Archive for the ‘United States Politics’ Category
Occupy Writers: Articulate Speakers for the Bottom 99%
Tonight, via MSNBC’s “Rachel Maddow Show,” I found out about the Website Occupy Writers because Maddow had author Daniel Handler (aka Lemony Snicket) on to discuss his recent post at that site. A few of Lemony Snicket’s salient points from his post at Occupy Writers follow:
6. Nobody wants to fall into a safety net, because it means the structure in which they’ve been living is in a state of collapse and they have no choice but to tumble downwards. However, it beats the alternative.
and
11. Historically, a story about people inside impressive buildings ignoring or even taunting people standing outside shouting at them turns out to be a story with an unhappy ending.
(Good words. I can’t top them.)
Note that OccupyWriters.com is where many of my favorite authors have signed up in support of the Occupy Wall Street/Occupy Everything Else movement that’s going on right now. A few of my favorite science fiction and fantasy authors who’ve signed their names in support at that site include Rosemary Edghill, Mercedes Lackey, Tamora Pierce, Melinda Snodgrass, Laura Resnick, Laura Anne Gilman, Ursula K. LeGuin, and Neil Gaiman — I’m sure there were more, but those were the ones I noted right away. There are many, many writers on that list, some who are extremely well-known (like Salman Rushdie), some who are well-known to SF/F readers like myself (see above) and some who aren’t known — including some editors of various magazines, including Esquire and Harper’s Bazaar. (I’d gladly sign my name to the list, too, but I don’t have a novel published yet. Otherwise, I’d have done this as soon as I knew the site was available.)
What I think is great about OccupyWriters.com is that it shows that people who are creative understand what’s going on in this world. Our economy is not just bad; it’s truly terrible, and it’s something that all Americans — not just the “bottom 99%” — should care about. These writers get that, which is great.
Now, it’s time for the top 1%, like those who sit in the United States Congress, to realize that without the “bottom 99%,” nothing gets done in this country. Period.
Speaking of that, CNN’s Jack Cafferty has an excellent blog about why the Congress doesn’t seem to care at all about the “bottom 99%”. This is because they, themselves, benefitted from the horrible policies they instituted — greatly.
During the height of the recession, Congress actually became 25% richer. Meaning they were “feathering their own nests” while the rest of us got the shaft — as disgusting as this is, there’s more to the story.
From Cafferty’s blog post:
“Roll Call” reports that members of Congress had a collective net worth of more than $2 billion in 2010.
That was up about 25 percent from 2008, during the height of the recession.
And these wealth totals likely underestimate how rich Congress really is. That’s because they don’t include homes and other non-income generating property, which could come out to hundreds of millions in additional dollars.
This wealth is split fairly evenly between both Democrats and Republicans.
Overall, about 200 members of Congress are millionaires. Once again, this doesn’t include the value of their homes.
So did you catch all that? As bad as this is that the Congress is so much wealthier, overall, than the rest of the country — including the vast majority of their own constituents — this doesn’t even include the value of their homes or other property, which anyone else would have to claim as a matter of course as part of his or her overall wealth.
Cafferty continues a bit lower with:
Another expert suggests members of Congress do better with their investments than the average American because they are privy to inside information.
Really? Seriously? They would take advantage of that… something that is clearly illegal for the rest of us?
The bottom line is this body of lawmakers has next to nothing in common with the average American. Yet we keep sending most of the same rat pack back year after year.
Here’s my question to you: What does it say when members of Congress got 25% richer during the height of the recession?
I don’t know about anyone else, but what it says to me is that Congress is behaving in an unethical, immoral, blatantly dishonest manner. And it once again reminds me why we must be vigilant, watch what our representatives do (not just what they say), and perhaps most importantly of all, keep an eye on who — and what — is financing their campaigns.
This is why I, for one, intend to vote out as many wealthy incumbents who are in Congress as I possibly can. In this case, there’s one name who tops my list — my long-time Representative, Paul Ryan (R-Janesville), who clearly has forgotten that most of his constituents make far less money than he does. Ryan has done himself no favors, either, as he’s shown little to no understanding of the whole “Occupy” movement, nor any compassion as to how difficult it is nowadays to find work in America — even for our honored military veterans, some of whom have gone out in support at various “Occupy” protests and have been hurt badly by police, most especially in Oakland, California.
