Puget Sound Liberals Weekly Newsletter #185

Enhancing Freedom, Opportunity and Cooperation in Puget Sound and Beyond

Through informing and networking Liberals and Liberal Organizations.

 

Our vision is hundreds of thousands of well-informed Puget Sound Liberals working together.

 

          3000 members                                 July 31, 2009                   formerly Lake Hills Liberals                

 

 

 

 

                                                     

Our Website                                   Our  Editor                  To Unsubscribe

 

              Table of Contents   *Featured Articles

 

About Puget Sound Liberals

Calendars of Events

Communication with Our Members

Our News Coverage

Endorsing Local Candidates

 

Opportunities

Petitions

 

Commentaries from Our Members

Richard Curtis: Honduran Coup is Illegal

Eshy Shahrazad: U.S. Should Encourage Democracy

 

Liberals and Democrats Links to the Beef

Government Watch

Let’s Attack Private Health Insurers?**

Adam Smith Addresses Health Care Reform Issues

Comments on Rick Larsen’s Health Reform Views

Senator Maria Cantwell: Health Care Reform

Fairness, Not Class War*

 

State and Local Links to the Beef

Let’s Bring New Politics to Washington State**

Know Our Opponent: the BIAW**

College Budget Cuts Reduce Student Opportunities

Featured Advocacy Group: American Rights at Work

 

Nation and World Links to the Beef

Stop Illegal Actions against Union Organizing*

John de Graaf: What Is Productivity For?*

 

Our Liberal Spirit

Belligerence*

 

Recommended Books

 

 

 

Our Political Values

 

Our Political Priorities

 

·       Fair Clean Elections and Open Government

·       Fair Taxes and Competent Spending

·       Investment for Productivity

·       Quality Health, Education, Jobs, Income

·       Environmental Protection and Energy Independence

·       Security and Equal Rights

·       Justice and Peace Everywhere

·       International Cooperation and Leadership

 

Conservatives oppose all of these

 

     Let’s End Our National Nightmare

 

         Let’s Restore Our American Dream

 

More on Conservative opposition to our American Dream

 

Washington State’s 5 Major Needs

·       Federal Funding for Health and Education

·       Public Campaign Financing

·       Substituting a Progressive Income Tax

·       Replacing Conservative Legislators

·       Stopping Corporate Abuse

 

Quote of the Week

Pugnacity is a form of courage, but a very bad form.  Sinclair Lewis (1885 - 1951)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Calendar of Events

Monday, August 10 at 6 PM to Wednesday, August 12 at 12:30 PM at Seattle University – National Vacations Matter Summit, with three hundred experts, advocates, and stakeholders from the fields of health, travel and tourism, family studies and the environment with other interested citizens.  $95.  To Register.  $120-180 for room for both nights, meals, and parking.  Sponsored by right2vacation.org

 

 

Calendars of Events                             

 

King County Democrats - LD Meetings            Some 2008 Legislature Lobby Days

Thurston County Progressive Net                  Western Washington Fellowship of Reconciliation

Alliance for Democracy                                Democratic Underground.Com                          

Sierra Club Cascade Chapter Calendar           Cool State Washington

Washington Public Campaigns Calendar          Town Hall Seattle Calendar

Washington State Labor Council                    Whatcom County Peace and Justice Calendar 

Conversation Cafe      Drinking Liberally          Seattle NOW          

Wallingford Neighbors for Peace and Justice – Friday Night Movies      Liberal films on PBS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Communication with Our Members

 

Our News Coverage

 

More than almost anyone else we have defined what we mean by news.  We express our Liberal political values on our website homepage.  We express our Liberal priorities based on our understanding of activities necessary to overcoming current and long term obstacles to our values.  Our news includes (international, national, state and local) political, economic and social happenings and trends, especially relating to our Liberal priorities.  

 

Besides our Basic Training and Liberal Resources sections of our website, our archived newsletters attempt to enable Washington Liberals to be better informed about facts relevant to our values and how to understand the various contexts and perspectives for identifying and organizing these facts.

 

If you consider all of the commentaries and links to commentaries, I believe we present access to more news each week than is presented by any of our Washington newspapers.  Far more than any magazines, radio or television.  And we do this with much fewer resources, my volunteer time and the increasing volunteer time of our members who submit commentaries.  As you can guess from our style, we are perhaps the most frugal organization around: $200 per year for our website and service.

 

I draw on many newspapers, magazines, websites and blogs, helped by culling done by such organizations as Sightline, AlterNet, Common Dreams, Campaign for America’s Future, The Progress Report, and The New Republic.  I try to organize our commentaries and links so that you can easily identify and read the ones that interest your.  It might be nice to organize them into dozens or hundreds of yellow page like categories, but the flow of news in each category is uneven, particularly as the categories become more specific.  So I have organized most of it under: (1) Political, (2) State and Local, (3) National and International and (4) Our Liberal Spirit. 

