Showing posts with label taxes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label taxes. Show all posts
They're baaaaack!
Having failed to inflict sufficient damage on Santa Monica's planning process last year with its ill-conceived but successful referendum to hogtie the development of the admirable Hines project (you can see the not-unexpectedly mediocre aftermath of that effort here), nimby-oid Residocracy is back with a
non-binding digital petition designed to short circuit the reasonable, common-sense updating of the city's zoning ordinance, recently advanced by the planning commission after many months of study and debate.
According to the Santa Monica Daily Press, "Residocracy is asking for a 25 percent reduction of all proposed heights and densities under the first and second tier development standards. They want an amendment to another planning document (The Land Use and Circulation Element or LUCE) that eliminates third tier developments. They’d like a second amendment to the LUCE that would eliminate all activity centers, which would allow larger scale development. And finally, they want an ordinance requiring that all development agreements be approved by Santa Monica voters."
This is not how representative democracy works. In fact, representative government was established precisely to prevent the highjacking of the political system by highly motivated minorities. Even the heart of Residocracy's complaint -- that the proposed ordinance and LUCE are complex 500 page documents that took seven years to put together -- points to the inadvisability of deciding complex issues by referendum. The other complaint -- that, despite extensive public input in Santa Monica decision-making, the outcomes seem predetermined by city staff -- has some merit, but the solution is to give elected representatives more sway over city employees (council members need their own staffs, for example, or, shy of that, there should be a full-time independent auditor with his or her own staff).
Residocracy presents itself as the voice of Santa Monica residents. but in actuality it is a single-issue interest group with a very specific and very negative agenda. Using intimidation, sloganeering, over-simplification and scare tactics. it attempts to bully its way to its desired outcomes (go to a public meeting where its members have been turned out in numbers and you'll think you're at a cage fight not a civic event). During the lead up to the Hines ballot initiative, out off curiosity I took a walk around town randomly asking people what they thought of the project. Although it is anecdotal not scientific, what I found is nonetheless instructive: of the people I spoke to who'd heard of Hines. not a one was opposed to it as approved and a number expressed the hope that it would be built.
Maybe this time the city council -- charged with looking out for the general welfare, after all, not the interests of one group, however clamorous -- will not let itself be bullied. And before you allow yourself to be bullied into endorsing Residocracy's abstinence appeal ("just say no" to all development it dislikes, whether useful, necessary, desirable or popular), consider this: what do you know about land use; tax law and revenue generation; infrastructure and utilities; zoning; federal and state regulations affecting development; the influence of local bylaws, ordinances and regulations on our environmental, economic and housing goals and whether such rules are prescriptive or proscriptive; the effects on traffic, air quality and other elements of urban life of concentrating development near transportation hubs; the mix and condition of the city's housing stock; public benefits that can be achieved from easements and development agreements; the possible differences, relationships and sound mix of residential, commercial and industrial uses; the need for public facilities; and how your concerns dovetail with others who have an equal claim on what happens here? That's what a city council is for.
By all means, participate! Go to community workshops, express yourself at planning commission and city council meetings, call and write your elected and appointed representatives. And when Residocracy turns up again, as they will, with a plebiscite on a complex development matter, don't play along. Just say no.
Follow: Santa Monica Mirror; Santa Monica Daily Press; City of Santa Monica.
 |
| 26th Street as it might have been |
According to the Santa Monica Daily Press, "Residocracy is asking for a 25 percent reduction of all proposed heights and densities under the first and second tier development standards. They want an amendment to another planning document (The Land Use and Circulation Element or LUCE) that eliminates third tier developments. They’d like a second amendment to the LUCE that would eliminate all activity centers, which would allow larger scale development. And finally, they want an ordinance requiring that all development agreements be approved by Santa Monica voters."
This is not how representative democracy works. In fact, representative government was established precisely to prevent the highjacking of the political system by highly motivated minorities. Even the heart of Residocracy's complaint -- that the proposed ordinance and LUCE are complex 500 page documents that took seven years to put together -- points to the inadvisability of deciding complex issues by referendum. The other complaint -- that, despite extensive public input in Santa Monica decision-making, the outcomes seem predetermined by city staff -- has some merit, but the solution is to give elected representatives more sway over city employees (council members need their own staffs, for example, or, shy of that, there should be a full-time independent auditor with his or her own staff).
Residocracy presents itself as the voice of Santa Monica residents. but in actuality it is a single-issue interest group with a very specific and very negative agenda. Using intimidation, sloganeering, over-simplification and scare tactics. it attempts to bully its way to its desired outcomes (go to a public meeting where its members have been turned out in numbers and you'll think you're at a cage fight not a civic event). During the lead up to the Hines ballot initiative, out off curiosity I took a walk around town randomly asking people what they thought of the project. Although it is anecdotal not scientific, what I found is nonetheless instructive: of the people I spoke to who'd heard of Hines. not a one was opposed to it as approved and a number expressed the hope that it would be built.
Maybe this time the city council -- charged with looking out for the general welfare, after all, not the interests of one group, however clamorous -- will not let itself be bullied. And before you allow yourself to be bullied into endorsing Residocracy's abstinence appeal ("just say no" to all development it dislikes, whether useful, necessary, desirable or popular), consider this: what do you know about land use; tax law and revenue generation; infrastructure and utilities; zoning; federal and state regulations affecting development; the influence of local bylaws, ordinances and regulations on our environmental, economic and housing goals and whether such rules are prescriptive or proscriptive; the effects on traffic, air quality and other elements of urban life of concentrating development near transportation hubs; the mix and condition of the city's housing stock; public benefits that can be achieved from easements and development agreements; the possible differences, relationships and sound mix of residential, commercial and industrial uses; the need for public facilities; and how your concerns dovetail with others who have an equal claim on what happens here? That's what a city council is for.
By all means, participate! Go to community workshops, express yourself at planning commission and city council meetings, call and write your elected and appointed representatives. And when Residocracy turns up again, as they will, with a plebiscite on a complex development matter, don't play along. Just say no.
Follow: Santa Monica Mirror; Santa Monica Daily Press; City of Santa Monica.
Welfare states
Red indicates states that get more than a dollar back from the federal government for every dollar paid in federal taxes.
Tax Fraud
The primary justification for the negotiations b/t the WH and the GOP was the need to reduce the federal budget. However, the CBO estimates the budgetary impact of the fiscal-cliff deal will be that the debt will be nearly $4 trillion higher over the next ten years as compared with current policy.
