The reliably feckless David Brooks has this to say about the domination of the GOP by radicals:
"It's probably futile to try to change current Republicans. It's smarter to build a new wing of the Republican Party, one that can compete in the Northeast, the mid-Atlantic states, in the upper Midwest and along the West Coast. It's smarter to build a new division that is different the way the Westin is different than the Sheraton..."
"Would a coastal and Midwestern G.O.P. sit easily with the Southern and Western one? No, but majority parties are usually coalitions of the incompatible. This is really the only chance Republicans have. The question is: Who's going to build a second G.O.P.?"
Representative democracy would benefit from such a development, but here's an easier way to do it than by trying to recapture the GOP. Stragglers from the moderate wing of the Republicans, if joined by the neoliberals, now a declining and reviled minority among Democrats, would form a new centrist, corporatist, neoliberal party (the New Whigs?). The Republican Party under this scenario would continue to represent fundamentalists, reactionaries and rightist libertarians. The Democratic Party would take on its proper role as the champion of the middle and working classes. And a green party, maybe the Green Party, would carry on with an agenda focused climate change. A House with four or five parties could only function by building coalitions, making it far more likely that rational, practical and more representative political outcomes would prevail.
All parties in the legislature have an interest in reining in the executive branch. The Founders envisioned ours as a legislative democracy, and it would serve us all to return to that model. The assignment of power through winner-take-all contests has proven itself to be dangerous to democracy as well as to wise stewardship.
Headway
Though what they do will always trump what they say, it is a sign of progress that Stonewall is in a major presidential speech in the same sentence with Selma and that climate change is acknowledged there to require action.
Oligarchy
Not to say we have a ruling class in this country, but according to Ancestry.com, Mitt Romney’s family tree connects him to Franklin D. Roosevelt, Calvin Coolidge, Franklin Pierce, Herbert Hoover, and George H.W. and George W. Bush.
It's all just a show, folks.
Former Ohio Democratic Representative Dennis Kucinich, the House radical, has signed on as a regular contributor to Fox News, the AP reports. Fox News chairman Roger Ailes said he's "always been impressed with Kucinich's fearlessness and thoughtfulness on the issues."
Sound advice
Don't gamble; take all your savings and buy some good stock and hold it till it goes up, then sell it. If it don't go up, don't buy it. -- Will Rogers
Guns don't kill people; people who are ticked off kill people
Places, people, situations, other than public schools, that would benefit from more guns: the DMV; rude waiters; tardy Warner Cable installers; anyone who quotes Faux News; digital media wannabes on cell phones in public spaces; Jehovah's Witnesses at the door; bicyclists on the sidewalk; Segways; Republicans; the DNC; texters -- in traffic, on the sidewalk, bicycling; drivers faking disabilities to park for free; dog walkers without plastic bags; tiny, fidgety "service" dogs in restaurants...
Water, water everywhere...
I'd bet the word I use most often in political discussions is "infrastructure." Along with education, it was infrastructure that gave us our biggest advantage over economic rivals in the 20th century. Natural resources are abundant in North America, of course, but it was government infrastructure spending in the form of railroads, electric grids, highways, port facilities, and so on (and a work force trained and educated in publicly financed schools) that enabled us to convert resources into wealth. Forty years of feckless leadership has squandered this advantage; a succession of Democratic and Republican regimes has presided over the transfer of public wealth into private hands, leaving virtually nothing to spend on the commons.
The penalty for allowing our government to devolve into kleptocracy is coming due, however.