 

I welcome your suggestions concerning our values, obstacles and priorities.  Our coverage, sources, and presentation.  And anything else.  As I have repeatedly expressed, I would welcome a leadership council which protect us from my loose cannon actions and look toward continuity when I wear out.

 

Endorsing Local Candidates

 

I don’t have as much knowledge and expertise concerning local races and candidates as do some of our local political reporters, bloggers and political party organizations.  So I am avoiding making endorsements.  I recommend you visit our candidates’ various websites.  Learn who endorses them.  Go to endorser’s websites to see what more they may say about the candidates.  I’ve got lots to do that I am better at.  Dave Thomas

 

Opportunities

Useful Websites: contacts, maps, community organizing tools, and more.

Access to jillions of political cartoons.

Download Sightline Institute’s climate policy primer ‘Cap and Trade 101’.  About Sightline.

Create your own petition.

Conduct your own home energy audit.

See all of President Obama’s weekly (Saturday) addresses.

Open Congress: Race Tracker

 

Petitions

Tell your congress members to stay in session to work on Health Care Reform.

Tell your senators to not let anti-choice politics affect health care reform.

Tell congress members to update 33 year old toxic chemicals regulations.

Tell your representative to support Military Readiness Enhancement Act which ends discrimination against GLBT.

Tell Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to reject funding for tar sands oil pipeline.

Tell Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to protect our wilderness heritage.

Tell Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to protect Tongass National Forest from Logging.

Tell Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to protect our Grand Canyon from Uranium mining.

Tell Obama to create rules that regulate coal ash, mercury, mining, soot, smog, and carbon pollution.

Tell Senators Kerry and Lugar to send a strong message to Sudan concerning Darfur.

Tell our Obama Administration to impose sanction on leaders of Honduran military coup.

 

Commentaries From Our Members

 

Richard Curtis: Honduran Coup is Illegal

Published by Seattle Times on 7/25/2009

 

Nazis also called policies 'the rule of law'

I am astounded state Sen. Pam Roach would have the gall to argue that a military coup against a democratically elected president of any country is a lawful measure.  I will assume Roach is intelligent enough to know the Honduras coup is not lawful. So my question is: How do you sleep at night?

 

The Nazi's told these kinds of lies, too. They followed "the rule of law" as well. They had judges and courts, too. But unlike Honduras, they did not have democracy once they were done.

 

I know this is the type of political system Roach prefers, but I think it is demonic of her to call that the rule of law. She should be ashamed of herself.  Richard Curtis

 

Also see similar letters published by the times.  I agree that Honduran President Manuel Zelayawas removed illegally.  Dissidents should have used legal processes, which are available in Honduras.  Our United States has reacted ambivalently, as we often do with similar situations in Venezuela and other countries whose leaders we don’t like.  It’s difficult for our government to change bad habits, especially concerning our domination of South American countries.  Dave Thomas

 

Eshy Shahrazad: Our Democrats Should Encourage Democracy in Iran

 

Dear friend, as a devoted democrat I volunteered for the past two years, I worked hard for our victories. We all worked as a team.  Now we need our team to put their support behind Democracy in Iran, freedom and democracy in Iran, which is the United States best interest, and for the world to be free from fear and hate. Please support Iranian people, ask our local liberals and democratic leaders to join us to come to our rally.  Just stop by for a short time, any Sunday; 1:30 to 3:30 in Bellevue, corner of Bellevue Way NE & NE 4th. Show us the way; and let us know what we can do and what needs to be done, to be the voice of freedom and justice in Iran, for better world.

 

In spite of all my effort, I have not been able to convince any of our fellow democrats to join me in this effort.  So far, Mr. Bruce Chandler, Mr. Reagan Dunn, and Mr. Rob McKenna (twice) have participated and delivered petitions to Washington D.C. 

 

The hostage crisis is not over in Iran, yet. After 30+ years there are still 70-80 ML Iranian are still kept hostage by this regime.  Please join and help us to be the voice of democracy and justice in Iran and therefore, a peaceful world for all mankind. Please Help.  Thank you, Eshy Shahrazad

 

I agree that Iran and all countries should become democratically responsive to their people, including facilitating governmental and non-governmental organizations and processes beyond ballot boxes.  I believe the United States can use the bully pulpit to express the virtues of democracy and can reward actions in that direction.  I support President Obama’s approach, which avoids giving Iran’s abusive rulers the excuse that their opponents are only puppets of ours.  I wonder if the Republicans you note above are primarily trying to embarrass Obama.  Dave Thomas

 

Seattle marchers rally in support of Iranian protestors.