The Hill: “The extension of lower tax rates for a bulk of the nation’s taxpayers and the addition of a permanent patch to the alternative minimum tax would add roughly $3.6 trillion to the deficit over the next decade… Other individual, business, and energy tax extenders would add another $76 billion.
“The extension of unemployment benefits would cost roughly $30 billion, and the so-called ‘doc fix’ would tally another $25 billion through fiscal 2022… the budget agreement will lead to an overall increase in spending of about $330 billion.”
The Hill: “The extension of lower tax rates for a bulk of the nation’s taxpayers and the addition of a permanent patch to the alternative minimum tax would add roughly $3.6 trillion to the deficit over the next decade… Other individual, business, and energy tax extenders would add another $76 billion.
“The extension of unemployment benefits would cost roughly $30 billion, and the so-called ‘doc fix’ would tally another $25 billion through fiscal 2022… the budget agreement will lead to an overall increase in spending of about $330 billion.”
Maybe we should stop electing Democrats to the White House and start electing democrats.
It looks like the new deal (an expression I am using ironically) will define -- absurdly -- "middle class" as any family making up to $450,000/yr or individual bringing in $400,000. The median household income is about $50,000/yr. Four out of five U.S. families make less than $100,000/yr. Fewer than 1% earn more than $450,000/yr. We've got to stop electing Democrats to the White House and start electing democrats.
Discuss:
"Neither spending more nor taxing less will help the country pay its bills. What it can and must do is radically simplify its tax, health-care, retirement and financial systems, each of which is a complete mess. But this is the good news. It means they can each be redesigned to achieve their legitimate purposes at much lower cost and, in the process, revitalize the economy."
U.S. Is Bankrupt and We Don’t Even Know It by Laurence Kotlikoff (Bloomberg)
Keep Out
The wealth of top six family members who own Wal-Mart is equal to the wealth of 30% of the American people.
This has been accomplished by destroying thousands of local businesses and jobs and by denying adequate pay and benefits to its employees.
It's Henry Ford turned on his head. Ford provided good jobs to create customers for his cars; Wal-Mart destroys good jobs so people will have no choice but become customers of its stores.
It should not be allowed destroy businesses and jobs in Los Angeles County.
On June 30, join 10,000 to March Against Wal-Mart in Los Angeles.
Too controversial for TED: "The rich should pay more in taxes"
“Ideas Worth Spreading.”
Some, not so much.
If you need more evidence of how difficult it is for ideas that challenge the reigning political Weltanschauung to gain traction in mainstream media, take a look at this video of a presentation at TED, the conference that GOOD business editor Tim Fernholz describes as "for creative techies and do-gooding hipsters that vaulted the 18-minute lecture into an art form."
Like fish trying to make sense of water, it is impossible for most of us to comprehend how much misinformation we take for granted swimming as we do in the ocean of propaganda -- American exceptionalism, the greatest nation in history, fortress of democracy, Christian state, yadda yadda -- that envelops us.
At TED, Fernholz writes, "you’ll find speakers discussing everything from 'Sculpting Waves in Wood and Time' to 'Building U.S.-China relations … by Banjo.' What you won’t find is a recent TED talk by Nick Hanauer, a wealthy venture capitalist, that argues income inequality is a problem that threatens the economy, and that higher taxes on the wealthy are part of the solution."
"So here's an idea worth spreading," concludes Hanauer:
In a capitalist economy, the true job creators are consumers, the middle class. And taxing the rich to make investments that grow the middle class, is the single smartest thing we can do for the middle class, the poor and the rich.A transcript of Hanauer's speech is available here.
See, also: Too Hot for TED: Income Inequality by Jim Tankersley (National Journal 2012-05-22).
TED's Taboo: What's Too Controversial for the Hipster Confab? by Tim Fernholz (GOOD 2012-05-17)
In response to the brouhaha over his website's suppression of Hanauer's talk, TED "curator" Chris Anderson posted the video to Youtube himself, with a link to an apologia: TED and inequality: The real story (TEDChris: The untweetable 2012-05-17). However, Anderson's claim that the talk was rejected because it "framed the issue in a way that was explicitly partisan" is contradicted by the fact that TED has posted other "partisan" presentations, such as scoldings by Al Gore on the need to fight climate change or the Gates Foundation's Melinda Gates call for handing out contraceptives across the globe. These challenges to the status quo are apparently less bothersome to the wealthy attendees at TED than the simple idea that they should pay their fare share of taxes.
Privatization: keep your eye upon the donut, not upon the hole
In the wake of massive of tax giveaways, governments are having trouble maintaining public services.
The Right will use this crisis to achieve a long-time goal: privatization (through tax cuts, many billions of dollars that belong to the public have been privatized already).
This is how privatization will go.
Businesses will use some of their new cash surpluses to buy public services (roads, bridges, parks, stadiums, libraries, water and waste water systems, trash collection operations, prisons, police/fire/rescue departments,
power generation and distribution setups, etc.).
Many will be sold at fire-sale prices. Or given away.
Once in private hands, services that were created with public wealth and have worked well for generations (roads, bridges, parks, stadiums, libraries, water and waste water systems, trash collection operations, prisons, police/fire/rescue departments, power generation and distribution setups, etc.) will be milked, trashed, bled to death.
The public will continue to transfer more tax revenues to private hands for continuing operations or will pay directly for services through fees, tolls, etc.
The services will decline. They will reach the point where new money will need to be invested to keep them going. Business noggins will not regard this as money well spent.
The services will be returned to the public. They will not be sold at fire-sale prices. Nor will they be given away. The companies will demand -- and receive -- compensation, not only for the value of the land, buildings and "improvements," but also for "lost future revenues."
The service infrastructure will be repurchased by the public using tax dollars.
New taxes will be needed to restore the infrastructure to the condition it was in before privatization.
This story happened to appear today: Private services gaining toehold in Tucson (Arizona Star 2011-10-02).
The Right will use this crisis to achieve a long-time goal: privatization (through tax cuts, many billions of dollars that belong to the public have been privatized already).
This is how privatization will go.
Businesses will use some of their new cash surpluses to buy public services (roads, bridges, parks, stadiums, libraries, water and waste water systems, trash collection operations, prisons, police/fire/rescue departments,
power generation and distribution setups, etc.). Many will be sold at fire-sale prices. Or given away.
Once in private hands, services that were created with public wealth and have worked well for generations (roads, bridges, parks, stadiums, libraries, water and waste water systems, trash collection operations, prisons, police/fire/rescue departments, power generation and distribution setups, etc.) will be milked, trashed, bled to death.