And I’m sorry; I cannot support anyone who doesn’t want to help promote job growth in this country. Rep. Ryan’s been in office for twelve whole years; he’s had twelve years to try to improve the economy, and he’s done very little about it. Ryan has obviously lost touch with the people of his district, and more importantly, the people of this country. If he can’t even figure out that the economy is in the tank, so the House of Representatives should have better things to do with their time than re-affirm “In God We Trust” as the official motto of the United States (as they did earlier this week) rather than take up any measure that could possibly help create employment in this country (see previous post for details), I know that just about anyone would do a better job as my US Rep. than Paul Ryan.
Worse yet, he’s said several times that he doesn’t understand the “Occupy” movement; he doesn’t believe it’s helpful. Yet military veterans, who Ryan claims to appreciate, are coming home to no jobs and a 12% unemployment rate, which is why some are going to “Occupy” protests across the US of A in order to ask, “Where are the jobs, and why doesn’t anybody in Washington, DC, or in the halls of power seem to care?”
I’m sorry; if you can’t be bothered to understand why people are upset because there’s a high unemployment rate overall, including a very high unemployment rate for returning military vets who’ve fought the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya, it’s time for you to go.
So please, Mr. Ryan — don’t let the door hit you in the rear on the way out.
————–
I, indeed, am an “Occupy Writer” even if I never am able to sign that petition — and I hope that I’ve done my level best to speak for the bottom 99% this evening, even if I did originally say “top 99%” because I was thinking about our morals, manners, and ethics — where we are, indeed, the top 99%, and those who don’t get it have to be the bottom 1% in these areas.
Totally Unnecessary: House Will Vote on “In God We Trust” as Official US Motto
I’m sorry; I thought I’d seen it all from this bunch of do-nothings we currently have in the United States Congress, but now they’ve topped themselves.
Tomorrow, they will be voting to “re-affirm” the “In God We Trust” motto in the United States House of Representatives. Really.
Which begs the following question: do we really need to have this vote, considering all the real problems that this Congress isn’t facing?
See this article from Raw Story, if you don’t believe me . . . this is just absolutely, totally nonsensical, and probably the worst action I’ve yet seen out of this bunch of yahoos that are currently wasting our money and time in the House of Reps.
How can Speaker of the House John Boehner have the nerve to schedule a vote on “In God We Trust,” of all things? “In God We Trust” has been our official motto since 1956, so this vote isn’t even original legislation — so what on Earth is the justification for it, except for the Republicans to point out to voters the many Democrats out there who will vote “no” on it (as they should as it’s an unnecessary time-waster). Then these self-same Rs will tell voters, “Oh, no! Those Dems don’t believe in God! See? They voted against ‘In God We Trust’ — aren’t they bad, evil, and vicious people? They must go!”
There are people who are genuinely hurting in this country — many, many people. Yet this is the best the House can do for anyone?
I’d not care about this sort of petty-politicking so much except we have genuine anger out here, for good reason. (See the “Occupy” movement for further details.) We have a national unemployment figure standing firm at 9% or more, with some areas (including my own) way above that. There are many real problems in the United States that this Congress won’t do anything about. Instead, they’d rather waste our time with garbage like this.
No wonder so many of us are in a “throw the bums out” mood, considering our elected leaders (starting with Boehner and moving on down) would rather play stupid power-games than actually legislate and do their jobs.
This Labor Day, We Know Fewer are “Laboring”
After a horrible August, where zero jobs were created whatsoever in the United States, we know that as of this Labor Day, fewer workers are working than ever before — thus, fewer are “laboring,” which is part of what is keeping the American economy down for the count.
I don’t know what the answers are, but I do know a few things could be instituted right now that would help.
For example, in Betty Jin’s recent article at BusinessInsider.com, she suggested the following:
1) Cut the corporate tax rate by 5%; this may stimulate jobs. (The risk in doing so is that it would probably increase the deficit in the short-term.)
2) Print more money, and start taxing corporate savings. This would force companies to invest, but could cause inflation. The hope here is that the American companies would invest in American workers, which would keep inflation down to a manageable level.