 

-Liberals and Democrats-

 

Government Watch

Also go to Whitehouse.gov.

 

Health Care Reform

If the Senate can’t pass Health Care Reform before August recess, they should stay to finish it.

President Obama says delay is OK.  We want to get it right. 

Our public is unsure about the health care reform packages, but they support their specific policies.

Republicans cite research by non-partisan firm, which is owned by a large profitable private insurer.

To pass health care reform, Obama should aim moral message at Blue Dog constituents.

The Blue Dog Democrats are opposing Health Care Reform for the money.  Their PAC receives big bucks from opponents.  However, Energy and Commerce Committee member Blue Dogs on have negotiated a better health reform bill, which will pass before August recess, with the House as a whole passing a bill soon after recess.

Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus fails at watchdoging TARP and advancing Health Care Reform.

Organizing for America is running ads against Democratic legislators who don’t support public option.

Conservatives hope that defeating health care reform will destroy President Obama’s support.

Ohio Republican proposes Father’s Rights Bill, requiring biological father’s permission for abortion.

Republicans cite research by non-partisan firm, which is owned by a large profitable private insurer.

 

Note that Social Security and all major legislated programs get modified every few years as new realities, difficulties and solutions become apparent.  Let’s pass reform health care now, then fix and perfect it periodically.

 

Government Department Evaluation and Accountability

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is instituting a quadrennial review of State Department objectives and activities that is similar to the one conducted by our Defense Departments.  Let’s have such reviews for all Departments.

 

Conducting Foreign Policy

Besides dealing with economic recession, health care and other domestic issues, Obama is fully involved in foreign policy decisions and action.

 

Military Spending

Our Senate has approved 87 to 7, a $679 billion defense spending bill that includes most of the weapons program cuts sought by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and an expansion of the federal hate-crime law.  It’s difficult to identify how much is spent on foreign military bases, Cold War technology and other categories that might be reduced.  I believe bases should be closed and weapons procurement programs eliminated to release money to be spent for useful non-military projects.  People who lose their military-industrial jobs could be employed in green infrastructure and other needed jobs.

 

House Appropriations Bills

Transportation, housing, health, welfare and military bills have all passed by significant majorities, with Washington congressional members Hasting and McMorris Rodgers opposed.  Pay-go passed easily with congress members Doc Hastings, Cathy McMorris Rogers, Dave Reichert and Jim McDermott opposed.  For more.

 

Other

If Senate won’t complete Health Care Reform bill before recess, how about Employee Free Choice bill?

Should the Community Choice Act to assist 37 million disabled people be part of health care reform.

Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) are continuing their effort to restore voting rights for million of Americans.

Obama Administration is accused of continuing abuse of undocumented immigrants.

Court forces government to prosecute Guantanamo prisoner in civilian instead of military court.

 

Steps that Obama Administration should take to stop coal mining from despoiling Appalachia.

Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) questions whether we should escalate Afghan War.  For More.

 

Let’s Attack Private Health Insurance?

 

Private health insurers and their supporters continually attack public health insurance, mostly with lies about government interference in the patient’s relationship with his health providers and about the effectiveness of public health insurance in other countries.  Why shouldn’t we supporters of public health insurance attack private health insurance?  It is easy to do so while sticking to the truth.

 

I was glad to watch Senator Christopher Dodd deliver an impassioned speech on C-Span, in which he eloquently described various abuses by private health insurers:

·       They refuse to insure people with pre-existing conditions

·       They accuse ill customers who make claims of having pre-existing conditions (rescission), such as arguing that headaches noted on an application indicated the presence of multiple sclerosis.  More.

·       They invisibly, vaguely, or in small print, deny coverage of various illnesses

·       They delay approval, such that people become sicker or die due to lack of treatment.

·       They deny coverage of various treatments, claiming they are experimental contrary to the judgment of his patient’s physician.  Rationing done by publicly unaccountable private bureaucrats.

·       They offer a bewildering array of deductions, co-payments, underpayments, and limits, such that insured patients end up with enormous bills.

·       Their priority is increasing profits instead of serving their customers.

Obama sent me an email describing consumer protections to be included in health care reform.

 

In addition:

·       Private health insurance is much more costly than public health insurance, due to marketing, the cost of disqualifying customers and treatments, and profits.  There is little competition with just 1 or 2 private insurers dominate many state markets.

·       Private health insurance costs are increasing more rapidly than costs of medical products and services.  And more rapidly than increasing public health insurance costs.

·       People with private health insurance frequently find their insurance cancelled or treatments denied, often without just cause.  The resulting medical costs often lead to mortgage foreclosure and bankruptcy.  Something that doesn’t happen in countries with universal coverage.