The public will continue to transfer more tax revenues to private hands for continuing operations or will pay directly for services through fees, tolls, etc.
The services will decline. They will reach the point where new money will need to be invested to keep them going. Business noggins will not regard this as money well spent.
The services will be returned to the public. They will not be sold at fire-sale prices. Nor will they be given away. The companies will demand -- and receive -- compensation, not only for the value of the land, buildings and "improvements," but also for "lost future revenues."
The service infrastructure will be repurchased by the public using tax dollars.
New taxes will be needed to restore the infrastructure to the condition it was in before privatization.
This story happened to appear today: Private services gaining toehold in Tucson (Arizona Star 2011-10-02).
2012: California referendum to capture oil drilling revenues
This is the text of a proposed California ballot initiative:
Oil Extraction Tax to Rescue EducationOrganizations supporting the referendum effort include labor unions, teacher and student associations, and progressive political groups. Anyone interested in participating can download a petition here and flyers here. For more information, visit the sponsoring organization at Rescue Education California.
Maintaining California's competiveness in the new global economy
California's Educational System, Kindergarten through College and University, has been cut to the bone. Overcrowded classrooms, textbook shortages, teacher and professor lay-offs, and reduced or eliminated college class sections have made it impossible for millions of talented students to graduate. For example, Long Beach Unified School District eliminated computer literacy classes as a graduation requirement.
University of California student's' tuition fees are being raised 8% and California State University students' tuition fees are being raised by 15% percent for Fall 2011. California Community College students are facing a proposed tuition fee increase of 38% (to $540) per semester minimum, up to 154% ($990) per semester for fall 2011. Californians must act now to save our once world renowned Educational System.
Education is the foundation of a strong economy. California Governors Pete Wilson and Arnold Schwarzenegger enjoyed tuition free education at UC Berkley and Santa Monica College, respectively. In the 1960s and 1970s, California's Educational System was the envy of the world. During this time, public higher education was essentially tuition free, as mandated by Governor Pat Brown's Master Plan for Higher Education, and California's economy grew to the 5th largest in the world, supporting a large vibrant middle class.
Today, California's middle class is endangered, and California's economy has fallen to 8th position in the world because of a lack of investment in education and technology. China recently invented the world's fastest computer (server) and produces the largest number of solar panels, while South Korea produces the best electric car batteries using cutting edge technology. California's K-12 spending per pupil has dropped to 43rd out of 50 states. College and university graduates are saddled with huge debt. If California is to successfully compete with states and countries such as China, Japan, Germany, South Korea, and India, California's Educational System must again be adequately funded, offering more classes and programs in cutting-edge technology, skilled manufacturing, alternative energy, and the arts. California Community Colleges need adequate funding to continue training Nurses, and preparing Firefighters and Teachers.
Unbelievably, California has failed to employ a widely used revenue source that can address this crisis in our education. This revenue source is employed by every major oil producing state, except California. This untapped source of revenue is an extraction fee on oil pumped in California, onshore and offshore. Since California is the nation's third largest producer of oil, after Texas and Alaska, a 15% oil extraction fee (midway between that of Texas and Alaska) would raise approximately $3.6 billion each year, at 2011 oil prices. This has not been a partisan issue in other states. For example, Governor Sarah Palin, with a Republican legislature, raised Alaska's oil extraction fee to 25%, bringing in billions of dollars. Texas's and Alaska's gasoline prices were not affected by their oil extraction fees, and in March 2011, their price per gallon of gasoline was lower than California's. From 1901 to 2008, oil companies have extracted over 10 billion barrels of oil from California's territory. Based on 2011 per barrel crude oil prices ($100 per barrel), oil companies have extracted over $1 trillion worth of oil. At the current world market price, this oil extraction fee would have raised over $150 billion. This type of fee is the economic standard in every major oil producing state and nation around the world. California can no longer afford to give preferential treatment to oil companies compared to how they are treated elsewhere.
This initiative requires that California apply a 15% oil extraction fee on the value of each barrel of oil, California's common resource, extracted onshore and offshore. Following Texas' example of devoting this oil revenue to its Educational System, the revenue generated by this fee shall be appropriated for non-capital purposes in the following amounts: K-12 shall receive 30% (approximately $1.08 billion). The California Community College System (approximately 3,000,000 students) shall receive 48% (approximately $1.72 bill). The California State University System (approximately 412,000 students) shall receive 11% (approximately $400 million). The University of California System (approximately 200,000 students) shall receive 11$ (approximately $400 million). This will reduce college and university tuition fees, and restore cut class sections. The funding increases will pay to rehire professors, laid-off teachers, and reduce K-12 class sizes.
This proposition, along with existing anti-trust and anti-collusion laws, prohibits oil companies from passing on the oil extraction fee to oil refineries, gasoline stations, and consumers (the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that States can prohibit oil companies from passing on fees such as this to consumers). This fee will enable California to capture $3.6 billion that would have left California. This additional money will help rejuvenate California's stagnant economy. This fee will have minimal impact on oil company profits which total in the hundreds of billions of dollars. For example, Exxon Mobile reported record profits of $45 billion in 2008, and Shell Oil reported profits of $31 billion in 2007.
If oil companies illegally pass on the oil extraction fee, a fine shall be assessed equal to the amount passed on. The dollar amount recouped shall be equally distributed to each Californian as a rebate check at the end of each year. The State Attorney General is bound by this proposition to examine the books of oil companies operating in the state of California, if they appear to be breaking this law.
The revenues from this proposition exclusively constitute a Competiveness Education Fund and cannot be commingled with, or lent to, the State General Fund. The State shall not be allowed to reduce its regular education funding corresponding to the additional revenue produced by this proposition. The revenues from this Competiveness Education Fund shall be deposited in a Special Account and distributed, on a monthly basis, by the California State Treasurer to each of the California Educational Systems involved. Passage of this proposition will once again ensure a bright future for this generation and succeeding generations of Californians who have to compete in the new global economy.
