnowing occurs later.  Ways of generating solution ideas ranges from brain-storming to surveying people’s opinions.  Another possibility is to try to view the problem from other perspectives than one’s own.

Here are a few possible (partial) solutions just to illustrate this step:

-Send a block grant to the identified states to assist in job training in electronics
-Get electronics manufacturers to offer training sessions to interested citizens
-Have specific electronics companies offer internships
-Arrange government contracts with private trainers to offer computer training and use of software
-Expand use of community colleges to teach computer skills
-Identify government and social service agencies where citizen volunteers can be trained in computer skills
-Use AmeriCorps and Teacher Corps members to train cadres of people in local communities in computer skills

This list, of course, could go on and on as possible solutions are solicited.  Notice that no one suggestion is the “ideal” solution.  As one brainstorms with a group, one discovers many facets that were previously unknown or hidden; in fact, some seemingly impractical or naïve solutions may trigger good ones!  The power of this step is incalculable, and leads one to the conclusion that it is often not a good idea to seek one solution to a problem, but to concentrate one’s efforts in several directions. 

If Congress were to take such an approach as its modus operandi, there might need to be a limited time frame proposed for such “solution-gathering”.  Another caveat:  Congress already does some of this solution-gathering through committee hearings on proposed bills and on budget authorizations and appropriations.  But too often, the solutions have already been proposed and they are seeking agreement, but are so committed to an ideology that any conflicting advice is quickly dismissed as irrelevant.  That is why, too often, only witnesses sympathetic to the majority view are called to appear; others are simply ignored.  

The final step in this definition of the problem and possible solutions is: to choose (and evaluate) the most viable alternatives/solutions.  Not an easy task because all kinds of obstacles can present themselves in the form of prejudices, ignorance, lack of experience, and ideologies.  So this is the most likely place for some ground rules and for civil debate, and for a willingness to see the good in proposals that may not conform entirely to one’s pre-conceived notions! 

Some groups, at this point, study the meaning of the word “consensus” (a process by which a group consents to a proposal even though there may still be some individual dissent or concern. “Compromise” may be a factor in this but there is more likely the sense that acceptance is based on a greater good that may be achieved).  Diversion from the topic, name-calling, ideological rants, irrationalities, narcissism, blocking, unsubstantiated facts or opinions, and other negative behaviors are ruled out-of-bounds so that the group can proceed with its task of choosing viable alternatives.

Such choice can be done in more than one way and often the group chooses its own process.  Three possible procedures: eliminate those solutions that are glaringly unworkable and then assign a ranking to the rest; or, rank all solutions by voting; or, rank only those items the group feels are most workable.  Groups or committees often employ a combination of procedures to get the best results.

Some other criteria:
-it is important that solutions chosen speak directly to the defined problem
-it is necessary that each chosen solution be viable and doable
-it may be helpful to seek outside expert advice when a particular proposal needs greater definition or there is a need to resolve deep conflicts
-it is requisite that every chosen solution be backed-up with sound research and argument and with group consensus; every member of the group should be able to defend the choices, even though some reservations may still be held.  Minority opinion and concerns should always be reported in order to protect the integrity of the process and the outcomes of the debates/choices.

Therefore, some evaluation of the top ideas is necessary at this point to test whether each is good enough to consider using.  Will it offer a big-enough benefit?  Where could things go wrong - are there too many high risks?  What will be the consequences of implementing a particular chosen solution?  What pressures will be brought against it; can they be addressed?  Is it worth implementing from a financial perspective?  Some groups use a testing or demonstration procedure here so that one or more solutions can be “tried out” in a limited way before full implementation.

Now that the group or committee has gone through this problem-solving process, their work is not done.  The most difficult process is yet to come, and that is: planning for implementation.  More on that in a future Blog, but right now a few points need to be made in conclusion:

-this is a technique that can be taught and learned; even for members of Congress!
-Unfortunately, I cannot find much of this kind of training being done (there is one small contract let by the Labor Department for such training)
-this is a technique that is a continuous circle not a straight-line process; once a solution is implemented, a cycle of evaluation and improvement must kick-in; something much needed in government
-this problem-solving method has the potential to change the way Congress and the Executive branch operate.
- why do we tolerate anything less from those who govern?

Is President Obama a “Lightweight”?