·       People with private health insurance are much less satisfied with their insurance than people with public health insurance.  A majority of our people prefer public health insurance.  If we didn’t have private health insurance lobbyists backed by campaign contributions, we would have public health insurance like less corrupt democratic European countries.  For benefits of Medicare.

Note that no Canadians run up large debts, lose their homes or become bankrupt due to illness.

 

We need to provide public health insurance coverage of necessary medical treatments, allowing people to buy additional private health insurance for optional medical treatments.  To reduce costs of public health insurance, we need to implement:

·       Low-cost single payer administrative system, monitored to prevent fraud

·       Bargaining with health care providers to create appropriate prices

·       Payment for health outcomes instead of procedures, including preventive, chronic and hospice care

·       Various local, state and national strategies to stimulate healthier lifestyles (such as dieting, exercise, addiction prevention and treatment)

·       Coordinated care beginning with a primary care physician, including shared electronic patient charts (as done excellently by our Washington Group Health Cooperative)

·       Evidenced based care, based on recommendations (or mandates) by health care specialist committees (with members employed by providers or our government) based upon comparative effectiveness health care research.  For more.  This will result in rationing by physicians instead of private insurance clerks.  For more.  For more.

·       Eliminating payment disparities between regions, resulting from congressional responses to special interests.  Instead of congress, a non-political commission should decide payment rates. 

·       For more.

 

The congressional delay in passing health care reform bills may have beneficial consequences.  Many of the cost containment measures that are needed were not sufficiently included in the various bills, due to their negative impact on various special interests in various congressional districts.  I expect including some of the measures will be a high priority during and after the congressional recess.  For more.  I still believe that health care reform has plenty of congressional support and will be passed.  Democrats won’t let Max Baucus almost single-handedly stop Health Care Reform.  Dave Thomas

 

Vermont successfully implements a variety of health cost savings programs. 

Vermont Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders supports health centers (clinics) in every county.  Would reduce unnecessary ER visits.

Lawmakers try to limit patent protection tenure for drugs.   Pharmaceuticals strongly oppose it.  More.

 

Congressman Adam Smith Addresses Issues

About Upcoming Health Care Reform Legislation

 

The United States Congress is entering a critical stage in the effort to reform our country’s health care system.  I remain absolutely committed to providing universal access to all Americans.  I believe very strongly that, with the right legislation, we can provide quality, affordable care to all Americans while controlling costs and improving quality.  I am also very supportive of a public option to help to drive the reforms our system so desperately needs. 

 

The House has now introduced, through a tri-committee process, its first bill aimed at substantially changing that system.  I fear, however, that this bill doesn’t recognize the need for reform that will not only create universal access for all Americans, but that also fundamentally changes our broken and inefficient health care system to control costs and improve quality.  The cost of adding the nearly 50 million uninsured Americans into our current health care system, as this bill does, could collapse the health system.  And, by so doing, we will have missed a tremendous opportunity to change how all Americans receive health care in ways that will address the significant shortfalls that currently exist in the quality of that care.

 

The Tri-Committee legislation, while it makes great strides toward covering more Americans, is unsustainable.  The draft is too expensive and misses the most fundamental problems with our current system.  We will be unable to provide quality care for those Americans who would gain coverage under this legislation if we do not remedy the current wasteful spending and out of control costs in health care.  Further, I am concerned that the Obama Administration has released several promising ideas but has not yet put forth a solid legislative proposal around which Congressional leaders can coalesce.

 

Achieving the essential goal of affordable health care and universal access to care can only be achieved and sustained through cost containment measures.  In this country we do too many unnecessary tests, prescribe too many unnecessary drugs, perform too many unnecessary surgeries, and have too many unnecessary hospitalizations.  With greater emphasis on primary care, prevention, and paying for quality outcomes instead the amount of services there is a way to reform health care that could not only rein in costs, but could also improve the quality of care dramatically.

 

If we are going to be able to provide universal coverage to all Americans without bankrupting our economy, we have to eliminate fee-for-service (FFS) medicine.  It has led to massive over utilization of treatment and tests.  The current FFS model, and basis of our health system, rewards the quantity of services provided rather than the quality of care.  In this system, providers are overburdened and incentivized to fit in too many patients.  Providers must rush through appointments, which means that they can often order treatments, tests, and specialists that they may have otherwise determined to be unnecessary if they were afforded more time with their patients. 

 

Unfortunately, however, the debate on overhauling FFS medicine has taken a disappointing turn in Congress.  The argument has been made that, if we move away from FFS, it will lead to rationing of necessary tests and treatments.  Correcting the flawed FFS system is not about rationing medicine or valuing one kind of care over another.  Rather, it is about more efficiently expending resources.  There are studies that show that regions of the country that spend the most on health care and perform the most tests and procedures have a lower quality of care than those areas that have lower costs.  The debate, then, should not be about denying care but about reducing over utilization of unnecessary services and promoting higher quality care, both of which save money. 