Saturday Catchup 2010-08-14
One of the greats is gone:
Change Watch: "A friend whom I'll call David raised a ton of money for Democrats in 2008 and now tells me they can go to hell. He's furious about the no-strings bailout of Wall Street, the absence of a public option in health reform, financial reform that doesn't cap the size of banks or reinstate the Glass-Steagall wall between investment and commercial banking, and a stimulus that was too small to do much good but big enough to give Republicans a campaign issue. He's also upset about tens of thousands of additional troops being sent to Afghanistan, a watered-down cap-and-trade bill that's going nowhere, and no Employee Free Choice Act. David won't raise a penny this fall and doubts he'll even vote. 'I busted my chops getting them elected, and they caved,' he fumes. 'They're all lily-livered wimps, and Obama has the backbone of a worm.' Tea Partiers are getting all the press. But the anger on the left, including much of the Democratic base, is almost as intense. And it spells trouble for Democrats a few months from now." -- Fire on the Left: Tea Partiers are getting all the press, but it's the anger on the left that spells trouble for Dems in the midterms by Robert B. Reich (The American Prospect 2010-08-02).
Populism Schmopulism: "Since the 1960s, populism has succeeded on the right and has produced few if any left-wing counterparts. The tradition has moved from the segregationist George Wallace, who derided the federal government and pointy-headed intellectuals, to Richard Nixon's celebration of 'the silent majority' and Spiro Agnew's attack against journalists and elites. It has fed on an easy hatred of government and taxes, from the 'I'm Mad as Hell' chants of the California tax protesters in 1978 -- the spirit that helped get Ronald Reagan elected president -- to the Tea Party of today. There's no way to steer this boat back to left-wing shores....'The people' are no more virtuous or incorruptible than elites, and pandering to them won't advance liberal political goals." -- Forget Populism by Kevin Mattson (The American Prospect 2010-08-03).
Here's a ditty that will never go out of style:
But it's what a declining empire looks like: "The world leadership qualities of the United States, once so prevalent, are fading faster than the polar ice caps. We once set the standard for industrial might, for the advanced state of our physical infrastructure, and for the quality of our citizens’ lives. All are experiencing significant decline. The latest dismal news on the leadership front comes from the College Board, which tells us that the U.S., once the world’s leader in the percentage of young people with college degrees, has fallen to 12th among 36 developed nations. At a time when a college education is needed more than ever to establish and maintain a middle-class standard of living, America’s young people are moving in exactly the wrong direction. A well-educated population also is crucially important if the U.S. is to succeed in an increasingly competitive global environment. But instead of exercising the appropriate mental muscles, we’re allowing ourselves to become a nation of nitwits, obsessed with the comings and goings of Lindsay Lohan and increasingly oblivious to crucially important societal issues that are all but screaming for attention. What should we be doing about the legions of jobless Americans, the deteriorating public schools, the debilitating wars, the scandalous economic inequality, the corporate hold on governmental affairs, the commercialization of the arts, the deficits? Why is there not serious and widespread public engagement with these issues — and many others that could easily come to mind? That kind of engagement would lead to creative new ideas and would serve to enrich the lives of individual Americans and the nation as a whole. But it would require a heavy social and intellectual lift." -- Putting Our Brains on Hold by Bob Herbert (New York Times 2009-08-06).
What's in a name? that which we call socialism/By any other name would smell as sweet: "Virg Bernero, the mayor of Lansing, Michigan, just won the Democratic nomination for governor of his state, making a state-owned Bank of Michigan a real possibility. Bernero is one of at least a dozen candidates promoting that solution to the states' economic woes. It is an innovative idea, with little precedent in the United States. North Dakota, currently the only state owning its own bank, also happens to be the only state sporting a budget surplus, and it has the lowest unemployment rate in the country; but skeptics can write these achievements off to coincidence. More data is needed and, fortunately, other precedents are available from other countries." -- What a Government Can Do With Its Own Bank: The Remarkable Model of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia by Ellen Brown (Truthout 2010-08-05).
In the last half century, I've been lucky at being in the right place at the right time, but on few occasions as dramatic as when Bob Dylan went electric at Newport in the summer of 1965:
Who pays the piper, calls the tune: The GOP wants tax cuts for the rich, and only the rich. "...For the last few years, we haven't spent much time debating taxes. And to use a word conservatives like so much when it comes to this subject, it was a relief. However, since the Bush tax cuts will be expiring at the end of the year, we're in for another round of ridiculous arguments, disingenuous talking points, and maddening stupidity. We have already seen the return of the Tax Fairy, the absurd belief, depressingly widespread in Republican circles, that cutting taxes increases revenue. Even Greg Mankiw, chair of George W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, called those who believe this fiction 'charlatans and cranks.' But it has become almost doctrine within the GOP." -- The Return of the Tax Fairy: Conservatives gear up to defend the expiring Bush-era tax cuts by Paul Waldman (The American Prospect 2010-08-03).
A conservative stalwart looks at Republican fiscal "policy": "If there were such a thing as Chapter 11 for politicians, the Republican push to extend the unaffordable Bush tax cuts would amount to a bankruptcy filing. The nation’s public debt — if honestly reckoned to include municipal bonds and the $7 trillion of new deficits baked into the cake through 2015 — will soon reach $18 trillion. That’s a Greece-scale 120 percent of gross domestic product, and fairly screams out for austerity and sacrifice. It is therefore unseemly for the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, to insist that the nation’s wealthiest taxpayers be spared even a three-percentage-point rate increase. More fundamentally, Mr. McConnell’s stand puts the lie to the Republican pretense that its new monetarist and supply-side doctrines are rooted in its traditional financial philosophy. Republicans used to believe that prosperity depended upon the regular balancing of accounts — in government, in international trade, on the ledgers of central banks and in the financial affairs of private households and businesses, too. But the new catechism, as practiced by Republican policymakers for decades now, has amounted to little more than money printing and deficit finance — vulgar Keynesianism robed in the ideological vestments of the prosperous classes. This approach has not simply made a mockery of traditional party ideals. It has also led to the serial financial bubbles and Wall Street depredations that have crippled our economy. More specifically, the new policy doctrines have caused four great deformations of the national economy, and modern Republicans have turned a blind eye to each one." -- Four Deformations of the Apocalypse by David Stockman (New York Times 2010-08-01).