3) Increase “infrastructure” spending — in other words, start building roads, bridges, and other things like rail lines, as this definitely would create jobs. Also, everyone of every party wants safe roads and bridges — this one seems like a win/win, especially if President Obama stops calling it “infrastructure,” something very few people seem to realize means “roads and bridges,” and starts calling this exactly what it is — putting people back to work doing something that’s vital and necessary.
This last one, to my mind, is the strongest of the 10 things Jin says can be done right now to improve the economy (it’s third on her list; to see the other seven, click on her article) because Dwight D. Eisenhower, a Republican President, was the one who pushed for the Interstate highway system we all take for granted back in the 1950s. So it would be really hard for the current crop of radical Republicans to say that this is a bad idea, considering it was started by their own party.
Next, there’s the New Republic’s article, written by Jared Bernstein, that’s headline states “Obama’s Got Plenty of Options to Right the Economy — He’s Just Got to Fight for them.” This article is part of the New Republic’s “Symposium on the Economy” that’s sub-titled, “Is there Anything that can be Done?” Other articles in this series can be found here.
At any rate, here’s the first few paragraphs from Bernstein’s article:
Here’s the policy reality facing the president: The economy is stuck in the mud and the American people are losing faith that policy makers can do anything about it. As long as GDP growth is persistently below trend—trend being around 2.5 percent—the unemployment rate won’t be going anywhere good anytime soon. Paychecks, meanwhile, are declining in real terms, so we’re stuck in a cycle where the weak job market hurts household budgets, which trims consumption, which discourages investors.
The only games in town are fiscal or monetary stimulus—there, I said the ‘s’ word—but the president is boxed in, it is said, by three forces: First, he’s got no job-creation bullets left; second, even if he did, and American people don’t believe the government can help on the jobs front (a pathetic 26 percent have confidence in Washington’s ability to solve economic problems); and, third, Republicans in Congress will block any idea he proposes anyway. Thankfully, none of these challenges are as insurmountable as they might seem, and pushing relentlessly to overcome them is the president’s best, and only, chance to change the fundamental direction of the debate, find his footing, and create some momentum for the economy and for himself.
Mind you, all of this means one thing: President Obama must lead, and the country must follow wherever the President leads with regards to the economy. This means a comprehensible strategy must be created, and thus far, I really haven’t seen very much out of the current Administration that leads me to believe there’s much going on there except reactionary spending — that is, Timothy Geithner, current Secretary of the Treasury, and Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, have performed well in their jobs but they haven’t really seemed to set policy so much as react to it instead. This may be an error on my part; I’m no financial wizard by any stretch of the imagination. But it seems to me that if these two men have a grand, overarching vision, it surely hasn’t been well-explained to the “men (and women) on the street” like me. And it also seems that if these two men do have a way out of this mess, the President doesn’t seem to know what it is, either — or, perhaps, he’s just not saying because he knows the Republicans in Congress wouldn’t like it and would say so with great vigor and dispatch.
Note that at a Labor Day rally and speech that President Obama gave today in Detroit, Michigan, the President seemed to not only understand the high stakes of this “game” (if he loses public opinion on this issue, any chance he has of a second term will be gone), but understood the need to boldly counterattack the current crop of Republican Presidential candidates including Texas Governor Rick Perry and former Gov. of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney according to today’s AP article listed at Yahoo News. Obama said:
“I’m going to propose ways to put America back to work that both parties can agree to, because I still believe both parties can work together to solve our problems,” Obama said at an annual Labor Day rally sponsored by the Detroit-area AFL-CIO. “Given the urgency of this moment, given the hardship that many people are facing, folks have got to get together. But we’re not going to wait for them.”
“We’re going to see if we’ve got some straight shooters in Congress. We’re going to see if congressional Republicans will put country before party,” he said.
Now, this sort of rhetoric is exactly what most Democrats and Independents have been waiting for, but until voters see some action beyond the words, it’s unlikely to help overmuch. Still, this is the right message — people are hurting, and the President seems to “get” that — and one can only hope that the President’s advisors are reading the same articles I am that offer some real possibilities rather than just allowing the economy — and workers — to continue to be flushed down the drain.