When I was a supporter of Hillary Clinton, I said to my spouse:  “this guy Obama seems like a lightweight.  I’m not sure he has what it takes to be a strong President.”  I stuck with Hillary until almost the end when I switched my support to Obama because her campaign was making too many wrong moves.  I thought he might be “ the one” after all.  After the latest debacle surrounding the debt ceiling, and his “compromises” with Republicans over debt reduction and spending cuts, I have to ask again, is he a lightweight?  (Even if he is,  I’m glad he made history -- we needed that!).

On the one hand, the evidence points to a verdict that the President is indeed a lightweight.  Let me count the ways:

1)    He had little experience with governing.  Yes, he was an Illinois State Senator for three terms.  Yes, he served in the US Senate from 2004 to 2009.  Yes, he worked as a lawyer and a professor and a community organizer.  But, he had little experience as an Executive who had to confront challenges, mobilize people to address those challenges, and then carry through on implementing concepts, programs, policies, etc., to meet those challenges.  Maybe that’s why Senators have such a hard time becoming President.  Governing is a whole lot different than campaigning!

2)    He veered from the obvious path of needing to deal with jobs and housing to dealing with health care.  A huge mistake that still has not been rectified.

3)    Then he failed to lead the way on health care.  His extreme caution in not producing a carefully thought-out plan for health care plus his insistence that Congress construct the plan(s), led to a debacle over that summer.  The lack of a clear plan to be discussed and debated helped lead to the distortions that Republicans and Tea Partiers put forth into the minds of the electorate by cherry-picking from various bills that were then on the table. 

    What’s worse is that he didn’t learn from this mistake.  Instead, he did the same thing with the 2012 budget plan and with the latest debt-reduction plan.  He let Paul Ryan lead the way, instead of pushing his own agenda.  He let the Republicans define the debate by insisting on spending cuts before the debt ceiling could be raised.  He let the Congress do the heavy-lifting, and that meant that the Tea Partiers took over the debate and the initiative.  Strong Presidents propose plans and legislation, and then they work with Congress to influence the outcome.

4)    He failed to stand-up for the most progressive part of the health care plan which was the public option, which he touted and then abandoned when the pressure from the Right, and from Democrat defectors got too hot.  This was the first indication for many progressives that he was not the strong advocate we thought he was.  This decision diluted the bill so much that both the positive and negative parts that remained could not get a fair hearing.  The public favored a public option throughout the debate simply because so many needed it, and the President abandoned them in the name of compromise.  “Capitulation” would be a more accurate term, and this was the beginning demonstration of this very trait.

5)    The “Stimulus Package” was ill-advised in that it did not address strongly enough the needs for help with housing and jobs.  It was characterized as helping Wall Street and not Main Street.  Obama did not take the opportunity to explain thoroughly what the plan was meant to accomplish, nor what it was achieving.  For many, it did not appear that the stimulus package was strong enough; it needed even greater funding to address the prevalent problems that people were facing.  It was also not transparent: the administration failed to get the provisions out to the people; it was even difficult to find it online.  Not only was the initial phase ill-explained, but the accomplishments were almost ignored.  There should have been a cadre within the White House with no other mission than to explain what was happening with that legislation, and to keep the public up-to-date on it.

6)    From 2009 through 2010, the President failed to use the majority in the House and Senate to his advantage. The Democratic Caucus was contentious and scrambled, as usual, and the need for strong leadership in this regard was practically ignored.  Would Lyndon Johnson have allowed maverick Democrats to get away with defying him on major issues, like health care or the Stimulus?  You better believe he would not.  He would have brow-beat them over the phone or in his office until they whimpered. Would Harry Truman have given in to the idea that the Generals should tell him what to do in either Iraq or Afghanistan?  Remember General MacArthur?  He tried to tell old Harry what to do about China and he got fired!  Obama failed to use the Democratic majority to pass strong legislation on housing, health care, and jobs, and waited until the lame duck session in late 2010 to push Congress a bit! Guess what? It was definitely too late!