 

The problem is particularly apparent in Medicare where the reimbursement rate formula fails to reward efficient health care regions at a fair rate and over utilization is rampant.  As a result, Washington state and others like it with very efficient health systems, where providers order fewer unnecessary tests and treatments, have very low reimbursement rates compared to other regions of the country. 

 

This system is not only unfair to states like Washington; it is incredibly wasteful and unsustainable for the entire health care system.  Providers are paid for the amount of care whether or not it is of high quality and in the best interest of the patient.  The Tri-Committee bill does nothing to reform this system, and also adds to the problem by basing the public option on this same failed fee-for-service reimbursement model.

 

If health care reform rewarded doctors for the quality of the care they provide, rather than the quantity of tests, referrals, and visits, we could greatly reduce the amount of services and provide better, more efficient care and cover more Americans in a sustainable way. 

 

A public plan option and broader health reform is our opportunity to get off of fee-for-service medicine.  I am extremely supportive of a public option that includes both a reformulated reimbursement system and a focus on preventative care with discounts for people that make progress on preventable and controllable heath conditions. 

 

As you know, preventative care is about more than tests and taking medications, it is also about promoting healthy behaviors and individual engagement.  Health care should be a shared responsibility between patients and providers and that should be reflected in how people pay for insurance.  There are several common preventable, controllable, health conditions that can lead to larger problems such as high blood pressure, high cholesterol, obesity, and smoking.  Pricing that rewards efforts to improve or control these problems is not only fair, but also incentivizes individuals to actively engage in their own health, ultimately driving down the cost of care. 

 

Many companies that self-insure their employees have had great success with risk-based pricing.  The system they uses gives discounts to people who make progress on or control the issues mentioned above and charges people who don’t control them more.  Using this model, these companies have had great success with not only improving the health of their employees, but also with keeping health care costs low while the rest of the country saw inflation in costs.  There is no reason why this model could or should not be applied to all federal health care programs including the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) in which Members of Congress participate.  

 

The Tri-Committee bill makes great progress toward covering more Americans.  But, the introduced legislation makes minimal progress toward containing costs which will mean that our health system will remain unsustainable, our federal debt will continue to grow, and the burden of an excessively expensive health care system will continue to be an impediment to economic growth.  

 

It is also important for the White House to take a more active role in formulating health care reform legislation.  To date, the Obama administration, while very supportive of Congressional efforts to reform health care, has not yet introduced its own legislative text.  It is necessary for the White House to contribute concrete ideas to this debate so that Congress and the American people can know exactly where President Obama stands.  I would encourage you to contact the White House and urge the President to present his own version of health care reform legislation. 

 

Now is the time to fundamentally reform our health care system in a way that expands access while containing costs to instill efficiencies in the system that pay for the expansion. I am hopeful that these issues will be addressed as health care reform moves forward and I look forward to working with my colleagues and President Obama on these important issues.  Congressman Adam Smith (WA-9)

 

Washington Second District Congressman Rick Larsen opposes Public Health Care Option.

 

Member Comments on Congressman Rick Larsen’s Health Care Reform Views

Note: Rick Larsen has refused to endorse a public option.  Dave Thomas

 

Janet Lutz-Smith

Rep. Larsen's position on Health Care Reform is totally unacceptable to me and to most of us Progressives.

 

We MUST come up with a viable candidate to run against him -- it's too late now but maybe a candidate could at least argue with him stating the positions he needs too support -- not supporting Pres. Obama's reform plan is like saying he is supporting Republicans - and of course, being a member of the DLC gives him that support for being obstreperous.

 

Some of us have been working for too many years on giving him opportunities to make change in his position without any success.  We must come up with a viable candidate to run against him!  I think a network is being started to do just this.  Anybody have information to share on the list with us?  I'd like to say I think Todd Nichols would be a great nomination -- For peace and love in the world, Janet Lutz-Smith

 

Dan Freeman

I absolutely agree.  Rick Larsen does not represent the people.  I have called and called his office to try and speak to his indifference to the majority of average citizens and their desire for peace and healthcare.  He doesn't seem to care much about humans and their very real needs. I'm quite sure he is wholly owned by the military/industrial/health insurance complex.  Dan Freeman

 

Sharon Abreu

I agree with Janet's statement except that I don't agree that it's too late to run someone against Larsen for the 2010 election.  Sharon Abreu

 

Excerpt from an Email on Health Care Reform by Senator Maria Cantwell

 

“I heard from many of you about the need to have a robust public option and other cost managing components in the health care reform debate. I could not agree more. To truly reform health care and ensure every American has access to affordable, quality care, we have to make sure there is an alternative to private health insurance that will help drive down costs and provide access to quality care. This is what I am working to achieve in Congress and why I continue to fully support a robust public option as part of health care reform in the Senate.