WI Senate Passes EB Bill on Party-Line Vote; Debt Ceiling Crisis Ends
Folks, I have two quick updates, though if you’ve been paying attention to US politics at all, you know full well that the debt ceiling crisis is over (for now).
First, the Wisconsin Senate passed a bill, 19-14, to agree with the Wisconsin Assembly that new claimants for unemployment will have to wait a week to receive benefits. This passed on a party-line vote, meaning 19 Rs voted for it, while the 14 Ds voted “no” because they don’t like the idea of employers being able to lay someone off for a week, then call them back, without those employees getting paid.
Now it’s up to Gov. Scott Walker (R) to sign this bill so people can start to receive their Extended Benefits. Many people have been out of EB since 4/16/11, and may only receive another week or two — yet any money beats no money at all, and this is something everyone who worked for an employer has paid into.** (If you are an independent contractor and have lost your job through no fault of yours, there’s still no remedy for you. As I am now an independent contractor, I completely understand.)
So now, we’re just waiting on Scott Walker to do his job and sign this bill. Let’s hope he signs it soon, as there are real people hurting in Wisconsin who need this money. (If he doesn’t sign it quickly, well, that’s just another reason to recall the man come January 2012.)
As for the whole debt ceiling issue, I am appalled by the final solution. I know that getting something done was better than nothing at all, but the problem with the solution is that it allowed the most radical, right-wing extremists in the Republican Party to basically hold up everyone else until they got what they wanted. These people ended up winning the argument because they refused to give in; they refused to do their jobs as politicians, trying to figure out what the “art of the possible” is and made everyone else figure out that the only possible action was to give in to these extremists even though giving in was the wrong thing to do.
My biggest problem remains this one: once you pay the Danegeld, how do you get rid of the Dane?
So we have not defaulted, but the world as a whole has been exposed to the ridiculously petty nature of our politics. And the world, it appears, dislikes it as much as American citizens do.
Hard to see any “winners” here, including the radical, right-wing extremists, even though they obviously feel they have won. One would hope once they go back to their states or districts and get a taste of how people are feeling, they will be rudely disabused of that notion, as according to this poll, 77% of Americans feel our elected representatives have “behaved like spoiled children.”
In my opinion, there are no winners in this process; the national debt is still there, and still really isn’t being dealt with, while the lack of revenue in this deal (or, in plain terms, raising taxes or at least allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire) doesn’t help anything, either. Further, if there was more of a focus on jobs, promoting ways of keeping people employed in order to perhaps keep the tax cuts that the businesses and the wealthy like, maybe we wouldn’t be quite as bad off as we are right now.
It seems to me that the folks in Washington, DC, have a very narrow view of the world. Perhaps they can’t help it; they meet up with wealthy lobbyists and wealthy business owners and mostly wealthy people day by day, right? (In order to fund their campaigns, they need these people to help them, because it’s become too expensive to stay in Congress once you’re there without the help of very wealthy people.)
But pegging the tax cuts to the amount of people these businesses employ seems like a very good idea — that way, people would be employed, thus more tax revenue overall would be flowing into the system. And that way, there’s an impetus for businesses that may be sitting on a lot of money (and many are; don’t kid yourself) to hire, in order to keep the tax breaks they love so much.
That, to my mind, would be a “win-win.”
————
** Note: A person I respect read me the riot act over Extended Benefits. All I know is what the folks at Unemployment told me; these are programs people have paid into, and their employers alike . . . I agree that no one ever expected people to have to stay on unemployment over a year. Nor that we’d still have over 9% reportable unemployment in the US of A, either, which makes it much more difficult to find work.
Debt Ceiling Action — Write your Senators and Reps Today
Folks, it is obviously up to us to tell our elected representatives what we want, because they need some guidance up there in Washington, DC. (What is it about the air of that place that makes people lose their minds?)
Here’s my letter to my Republican Senator, Ron Johnson, as an example:
Dear Senator Johnson,
When you ran for office, you promised to work on behalf of all Wisconsinites, not just those who voted for you. I write to you now as one who didn’t vote for you but needs your help, as do all Americans.
Refusing to raise the debt ceiling now is wrong. All the debt ceiling does is say to our creditors, “We will pay you what is owed.” There is no reason whatsoever not to do so, so I do not understand your opposition in this matter.