I Want Roosevelt Again*: "A video that made the rounds last summer summed up the problem nicely. Mike Stark of The Huffington Post hoisted a camera on his shoulder, hung out on the streets near the House office buildings in Washington, and asked passing Republican House members: Do you believe that Barack Obama is a rightful citizen of the United States? I don't know how many he asked (there were snippets of several ducking into cars or pretending to take calls), but he quoted 11 in the video he posted. Of the 11, only one, Trent Franks of Arizona, acknowledged straightforwardly that yes, his staff had intensively researched the question and was forced to conclude that a birth announcement in a 1961 issue of The Honolulu Advertiser likely couldn't have been forged. The other 10, mostly not well known, either ducked the question, marching forward in that West Wing, I've-got-important-business way, or gave too-clever-by-half responses, or just came out and said they weren't sure. 'I think there are questions, so we'll have to see,' quipped Charles Boustany of Louisiana -- spoken a touch ironically because he, unlike Obama, is in fact of Arab (Lebanese) lineage, an ethnicity frequently and incorrectly assigned to the president." -- The Right Way to Please the Base: What the left can learn from right-wing extremists by Michael Tomasky (The American Prospect 2010-08-02). *1944 campaign button
In a world of anarchy, the only currency that matters is power: "There are many sources of fear in world politics -- terrorist attacks, natural disasters, climate change, financial panic, nuclear proliferation, ethnic conflict, and so forth. Surveying the cultural zeitgeist, however, it is striking how an unnatural problem has become one of the fastest-growing concerns in international relations. I speak, of course, of zombies." -- Night of the Living Wonks: Toward an international relations theory of zombies by Daniel W. Drezner (Foreign Policy 2010-07/08).
"The first rule of fight club is one never mentions fight club":
Plus ca change...: "Southasian fiction has provided many insights into the persona and conflicts of the exploited-empowered dancing girl. It is not a coincidence that the earliest novels of the Subcontinent dealt with the intense and memorable characters of ‘nautch girls’. Essentially a colonial construct, a nautch girl referred to the popular entertainer, a belle beau who would sing, dance and, when required, also provide the services of a sex worker. The accounts on the marginalised women from the ‘dishonourable’ profession are nuanced, concurrently representing the duality of exploitation and empowerment." My candle burns at both ends by Raza Rumi (Himal 2010-08).
Oh, jeeze. Amid all the chatter about Lindsay's incarceration, Chelsea's nuptials, and the plot to install the Bin Laden Memorial Mosque at Ground Zero, almost forgot there's a war on. Think that's the plan. What about you?
"I'm going to be killing people. I'm actually joining the Marines and will be doing this in real life": Just because we haven't finished the war we have doesn't mean we can't have another one. "War springs eternal. Compare the words of the 18-year-old boy quoted above by Philadelphia radio station WRTI, as he was wielding a pretend machinegun at a video-game parlor/Army recruiting center at a Philly shopping mall, with those of two neocons, Charles Robb and Charles Wald (retired senator and general, respectively), writing last month in the Washington Post: 'We cannot afford to wait indefinitely to determine the effectiveness of diplomacy and sanctions. . . . Instead, the administration needs to expand its approach and make clear to the Iranian regime and the American people: If diplomatic and economic pressures do not compel Iran to terminate its nuclear program, the U.S. military has the capability and is prepared to launch an effective, targeted strike on Tehran's nuclear and supporting military facilities.' We're running out of time to act, they add, turning the fear crank, ratcheting up the pressure like good used car salesmen. Iran could have a nuclear bomb by the end of the year, they warn, citing no evidence for this assertion. Evidence? They all but cried: 'We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.'" -- The Next War by Common Dreams (Common Dreams 2010-08-05).
Does singing about being president make Wyclef Jean the Mike Huckabee of Haiti?
'Nuff said.
Change Watch: "A friend whom I'll call David raised a ton of money for Democrats in 2008 and now tells me they can go to hell. He's furious about the no-strings bailout of Wall Street, the absence of a public option in health reform, financial reform that doesn't cap the size of banks or reinstate the Glass-Steagall wall between investment and commercial banking, and a stimulus that was too small to do much good but big enough to give Republicans a campaign issue. He's also upset about tens of thousands of additional troops being sent to Afghanistan, a watered-down cap-and-trade bill that's going nowhere, and no Employee Free Choice Act. David won't raise a penny this fall and doubts he'll even vote. 'I busted my chops getting them elected, and they caved,' he fumes. 'They're all lily-livered wimps, and Obama has the backbone of a worm.' Tea Partiers are getting all the press. But the anger on the left, including much of the Democratic base, is almost as intense. And it spells trouble for Democrats a few months from now." -- Fire on the Left: Tea Partiers are getting all the press, but it's the anger on the left that spells trouble for Dems in the midterms by Robert B. Reich (The American Prospect 2010-08-02).
Populism Schmopulism: "Since the 1960s, populism has succeeded on the right and has produced few if any left-wing counterparts. The tradition has moved from the segregationist George Wallace, who derided the federal government and pointy-headed intellectuals, to Richard Nixon's celebration of 'the silent majority' and Spiro Agnew's attack against journalists and elites. It has fed on an easy hatred of government and taxes, from the 'I'm Mad as Hell' chants of the California tax protesters in 1978 -- the spirit that helped get Ronald Reagan elected president -- to the Tea Party of today. There's no way to steer this boat back to left-wing shores....'The people' are no more virtuous or incorruptible than elites, and pandering to them won't advance liberal political goals." -- Forget Populism by Kevin Mattson (The American Prospect 2010-08-03).
Here's a ditty that will never go out of style:
But it's what a declining empire looks like: "The world leadership qualities of the United States, once so prevalent, are fading faster than the polar ice caps. We once set the standard for industrial might, for the advanced state of our physical infrastructure, and for the quality of our citizens’ lives. All are experiencing significant decline. The latest dismal news on the leadership front comes from the College Board, which tells us that the U.S., once the world’s leader in the percentage of young people with college degrees, has fallen to 12th among 36 developed nations. At a time when a college education is needed more than ever to establish and maintain a middle-class standard of living, America’s young people are moving in exactly the wrong direction. A well-educated population also is crucially important if the U.S. is to succeed in an increasingly competitive global environment. But instead of exercising the appropriate mental muscles, we’re allowing ourselves to become a nation of nitwits, obsessed with the comings and goings of Lindsay Lohan and increasingly oblivious to crucially important societal issues that are all but screaming for attention. What should we be doing about the legions of jobless Americans, the deteriorating public schools, the debilitating wars, the scandalous economic inequality, the corporate hold on governmental affairs, the commercialization of the arts, the deficits? Why is there not serious and widespread public engagement with these issues — and many others that could easily come to mind? That kind of engagement would lead to creative new ideas and would serve to enrich the lives of individual Americans and the nation as a whole. But it would require a heavy social and intellectual lift." -- Putting Our Brains on Hold by Bob Herbert (New York Times 2009-08-06).