Take water as an example. Even though it is more important to life than any other factor, we treat it with about as much consciousness as goldfish in a bowl. Even now, with two-thirds of the country in severe drought, with aquifers, lakes, reservoirs and rivers drying up -- even the Mississippi is close to being unnavigable for lack of water -- we routinely waste unconscionable quantities of H2O. And the crumbling infrastructure is making a bad situation worse. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, we "lose" 1.7 trillion gallons of water each year -- enough to supply 68 million people -- to aging, leaky pipes (650 water mains burst on the average day). As the population grows and the supply of water declines, we will be forced to make changes in everything from agriculture to personal hygiene. And security planners say international tensions caused by water disputes will be a further burden on our ability to be the World's Policeman. Upgrading our water infrastructure will cost a bundle, at least $1 trillion, probably a lot more, but the costs of not doing anything -- in disease, productivity, unrest, and so on, are sure to be far greater. If we fail to act, and access to clean water dries up, we won't last much longer than goldfish flopping next to a broken bowl.
As with all our infrastructure problems, we have to resources to set this right, but doing so would require two seemingly impossible changes in our politics: we would need to raise taxes significantly and we would have to reorient our national priorities away from militarism and corporate welfare and toward spending for the common good. Neither of these outcomes is possible unless there is a radical updating of our political system to make it more democratic. Constitution 2.0 is long past due.
The penalty for allowing our government to devolve into kleptocracy is coming due, however.
Take water as an example. Even though it is more important to life than any other factor, we treat it with about as much consciousness as goldfish in a bowl. Even now, with two-thirds of the country in severe drought, with aquifers, lakes, reservoirs and rivers drying up -- even the Mississippi is close to being unnavigable for lack of water -- we routinely waste unconscionable quantities of H2O. And the crumbling infrastructure is making a bad situation worse. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, we "lose" 1.7 trillion gallons of water each year -- enough to supply 68 million people -- to aging, leaky pipes (650 water mains burst on the average day). As the population grows and the supply of water declines, we will be forced to make changes in everything from agriculture to personal hygiene. And security planners say international tensions caused by water disputes will be a further burden on our ability to be the World's Policeman. Upgrading our water infrastructure will cost a bundle, at least $1 trillion, probably a lot more, but the costs of not doing anything -- in disease, productivity, unrest, and so on, are sure to be far greater. If we fail to act, and access to clean water dries up, we won't last much longer than goldfish flopping next to a broken bowl.
As with all our infrastructure problems, we have to resources to set this right, but doing so would require two seemingly impossible changes in our politics: we would need to raise taxes significantly and we would have to reorient our national priorities away from militarism and corporate welfare and toward spending for the common good. Neither of these outcomes is possible unless there is a radical updating of our political system to make it more democratic. Constitution 2.0 is long past due.
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.”
Worse is yet to come
In the opening volley of his campaign to unseat John Boehner as Speaker, "House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) came out against the fiscal cliff deal passed by the Senate, according to Republican members in attendance at a closed-door meeting of the House GOP conference Tuesday afternoon." If you think you hated Boehner as Speaker....
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.
On not knowing when to hold 'em
"I think the president made a huge mistake by negotiating over what he'd previously said was non-negotiable (namely, the expiration of the Bush tax cuts on income over $250,000). Then the White House compounded that mistake by sending Biden to 'close' the deal when Harry Reid appeared to give up on it. As a practical matter, this signaled to Republicans that the White House wouldn't walk away from the bargaining table, allowing the GOP to keep extracting concessions into the absolute final hours before the deadline." -- Noam Scheiber
"Anyone looking at these negotiations, especially given Obama's previous behavior, can't help but reach one main conclusion: whenever the president says that there's an issue on which he absolutely, positively won't give ground, you can count on him, you know, giving way -- and soon, too. The idea that you should only make promises and threats you intend to make good on doesn't seem to be one that this particular president can grasp." -- Paul Krugman
"Anyone looking at these negotiations, especially given Obama's previous behavior, can't help but reach one main conclusion: whenever the president says that there's an issue on which he absolutely, positively won't give ground, you can count on him, you know, giving way -- and soon, too. The idea that you should only make promises and threats you intend to make good on doesn't seem to be one that this particular president can grasp." -- Paul Krugman
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