While there is an argument that we as a country shouldn’t be spending so much — something I fully agree with — the fight for a Balanced Budget Amendment shouldn’t be hitched to this particular wagon.
At this point, we are on the brink of utter disaster. If the debt ceiling is not raised, consequences could be catastrophic. I really doubt you wish to do something that is so harmful to every single aspect of our economy, from the highest to the lowest, so please reconsider your opposition to raising the debt ceiling.
Sincerely,
Barb Caffrey
To find your Senators, go here:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Here’s an example of how to write to your elected Representative, my letter to my duly elected Rep, Paul Ryan:
Dear Representative Ryan,
I know you are philosophically opposed to raising the debt ceiling without massive spending cuts as you are what’s known as a “deficit hawk.” Still, you are sworn to do the people’s business, and right now, raising the debt ceiling is the right thing to do.
You have been in Congress for many years now, and you know full well that most of the time, raising the debt ceiling is a bloodless move that no one frets about. I don’t understand why it’s different this time for you or for the Republican Reps. in the House, but I do know that if you don’t do it, the consequences will likely be catastrophic.
I am much more concerned about the economy, why we still have over 14% reportable unemployment in Racine, WI, and why no one’s talking about the jobs issue. If more people were working, the deficit wouldn’t be as bad as it is because more tax revenue would be coming in.
Further, I am disgusted and incensed that the Republicans in the House refused to even consider closing tax loopholes that enrich big business and the wealthy while talking about cuts to “entitlement programs” that the middle class and below need every day — Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. It seems to me that a disproportionate amount of the burden has been placed on the middle class and below; why is it that the wealthy are exempt from sacrifice? And why on Earth do we still need to subsidize oil companies, the wealthiest corporations in the history of the world?
I applaud you for being willing to at least discuss the issue, Rep. Ryan, but I do not appreciate that there is no “sharing” in this sacrifice.
Please vote to raise the debt ceiling forthwith, without any such nonsense as “Cut, Cap and Balance,” as you know that will never pass the Senate. Stop this nonsense, and let’s get on with the people’s business, all right?
Sincerely,
Barb Caffrey
To find your Representatives, go here:
http://www.house.gov/representatives/
And to write to President Obama, go here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact
Good luck in talking sense to these people; I pray that they will listen to us before it’s too late. (Why they insist on playing petty partisan games until the last possible second, I will never know. Perhaps that’s why I’m not a politician.)
God’s Poll Numbers Slipping — Really!
Folks, now I’ve heard and seen it all. Even God has poll numbers.
According to this Web site, God’s approval numbers stand at 52%, with 9% disapproving. (I’m not sure where all the other people are on this issue. Perhaps the pollsters talked with a lot of atheists?)
Note I’ve seen other polls, rarely, such as the Gallup Poll, with numbers on God. They’re usually much higher than this. I would venture a guess that the reason for that is because of our overtly pessimistic American culture and political situation more so than anything else — we’re unhappy about our politics, we’re unhappy about our financial situation (personal and governmental), and we’re unhappy about the overall prospects for anything better because it sure doesn’t look like anything’s really improving out there.
Anyway, the reason we have new poll numbers for God is that the PPP polling firm wanted to use them in order to contrast those numbers against the poll numbers for Congress. And while God’s poll numbers were lower than you might expect for a Deity, they were considerably higher than any member of Congress.
From the article:
Questions about God were asked as part of a larger survey assessing American opinions of congressional leaders in the midst of the ongoing debt ceiling debate in Washington.
God’s approval rating exceeded that of House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, as well as both Democrats and Republicans in Congress, with each party receiving only a 33 percent approval rating.
God also polled significantly higher than the scandal-ridden media baron Rupert Murdoch: only 12 percent of those polled viewed him favorably, compared to 49 percent who viewed him unfavorably.
“Though not the most popular figure PPP has polled, if God exists, voters are prepared to give it (sic) good marks,” PPP said in a July 21 press release.
I would sincerely hope so!