What's in a name? that which we call socialism/By any other name would smell as sweet: "Virg Bernero, the mayor of Lansing, Michigan, just won the Democratic nomination for governor of his state, making a state-owned Bank of Michigan a real possibility. Bernero is one of at least a dozen candidates promoting that solution to the states' economic woes. It is an innovative idea, with little precedent in the United States. North Dakota, currently the only state owning its own bank, also happens to be the only state sporting a budget surplus, and it has the lowest unemployment rate in the country; but skeptics can write these achievements off to coincidence. More data is needed and, fortunately, other precedents are available from other countries." -- What a Government Can Do With Its Own Bank: The Remarkable Model of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia by Ellen Brown (Truthout 2010-08-05).
In the last half century, I've been lucky at being in the right place at the right time, but on few occasions as dramatic as when Bob Dylan went electric at Newport in the summer of 1965:
Who pays the piper, calls the tune: The GOP wants tax cuts for the rich, and only the rich. "...For the last few years, we haven't spent much time debating taxes. And to use a word conservatives like so much when it comes to this subject, it was a relief. However, since the Bush tax cuts will be expiring at the end of the year, we're in for another round of ridiculous arguments, disingenuous talking points, and maddening stupidity. We have already seen the return of the Tax Fairy, the absurd belief, depressingly widespread in Republican circles, that cutting taxes increases revenue. Even Greg Mankiw, chair of George W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, called those who believe this fiction 'charlatans and cranks.' But it has become almost doctrine within the GOP." -- The Return of the Tax Fairy: Conservatives gear up to defend the expiring Bush-era tax cuts by Paul Waldman (The American Prospect 2010-08-03).
A conservative stalwart looks at Republican fiscal "policy": "If there were such a thing as Chapter 11 for politicians, the Republican push to extend the unaffordable Bush tax cuts would amount to a bankruptcy filing. The nation’s public debt — if honestly reckoned to include municipal bonds and the $7 trillion of new deficits baked into the cake through 2015 — will soon reach $18 trillion. That’s a Greece-scale 120 percent of gross domestic product, and fairly screams out for austerity and sacrifice. It is therefore unseemly for the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, to insist that the nation’s wealthiest taxpayers be spared even a three-percentage-point rate increase. More fundamentally, Mr. McConnell’s stand puts the lie to the Republican pretense that its new monetarist and supply-side doctrines are rooted in its traditional financial philosophy. Republicans used to believe that prosperity depended upon the regular balancing of accounts — in government, in international trade, on the ledgers of central banks and in the financial affairs of private households and businesses, too. But the new catechism, as practiced by Republican policymakers for decades now, has amounted to little more than money printing and deficit finance — vulgar Keynesianism robed in the ideological vestments of the prosperous classes. This approach has not simply made a mockery of traditional party ideals. It has also led to the serial financial bubbles and Wall Street depredations that have crippled our economy. More specifically, the new policy doctrines have caused four great deformations of the national economy, and modern Republicans have turned a blind eye to each one." -- Four Deformations of the Apocalypse by David Stockman (New York Times 2010-08-01).
I Want Roosevelt Again*: "A video that made the rounds last summer summed up the problem nicely. Mike Stark of The Huffington Post hoisted a camera on his shoulder, hung out on the streets near the House office buildings in Washington, and asked passing Republican House members: Do you believe that Barack Obama is a rightful citizen of the United States? I don't know how many he asked (there were snippets of several ducking into cars or pretending to take calls), but he quoted 11 in the video he posted. Of the 11, only one, Trent Franks of Arizona, acknowledged straightforwardly that yes, his staff had intensively researched the question and was forced to conclude that a birth announcement in a 1961 issue of The Honolulu Advertiser likely couldn't have been forged. The other 10, mostly not well known, either ducked the question, marching forward in that West Wing, I've-got-important-business way, or gave too-clever-by-half responses, or just came out and said they weren't sure. 'I think there are questions, so we'll have to see,' quipped Charles Boustany of Louisiana -- spoken a touch ironically because he, unlike Obama, is in fact of Arab (Lebanese) lineage, an ethnicity frequently and incorrectly assigned to the president." -- The Right Way to Please the Base: What the left can learn from right-wing extremists by Michael Tomasky (The American Prospect 2010-08-02). *1944 campaign button
In a world of anarchy, the only currency that matters is power: "There are many sources of fear in world politics -- terrorist attacks, natural disasters, climate change, financial panic, nuclear proliferation, ethnic conflict, and so forth. Surveying the cultural zeitgeist, however, it is striking how an unnatural problem has become one of the fastest-growing concerns in international relations. I speak, of course, of zombies." -- Night of the Living Wonks: Toward an international relations theory of zombies by Daniel W. Drezner (Foreign Policy 2010-07/08).
"The first rule of fight club is one never mentions fight club":
Plus ca change...: "Southasian fiction has provided many insights into the persona and conflicts of the exploited-empowered dancing girl. It is not a coincidence that the earliest novels of the Subcontinent dealt with the intense and memorable characters of ‘nautch girls’. Essentially a colonial construct, a nautch girl referred to the popular entertainer, a belle beau who would sing, dance and, when required, also provide the services of a sex worker. The accounts on the marginalised women from the ‘dishonourable’ profession are nuanced, concurrently representing the duality of exploitation and empowerment." My candle burns at both ends by Raza Rumi (Himal 2010-08).
Oh, jeeze. Amid all the chatter about Lindsay's incarceration, Chelsea's nuptials, and the plot to install the Bin Laden Memorial Mosque at Ground Zero, almost forgot there's a war on. Think that's the plan. What about you?
"I'm going to be killing people. I'm actually joining the Marines and will be doing this in real life": Just because we haven't finished the war we have doesn't mean we can't have another one. "War springs eternal. Compare the words of the 18-year-old boy quoted above by Philadelphia radio station WRTI, as he was wielding a pretend machinegun at a video-game parlor/Army recruiting center at a Philly shopping mall, with those of two neocons, Charles Robb and Charles Wald (retired senator and general, respectively), writing last month in the Washington Post: 'We cannot afford to wait indefinitely to determine the effectiveness of diplomacy and sanctions. . . . Instead, the administration needs to expand its approach and make clear to the Iranian regime and the American people: If diplomatic and economic pressures do not compel Iran to terminate its nuclear program, the U.S. military has the capability and is prepared to launch an effective, targeted strike on Tehran's nuclear and supporting military facilities.' We're running out of time to act, they add, turning the fear crank, ratcheting up the pressure like good used car salesmen. Iran could have a nuclear bomb by the end of the year, they warn, citing no evidence for this assertion. Evidence? They all but cried: 'We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.'" -- The Next War by Common Dreams (Common Dreams 2010-08-05).