7)    The President has been characterized as “Bush Lite”.  
--carried out the wars with Iraq and Afghanistan (with a surge for the latter as Bush did for the former)
--threw the military at the problem of violence against protestors in Libya just as Bush did with Iraq (to get Hussein).  
--failed to address the “Arab Spring” just as Bush ignored the Palestinian problem
--carried through the stimulus for Wall Street and corporations from the Bush administration instead of moving ahead on his own to ensure that main street got substantial help
--just as Bush appointed Henry Paulson, former CEO of Goldman Sachs, to be his Treasury Secretary, so Obama appointed Timothy Geithner, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, to be his Treasury Secretary.  Both were strongly connected to Wall Street and both continued an emphasis on big business as the recipients of government largesse, known as “corporate welfare”.
--Obama continued the Bush approach to terrorism by extending the some adverse parts of the Patriot Act
--has done nothing about abandoning Leave No Child Behind Act
--actually approved more domestic oil drilling, but no definitive legislation to get us off foreign oil
--responded slowly to the oil leak in the Gulf just as Bush did to the devastation of Hurricane Katrina
--worst of all, Obama has become Bush Lite, or at least Republican-like, in his attitude toward cutting discretionary spending and debt reduction, instead of investment and use of government to establish jobs

Does all this mean that Progressives should abandon President Obama in 2012?  It does not.  First of all, he has done many good things, among them: 

-He got Osama bin laden!
-Saved the collapse of the American automotive industry by making GM restructure before bailing them out, and putting incentive money to help the industry
-$789 billion economic stimulus plan and a housing rescue plan
-Appointed the nation's first Chief Technology Officer
-Extended Benefits to same-sex partners of Federal employees
-Expanded hate crime law to include sexual orientation through the Hate Crimes Prevention Act
-Added 4.6 Billion USD to the Veterans Administration budget to recruit and retain more mental health professionals
-Expanded the SCHIP program to cover health care for 4 million more children
-Instituted enforcement for equal pay for women
-Removed restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research
-Tax cuts for up to 3.5 million small businesses to help pay for employee health care coverage
-Health Care Reform Bill, preventing insurance companies from denying insurance because of pre-existing condition
(Ninety more Obama administration accomplishments, in brief, can be found at www.3chicspolitico.com) 

Secondly, the immediate alternative is deadly.  The Republicans and Tea Partiers are on a path of destruction with Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid in their sights.  But make no mistake, they are after much more than that.  They want to dismantle unions as well as the federal government; they want to cut out all vestiges of the New Deal, the Great Society, and all special programs that aid the poor and disabled beyond the three mentioned above: the WIC program, heat subsidies, food stamps, SSI and, of course, Obama’s health care plan.  And these are just a few examples; there are many more.  They won’t tell you what they are, but their strategy with cuts and caps is to starve them to death where they can’t just eliminate them!

They are  hell-bent on reducing the size of government.  But that is a shibboleth for returning as much power as possible to the states, and making national government impotent.  Take Ryan’s plan for Medicaid.  Devolving it to the States is nothing more than a way to gut it, because states can’t afford the costs to keep it solvent and effective for the many children and persons with disabling conditions that it is meant to serve. 

Is there another alternative?  Not really, unless the Democratic Party wants to risk defeat by having a primary that will exhaust needed funds for a national election, and a divided party that won’t be able to win. 

Barack Obama remains as our only hope, but he needs to demonstrate a change from lightweight to stout.  He needs to present a vision for the next four years, for this decade, and for the foreseeable future.  He needs to become what the Constitution intended: not a compromiser or capitulator, but a co-equal partner in the governing of this country.  If Congress (or the Judiciary, for that matter) has gotten it wrong, he must stand up and confront them as a co-equal.  In fact, his penchant for not confronting his power-rivals is his worst trait, for he betrays the uniqueness of our Constitution: its checks and balances.  Compromise is not necessarily what the Constitution always calls for, and I disagree that that is the only outcome that the framers aimed for.  It is not.  The Constitution granted certain powers to each branch of our government, and power is not a dirty word.  Power must be exercised by each branch in an appropriate and effective manner, and the bland use of the same, or the reluctant use of the same, is as dangerous as its overuse or its abuse.

Above all, Barack Obama, the constitutional law professor, must indicate how he will use his power and authority in his second term to the people’s advantage, or he will surely be the one-term President that the right-wing “destroyers” wish him to be.  Need some guidance, Mr. President?  You could do worse than taking the Progressive Caucus’s 2012 budget proposal (The People‘s Budget), as a model for action.