Make no mistake. The giant health care industries are working hard to defeat the kind of reform that you and I are pushing for. But we can't let them. You and I know that we can't stop with a public option in our push to get true health care reform.  We have to do even more. 

·       We must take advantage of this far too brief moment in history to pass reforms that will improve the lives of Americans and lower their costs. This health care reform effort must not only successfully bring down overall costs, but it must improve health outcomes for all Americans. I believe that we can do both and I believe that we must.

·       We have to improve primary care, with better care coordination and a focus on preventative care.

·       We must stop our system from paying for use and volume, and start paying for healthy patients. Providers nationwide should be encouraged to provide patient-driven high-quality health care, so Americans do better, not insurance companies.

·       We also have to do more to help seniors stay in their homes, healthier, for longer. Home and community based long term care patients are dramatically healthier than their counterparts, and the costs of delivering that high quality care are 70 percent less.”  Senator Maria Cantwell

 

Fairness, Not Class War

 

When we attempt to make taxes more progressive, we are often accused of conducting class war.  This is not true.  We would be glad to have everyone become wealthy, such that they can obtain all the goods and services that they want which are healthy and sustainable for themselves, others and our environment.  We welcome people becoming rich, although we also question some of the ways they become wealthy and how they use their wealth.

 

We attempt to make taxes more progressive, because present taxes are unfair.  People often receive income that they haven’t earned.  That they don’t deserve to have, like bank robbers.  They must pay for the labor, facilities, equipment and supplies that they use to earn an income.  But they often don’t pay to maintain our social heritage, our social and physical infrastructure and our safety net which past generations have created, with is necessary to their productivity and earnings.  What they earn here, they couldn’t earn in Paraguay or Haiti.  As they pay for their other necessary inputs, they should pay for these public investments which are now externalities paid for by the general public or delayed to harm our present and future productivity.  George Washington and many since have so argued.

 

A value added tax (VAT) captures the now uncollected payments for our social heritage involved in production.  A progressive income tax also captures the now uncollected payments for our private speculative and investment earnings.  For more.  To read about my recommended progressive income tax.  Note that it would result in lowering taxes for most people.  Dave Thomas

 

Conservatives complain that it is unfair for the top 1.2% of taxpayers to pay 42.5% of all income taxes.  They don’t tell you that these taxpayers own 50% of U.S. financial wealth.  Their tax rates are too low to pay for their social obligations.  Proposed higher tax payments would be far less than their incomes have increased and what they have received from the Bush tax cuts.  For more.

 

Here’s the Beef

President Obama’s popularity remains high, falling primarily among Moderate Republicans who worry that the Stimulus-Recovery Package isn’t producing results.

Texas Governor complains about U.S. gov’t.  Texas uses federal money to fund 97% of its budget gap.

In Arizona, politicians say stimulus money is a waste; but want all they can get.

Democrats may add to their House majority in 2010, as more Republicans may be vulnerable.

Bye bye Kentucky Republican Senator Jim Bunning.

If Senate won’t complete Health Care Reform bill before recess, how about Employee Free Choice bill?

 

-State and Local-

 

Let’s Bring New Politics to Washington State

 

I have decided that our Puget Sound Liberals will emphasize our Washington State’s major issue: replacement of Old Washington (Special Interest) Politics with New Washington (Public Interest Politics).  We will describe the workings of our Old Politics and propose basic reforms, including

·       Clean Elections and other Election Reforms, such as Instant Run-Off and Fusion Voting Systems

·       Exposing and weakening Conservative influence over our legislature

·       Replacement of Conservatives who oppose these measures, with Liberals who support them

·       Fair Taxation which yields sufficient revenue to adequately support necessary environmental, education, labor, consumer, infrastructure-safety net and other state services

 

We support the efforts of Liberals and liberal Advocacy Groups (including the Democratic Party, Labor Unions, Educational Associations, Environmental and Consumer Organizations and many other Liberal advocacy groups) to promote these and other public interest reforms.  Focusing upon serving the public interests of all of Washington’s people, our Liberals and Liberal Groups can work together for greater effectiveness. 

 

We place a lower priority upon making ourselves (including our Puget Sound Liberals) more powerful or catering to our private interests.  We need the financial and political resources to succeed in our mission.  But, we should not let the means become the end.  Our resources are to be used.  Not just accumulated.  Unfortunately, some of us who excel at building political capital fail at spending it.  Unused political capital quickly fades.  We must use it or lose it.  I also believe that Liberal Groups that emphasize public interests will better motivate and involve their own members than if they concentrate mostly on their own private interests.