Does singing about being president make Wyclef Jean the Mike Huckabee of Haiti?
'Nuff said.
Don't be fooled by false deficit prophets:
More Klein: "'Debt' isn't a buzzword, it's a math problem. And it's instructive to try to solve it. The 'Stabilize the Debt' game allows you to cut, tax and spend your way to a better budget outlook. So go ahead. Choose your own deficit."
Many policies that sound impressive when a politician promotes them don't actually save much money. Cutting foreign aid in half, for instance, will save $210 billion by 2022. That would get us 3 percent of the way there. Cutting earmarks in half is even less effective: It would save $130 billion by 2022. -- Choose your own deficit by Ezra Klein (Ezra Klein's Wonkbook/Washington Post 2010-06-27).Cut military spending -- $1,449 billion last year! -- cut that in half and it begins to add up to real money....
More Klein: "'Debt' isn't a buzzword, it's a math problem. And it's instructive to try to solve it. The 'Stabilize the Debt' game allows you to cut, tax and spend your way to a better budget outlook. So go ahead. Choose your own deficit."
Saturday Catchup: Must reads (and sees) from the past week
Taxing Cannabis: This Time, Pot Really Might Become Legal by Kevin Drum (Mother Jones 2010-03-26) -- The only thing that can stop legalization in California is massive spending by the prison guards union.
War Crimes: State Department Declares Illegal Drone Attacks to Be Legal as Part of Eternal Global War by David Swanson (AfterDowningStreet 2010-03-26) -- Because they say so, that's why.
Change Watch: The horrible prospect of Supreme Court Justice Cass Sunstein by Glenn Greenwald (Salon 2010-03-26) -- or Elena Kagan, for that matter. Will Obama move SCOTUS to the right?'
The influence of the Israel Lobby on America's Iran policy (Obama continues Bush's Iran policy 3) by Daan de Wit, translated by Ben Kearney (Deep Journal 2010-03-23) -- Why Washington lives in fear the lobby's long reach. Also, see Obama continues Bush's Iran policy 1 and 2.
Jon Stewart does (in) Glenn Beck:
Is this the Birth of a Nation? by Melissa Harris-Lacewell (The Nation 2010-03-22) -- The return of Jim Crow.
Health Reform Bill Summary: The Top 18 Immediate Effects by Jeremy Binckes and Nick Wing (Huntington Post 2010-03-23) | It's not affordable or universal, but it's a damn sight better than what was there before.
The real hero of health care reform: Nancy Pelosi by Mark Greenbaum (Christian Science Monitor 2010-03-22) -- Whatever you think of the outcome, leadership came from the House not the White House.
If you want to see why Carly Fiorina will never be US Senator you have only to watch this wacko ad for Carly Fiorina:
Secrets of the Tea Party: The troubling history of Tea Party leader Dick Armey by Beau Hodai (In These Times 2010-03-21)
Two Right-Wing Billionaire Brothers Are Remaking America for Their Own Benefit by Jim Hightower (AlterNet 2010-03-19) -- The Moneybags behind the corporate coup d'état.
War Crimes: State Department Declares Illegal Drone Attacks to Be Legal as Part of Eternal Global War by David Swanson (AfterDowningStreet 2010-03-26) -- Because they say so, that's why.
Change Watch: The horrible prospect of Supreme Court Justice Cass Sunstein by Glenn Greenwald (Salon 2010-03-26) -- or Elena Kagan, for that matter. Will Obama move SCOTUS to the right?'
The influence of the Israel Lobby on America's Iran policy (Obama continues Bush's Iran policy 3) by Daan de Wit, translated by Ben Kearney (Deep Journal 2010-03-23) -- Why Washington lives in fear the lobby's long reach. Also, see Obama continues Bush's Iran policy 1 and 2.
Jon Stewart does (in) Glenn Beck:
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Conservative Libertarian | ||||
| ||||
Health Reform Bill Summary: The Top 18 Immediate Effects by Jeremy Binckes and Nick Wing (Huntington Post 2010-03-23) | It's not affordable or universal, but it's a damn sight better than what was there before.
The real hero of health care reform: Nancy Pelosi by Mark Greenbaum (Christian Science Monitor 2010-03-22) -- Whatever you think of the outcome, leadership came from the House not the White House.
If you want to see why Carly Fiorina will never be US Senator you have only to watch this wacko ad for Carly Fiorina:
Secrets of the Tea Party: The troubling history of Tea Party leader Dick Armey by Beau Hodai (In These Times 2010-03-21)
Two Right-Wing Billionaire Brothers Are Remaking America for Their Own Benefit by Jim Hightower (AlterNet 2010-03-19) -- The Moneybags behind the corporate coup d'état.
Lies, damned lies & statistics: Reconciling reconciliation
The Republicans will say anything, no matter how unencumbered by fact, if they think it will hurt their opponents and return the GOP to power. Currently, they are shocked --shocked -- that to pass health care reform the Democratic majority plans to use "reconciliation," a wonky term for a legislative process that allows a bill to be adopted by a simple majority, as if the Republicans had never employed the mechanism themselves when they controlled Congress.
"Consider three bills -- two of them passed under budget reconciliation, the third heading for budget reconciliation. Each had an effect on the fiscal health of the nation, calculated by the Congressional Budget Office. The first two, the tax cuts pushed by President George W. Bush, blew a hole in the budget.
The third, the Senate's health reform bill? As you can see from the CBO projection, that's a different story." -- from The Rachel Maddow Show blog, based on a graph originally prepared by Econbrowser.
"Consider three bills -- two of them passed under budget reconciliation, the third heading for budget reconciliation. Each had an effect on the fiscal health of the nation, calculated by the Congressional Budget Office. The first two, the tax cuts pushed by President George W. Bush, blew a hole in the budget.
The third, the Senate's health reform bill? As you can see from the CBO projection, that's a different story." -- from The Rachel Maddow Show blog, based on a graph originally prepared by Econbrowser.
Reform: Majority Rule for California
In today's mail:
Get a Backbone on the Budget Crisis!
Just getting a majority on the budget alone won't make the pie any bigger, we need to solve the revenue problem.
Join teachers, firefighters, nurses and students who support majority rule for budget and revenue.
Majority rule for both budget and revenue has been endorsed by the California Democratic Party, the California Young Democrats and California College Democrats.
Sign, download and print the petition at CaliforniansForDemocracy.com
---
Democracy Goes Viral by George Lakoff & Californians For Democracy Team
Dear Friends,
The California budget crisis is a democracy crisis.