[for more on outlines for action, see the blog for July 31st at www.citizenvox.org/2011/07/31/by-popular-demand-robert-weissman-debt-ceiling-irrationality/> 
and my Blog for April 10, 2010]

SICK and TIRED

Sorry, but I’m sick and tired of the lies and false alternatives and misleading agendas of the politicians in Washington (and elsewhere for that matter).  For instance, I hear cut, cut, cut spending; that government is too big; that it needs to be made smaller.

Bamboozled!!  Government can be dysfunctional and non-effective whether it is big or small!  The politicians, as so often, are on the wrong track!  And, they continue to bamboozle all of us with their fabricated rhetoric. 

The debacle just concluded - passing a bill that raises the debt limit of the United States government - is a prime example of what’s wrong with government: the process of making decisions is unwieldy, problem-solving is non-existent, and compromise is a joke!

Republicans believe that changing the discussion from stimulus spending to cutting spending is a great victory.  It isn’t.  There is no victory here, because the public policy favored by radical right-wingers is detrimental to real lives of real people.  Cutting spending without considering its effects upon people’s lives is draconian.  Cutting spending without a rational basis is akin to anarchy.  Cutting spending without knowing what or why is illogical.  Cutting spending without defining problems to be solved is idiotic.

On the other hand, Democrats are equally to blame for not defining problems, solutions, alternatives, goals and objectives, and limits for any and all increases in spending.  Too many “projects” are just simply that: self-aggrandizing programs and projects meant to feather someone’s nest or to enhance someone’s chances to get re-elected. 

Politicians are politicians - no matter to which party they adhere - and public service is fast becoming an anachronism.

The point is: reform of government is the answer, not irrational spending cuts with no basis behind them except political gain and political ideology.  Reform and re-structuring are not options; they are necessities to keep institutions responsive, innovative and democratic.  Here, in no particular order, are some ideas related to reforming the political system:

1)    We must amend the Constitution in order to change the system fundamentally; there is no other choice.
   
    In an earlier blog, dated June 20, 2010, I proposed amendments establishing term limits, public funding of elections, broadening citizen participation in auditing and evaluating government programs, contracts, etc.  Also proposed: a new method for constitutional amendment; an end to the Senate’s cloture super-majority requirement; closing of the revolving door from public service to private sector; prevention of gifts and contributions to members of Congress; limits on budget earmarks; no exemptions for congress from any legislation they pass; non-partisan commissions to draw congressional district lines.
   
    With all the Republican emphasis lately on a balanced budget amendment, it must be said that such an amendment imposes a restriction on Executive branch governance that is not balanced or checked.  Therefore, it is my contention that a balanced budget amendment must be coupled with an amendment allowing a line item veto for the President.  One without the other is contrary to the checks and balances principle of the constitution.

2)    There must be a re-examination of the purpose of all three branches of  government, and a definition of mission for all departments, units, committees, etc.

    What is the purpose of all those Congressional committees, commissions, sub-committees, joint committees, special committees.  Do they each have a clear mission? what outcomes do they expect?  Are their operations in line with their purposes?  Why do we have so many?  Are they no more than posturing opportunities, and occasions for being addressed as “Mister or Madam Chairman?” 

3)    Problem-solving techniques must be taught in depth to all members of Congress and to Executive branch members, along with group process training, so that meetings, hearings, and sessions can be places to define and resolve problems, not places to posture and bluster and politicize.  

4)    We must return to Zero-based budgeting, and define what exact problem or problems are being addressed by each appropriation.  Never mind the inane exercise pushed by Republicans that every piece of legislation must identify a constitutional basis.

5)    We must demand Sunset provisions on all tax increases and tax loopholes, old & new programs, contracts, commissions, special committees, etc.  There are very few programs or taxes or committees or contracts that have the same value or relevance after 3-5 years down the road.   

6)    We must have a process by which all contracts are executed based on problem-solving criteria.  No contract should be let without a yearly evaluation built in by which a determination is made as to whether that contractor is meeting goals/objectives and outcomes that were defined to solve problems.

7)    We must challenge the existence of political leadership positions in the Congress.  Instead, all leadership should be focused in the Speaker’s office and the office of the Senate’s President pro temp or another non-political office.  The Constitution does not allow for any other leadership positions based on party, although it does allow for other Officers.

Yes, this only scratches the surface.  Yes, reforming government is a huge undertaking. Yes, it seems almost impossible.  However, our immediate problem is not the future end-game, but the beginning steps in the present.  Where do we start?  For me the obvious place to start is amendment of the Constitution.  What do you think?

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.