Add a corollary of sorts from this article, which discusses a church in Washington, DC, that’s praying for a “just and compassionate budget.” From the article, which has a video attached:
‘There’s nothing in the Bible about whether there should be revenues in the budget package of 2011,” said Rev. David Beckmann, president of Bread for the World, a nonpartisan Christian movement working to end hunger in the U.S. and abroad. “But there’s nothing in the Bible that says you can’t tax rich people. There’s a lot in the Bible that says you ought to protect poor people.”
Later in the article, the interfaith leaders who’ve been helping to hold this daily vigil said:
Besides praying, the group of interfaith leaders are urging their followers to contact members of Congress. Earlier this month, they sent a letter to President Obama, writing that “people who are served by government program – those who are poor, sick, and hungry, older adults, children, and people with disabilities – should not bear the brunt of the budget-cutting burden.”
Can I get an “Amen” from the peanut gallery? (Please?)
Back Issues, and a Few Thoughts on Politics
Folks, my back is really acting up at the moment. Which is not conducive to blogging or any form of writing — nor to a lot of editing, either, truth be told, though it is good for planning. But I can’t let the nonsense going on right now go by without a few comments, either . . . so here we go.
First, last night’s “face-off” between President Barack Obama and Speaker John Boehner was, to my mind, rather underwhelming. These two people obviously don’t like each other, don’t trust each other, would rather not have anything to do with one another, but have to work together to try to do the country’s business — and are failing miserably. I place more of the blame on Boehner than on the POTUS, partly because Boehner has been a Representative for a lot longer than Obama has been President, and partly because when the Republicans gained control of the House after the 2010 elections, they promised to create jobs — not do all this screwing around.
I keep wanting to ask Boehner, “Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs?” Because that’s what he, and by extension his whole party, kept saying, and that’s why they got elected — on a job creating platform. But once they got in there, they decided “job creation” really meant “protect the wealthy at all costs from any form of tax increase, no matter how benign.” And they’ve acted on the latter belief, insisting even though they should know better that this is what the American public wants them to do — then have pushed the real cost of lowering the deficit onto the middle classes and below, who can’t afford it and are already paying too much, proportionately, as it is.
Now, the Republican argument is that the lower 50% of income earners “pay no income tax at all.” That is, to an extent, true. However, we do pay FICA, where many high earners don’t, meaning we’re helping to sustain Social Security; we pay sales tax, and cannot tap into loopholes that get part of those taxes back as can the wealthiest Americans when they buy a new yacht or a second or third home in order to use it for two weeks a year on vacation. So proportionately, the lowest earners are paying more than the high earners, which in effect gets blood from a stone as low earners have very little to work with in the first place.
Then, with all the picayune nonsense going on in Washington, DC, I’m still having to put up with the Wisconsin Republicans in the state Senate screwing around. These guys have decided they will pass a bill that agrees with the state’s Assembly bill — that will hold one week of benefits from new unemployment claimants, starting on January 1, 2012 — on August 1, 2011, because that’s just one short week away from the recall elections for state Senators Darling, Cowles, Harsdorf, Kapanke, Hopper, and Olsen. The Rs have decided to do this because they think that’ll make their Senators look more compassionate, of all things . . . they like the timing, and don’t care that they’re making people who’ve not had any extended benefits since April 16, 2011, wait even more for their money.
Me, I find this behavior terrible. Shallow. Rude. Obnoxious. And reprehensible, too, because these Senators should know better.
The whole bit of difference between the two bills was there because the Senate Rs wanted to look more compassionate (the Senate voted 30-3 against withholding the first week of unemployment from people, knowing full well the Assembly would pass a different version of the bill so they’d be able to “have their cake and eat it, too.”), yet how compassionate is it to make people wait another week for their money?
Because, remember, this is a Federal program. The money is already there. The WI Rs are just sitting on it, perhaps collecting interest on it, rather than paying it out — so there’s no excuse for this whatsoever.
At any rate, this is why every single last R Senator in Wisconsin (with the possible exception of Dale Schultz) should be recalled — they’ve lost touch with the real people in our state, who are suffering. And only seem to care about the wealthiest people in the state, protecting wealthy corporations and their tax loopholes . . . then wonder why they’re all in danger of being recalled on the first available date (which for eleven other Rs is January 3, 2012; two are recallable now, Grothman and Lazich, and may yet end up recalled by the end of the year for all I know).
Barb Caffrey's Blog 