 

Liberal Groups should also give more attention to basic viruses as well as symptoms.  The above reforms are the key logs in the log jam.  Once they are enacted, many other specific reforms will more easily occur.  Let’s cooperate to initiate New Washington (Public Interest) Politics.  Yes, we can.  I believe we will.  Dave Thomas

 

Know Our Opponent: the BIAW

 

With its many resources, the Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW) is the major opponent to using our government to provide equal access to quality public services.  Without BIAW support, our Washington State Republican Party would be much weaker.  This commentary initiates a series of commentaries which describe BIAW, its activities and their impacts upon our state government, public services and people.

 

BIAW Mission

They claim that “The Building Industry Association of Washington exists to unite those in the building industry in Washington State in their fight against a government that has made this industry among the most regulated in the nation.  To accomplish this purpose, the association's primary focus is to educate, influence and affect the legislative, regulatory, judicial and executive agencies of Washington's government.”  Their actions show that they have a much broader Conservative agenda.

 

BIAW Resources

The Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW) has 12,500 members.  Besides dues and contributions, it receives money from our Washington State Government that is rebated when a surplus occurs in a State disability fund, due to employer contributions having exceeded amounts paid out for claims.  Bill SB 6035, which would have ended this practice, failed to pass.

 

This money supports the activities of the BIAW and the Master Building Association of King and Snohomish Counties, including the activities described below.  It also enables them to support various Political Action Committees (PACs), including Affordable Housing Council, ChangePAC and Constitutional Law PAC.  The BIAW also supports Washington Policy Center which describes its mission as improving lives through market solutions and Evergreen Freedom Foundation which promotes a broader Conservative agenda.  BIAW’s political and legal expenditures exceed those of any other Washington State special interest.

 

BIAW Activities

Activities include:

·       Contributing to the campaigns of Conservative Washington State candidates and officials of both political parties

·       Professional lobbying

·       Lobbying by member companies

·       Development of favored political candidates

·       Informing supporters about their issues, actions and needs

·       Conducting policy research in cooperation with the Washington Policy Center

·       Conducting law suits

 

Financially Assisting Conservative Political Candidates

BIAW provides large campaign contributions to Conservative candidates (Supreme Court Judges, governors (Ellen Craswell and Dino Rossi) and Republican and some Democratic legislators).  Without BIAW financial support, our Washington State Republican Party would be much weaker.

 

Affecting Washington State Government

Often successfully, BIAW uses the above described strategies to:

·       Reduce State Taxes and Revenue.  (It supports Tim Eyman’s initiatives to reduce state taxes, revenue and expenditures)

·       Reduce State Expenditures, especially for environmental, infrastructure (except housing) and safety net programs.

·       Increase Tax Subsidies for businesses

·       Deregulation of Business Activities, including environmental, consumer and worker protection

·       Adopt Conservative State Legislation and Block Liberal State Legislation, including legislation pertaining to so-called cultural issues

 

BIAW attempts to achieve these goals through many actions to pass or block passage of many specific legislative bills.  They also threaten and initiate law suits.  Major targets are environmental regulations, funding for health care (including women’s abortions), schools and anything except housing construction, worker benefits, unionization, collective bargaining and other protections and consumer protection (especially from abusive homebuilders).

 

Our future commentaries will more fully describe BIAW’s activities and their negative impacts on our state government and people.  Collaborating with others, we intend to create effective strategies to greatly reduce these impacts.  But first, we must know our opponent: BIAW.  I welcome your suggestions for research, sources of information, and other advice and comment.  Dave Thomas

 

College Budget Cuts Reduce Student Opportunities

Media Release by Economic Opportunity Institute (7/27)

 

A new report issued by the Seattlebased Economic Opportunity Institute says Washington State

is falling behind in the effort to build a world class education system. Continued cuts in state funding and corresponding tuition hikes mean fewer, more expensive slots at Washington’s public universities and colleges; “sticker shock” is likely to drive down applications from lowincome and minority students despite increased financial aid; and middleincome graduates are taking on more debt to pay for school.

 

With public funding for state higher education at a 30year low, EOI’s report “Losing by Degrees” calls on state leaders to identify new sources of public revenue to increase public investment in higher education in order to build a more competitive economy, and warns of lost economic security and decreased business competitiveness if no action is taken. Key findings include:

·       Students and families are paying more than ever to attend public universities and colleges. The total cost (tuition, room, board, and expenses) of attending the University of Washington has grown from onefourth to nearly a third of the median household income over the past 20 years – faster than both inflation and per capita income. Tuition is set to rise even faster over the next two years, as tuition at Washington’s research universities will increase by 30%, and at community colleges by 15%.