The 2/3 vote rules have destroyed democracy. A small minority of extreme conservatives - 37 percent - has been controlling the state legislature by saying no to all proposals until it gets what it wants. They want to destroy the ability of the state to serve public needs. They like the budget cuts. They don't care about the pain they have caused.
We - the majority of voters - can change all that. We can pass the California Democracy Act, an initiative on the November 2010 ballot. It is one sentence long - only 14 words. It is simple democracy.
All legislative actions on revenue and budget must be determined by a majority vote.
It would make two minor changes in the Constitution: In two places, "two-thirds" becomes "a majority." That's all. And it can be passed with only a majority vote!
To get this initiative on the ballot and to pass it, we will need your help. Go to http://www.CaliforniansForDemocracy.com
- now. Download a petition, sign it, and send it in. Then donate.
We need donations, large and small. $5000, $1000, $500 if you have it. $100, $50, $20, even $10.
Ask yourself, what are these worth to you? Excellent public education from K thru college, parks and beaches, our environment, roads, public health, child care, care for the elderly and disabled, fire departments, housing for the homeless, shelters for battered women, food safety. That's what's at stake.
This is the only initiative that can end the crisis by permitting sufficient revenue to be raised - without hurting lower and middle income Californians.
It is the only one that can return democracy and give you, the voters, a voice. You, the majority, will finally have the power to tell your legislators what you need and how to get it.
Go toCaliforniansForDemocracy.com, click on Sign the Petition, and click on Donate. Do it now. Our state can't wait.
Politics: More bipartisanship, this time on debt & taxes
White House, Democratic lawmakers cut deal on deficit commission (Washington Post)
"Faced with growing alarm over the nation's soaring debt, the White House and congressional Democrats tentatively agreed Tuesday to create an independent budget commission and to put its recommendations for fiscal solvency to a vote in Congress by the end of this year.
"Under the agreement, President Obama would issue an executive order to create an 18-member panel that would be granted broad authority to propose changes in the tax code and in the massive federal entitlement programs -- including Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security -- that threaten to drive the nation's debt to levels not seen since World War II....
"Fourteen commission members would have to agree on any deficit-reduction plan, a prospect that skeptics called a recipe for gridlock because action would depend on the support of at least two Republicans for a plan that is sure to include tax increases. Meanwhile, many influential interest groups -- including some unions and AARP -- have lined up in opposition to giving an outside commission power to cut federal spending and are likely to pressure Democrats to resist sharp budget cuts."
The rest of the story: White House, Democratic lawmakers cut deal on deficit commission by Lori Montgomery (Washington Post 2010-01-20)
"Faced with growing alarm over the nation's soaring debt, the White House and congressional Democrats tentatively agreed Tuesday to create an independent budget commission and to put its recommendations for fiscal solvency to a vote in Congress by the end of this year.
"Under the agreement, President Obama would issue an executive order to create an 18-member panel that would be granted broad authority to propose changes in the tax code and in the massive federal entitlement programs -- including Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security -- that threaten to drive the nation's debt to levels not seen since World War II....
"Fourteen commission members would have to agree on any deficit-reduction plan, a prospect that skeptics called a recipe for gridlock because action would depend on the support of at least two Republicans for a plan that is sure to include tax increases. Meanwhile, many influential interest groups -- including some unions and AARP -- have lined up in opposition to giving an outside commission power to cut federal spending and are likely to pressure Democrats to resist sharp budget cuts."
The rest of the story: White House, Democratic lawmakers cut deal on deficit commission by Lori Montgomery (Washington Post 2010-01-20)
Accountability: Congress should take back its constitutionally mandated role in making military policy
Despite Newsweek's silly cover story this week on The Post-Imperial Presidency (for starters, Newsweek might look at plans for military expansion in Africa, the takeover of air facilities in Columbia, the exponential growth of our military presence on Guam, Obama's increase by many multiples in the use of pilotless aircraft in the undeclared invasion of Pakistan, the grotesque $680 billion 2010 DOD budget, the tens of billions of dollars in war funding Congress is poised to pass quickly this session, and the additional supplemental spending bill that will arrive early next year to support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan...), there really was some hope last year that, if he became president, Barack Obama would rein in the abuses of power that get tarted up in the rhetoric of unitary executive theory.
On the more limited matter of war making, in this video The Nation's political correspondent John Nichols "sheds light on the American founding principle that presidents cannot define the debate about wars -- and reminds us that it is up to Congress, not the Commander-in-Chief, to set the debate and the terms of war." As the White House pursues its escalation of the war in Afghanistan, Nichols points out, Congress can still do its duty, starting with support for a sensible "war surtax" that will make the wealthiest Americans pay more so that the cost of the war is covered by concurrent revenues.
See, also: Grijalva Pushes to Block War Funding (AfterDowningStreet.Org 2009-12-08, reprinted from Roll Call)
On the more limited matter of war making, in this video The Nation's political correspondent John Nichols "sheds light on the American founding principle that presidents cannot define the debate about wars -- and reminds us that it is up to Congress, not the Commander-in-Chief, to set the debate and the terms of war." As the White House pursues its escalation of the war in Afghanistan, Nichols points out, Congress can still do its duty, starting with support for a sensible "war surtax" that will make the wealthiest Americans pay more so that the cost of the war is covered by concurrent revenues.
See, also: Grijalva Pushes to Block War Funding (AfterDowningStreet.Org 2009-12-08, reprinted from Roll Call)
Health Care Insurance Reform: To do it right will require raising revenues
In order to bring the cost of health insurance reform below the $900 billion limit imposed arbitrarily by the White House, the House of Representatives may have to cut government subsidies for low- and middle-class families unable to afford the mandated insurance. The amount of coverage that people will be required to buy may also have to be reduced. In other words, the mandated insurance would be less affordable and less effective than is called for now. If coverage is to be truly universal and affordable, finding new revenues makes more sense than raising the cost and lowering the coverage for those the legislation is intended to help. The House bill as it stands is about $1.2 trillion. Some House Democrats think a windfall profits tax on the revenue boost insurance companies will get from the bill would be only fair. Others want to raise taxes on people making more than $300,000 a year to help pay the bill's costs. Either is a better idea than cutting subsidies or limiting benefits.
Clip File: Talk about a graduated tax
The next time someone is whining about the burden of U.S. taxes, have them consider this: "In 2009, roughly 47% of households, or 71 million, will not owe any federal income tax, according to estimates by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center." -- 47% will pay no federal income tax (CNN 2009-09-30)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