·       The number of available slots is decreasing, even as our population grows.  Despite tuition increases, the state’s public research universities will be able to enroll about2,000 fewer students in 200910 than in 200809, and comprehensive universities will have space for 2,362 fewer. Meanwhile, the number of seniors enrolled in Washington public high schools has increased in each of the past four years, meaning more young people will be competing for fewer slots in school.

·       “Sticker shock” will likely lower applications from lowincome and minority students, despite higher financial aid packages. Legislators and education administrators claim that higher income families can afford price hikes, and that lower income students will receive increased financial aid, both from the state and from new federal policies. But the experience of other public universities using this “hightuition/highaid” financing model, including the University of MichiganAnn Arbor, University of MiamiOhio, and University of Vermont, indicates applications from lowincome and minority students are likely to decline.

At the University of Washington, data show a trend of decreasing economic diversity corresponding

with rising tuition rates even before the major tuition hikes scheduled for the next two years. Between

1997 and 2007, the percentage of freshmen applying for aid consistently hovered at around 63% of the incoming class. Of those 63%, roughly one in ten reported an annual family income of over $100,000 (adjusted to 2007 dollars) in 1997, yet by 2007 it was one out of every three students.

·       Middleclass families and students are shouldering higher costs as the majority of “aid” is coming from loans. In 199192, loans made up 36% of total aid packages, while grants were 61%. By 200708, however, loans had grown to comprise 49% of the packages, while grants fell to 45%. In 2008, the average student loan debt among borrowers at the University of Washington was $16,481 – a number that will only grow with tuition increases. These debt payments erect real barriers to purchasing a home or car, or pursuing graduate education, and portend a life of indebtedness as home mortgages, child care costs, and heath care costs deepen the financial hole.

·       Washington needs new sources of public funding to increase state allocations for public higher education, now at a 30year low. In 198081, undergraduate tuition accounted for 25% of the total costs of undergraduate instruction in research universities, while the state covered the remaining 75%.  By the 200708 academic year, tuition covered 62% and the state only 38%. In community and technical colleges, the trend is in the same direction, with the state decreasing its share from 77% in 198081 to 58% in 200708. Stateneed based grants, and federal aid and tax breaks cover only a fraction of the total costs of higher education. The current severe recession and consequent state budget crisis compound the problem, but the financing problem will remain even when the economy recovers. As long as Washington’s tax base shrinks relative to the whole economy and relies too heavily on contributions from low and middle income state residents – while taxing the wealthy too lightly – Washingtonians will not be able to raise sufficient public revenues to build a worldclass education system.  Losing by Degrees is available online at www.eoionline.org.

 

Featured Advocacy Group --- American Rights at Work --------------------------

 

    Advancing Democracy in the American Workplace

Since 2003, American Rights at Work has informed the American public about the struggle to win workplace democracy for nurses, cooks, computer programmers, retail cashiers, and a variety of workers who we all depend on every day.  Our vision is a nation where the freedom of workers to organize unions and bargain collectively with employers is guaranteed and promoted.

 

What We Do

Through coalition-building, research, public relations, policy analysis, and advocacy, we:

·       Investigate and expose workers' rights abuses and the inadequacy of U.S. labor law.

·       Stimulate debate about the state of workers' rights among journalists, policymakers, advocacy groups, and the public.

·       Promote public policy that protects workers from hostile employers and weak laws that impede their rights to form unions and collectively bargain.

·       Publicize success stories of profitable companies and public agencies that respect workers’ rights and build innovative partnerships with unions.

 

American Rights at Work educates the public about the barriers that workers face when they attempt to form unions and engage in collective bargaining. Click on the name of an issue to access related publications, statistics, and more.

·       Freedom to Form Unions

·       Broken Labor Law

·       Union Busting

·       Responsible Employers

·       Unions Making a Difference

 

Our Resources

·       Publications: We produce timely reports, case studies, issue briefs, and educational materials based on our original research.

·       Workers’ Rights Clearinghouse: Our national database features cases of workers whose rights have been violated during union organizing campaigns or contract negotiations with employers.

·       Workers’ Rights Watch: Eye on the NLRB: This feature monitors and analyzes decisions of the National Labor Relations Board, just one of the ways we demonstrate the inadequacy of the current labor law system.

·       Online Advocacy & Resources: Our website is the place to find the latest news, action alerts, reports, and other helpful resources for those who want to learn more about our issues or ways to get involved in defending the right of workers to organize.

 

 

Here’s the Beef

Two legislators say Washington provides many advantages for Boeing and other businesses.

Vancouver, BC may soon be our world’s greenest city. 

Portland businesses adopt green practices.

Seattle.com is seeking volunteer bloggers to comment on neighborhood issues and actions.

Washington congress members should support bill to create sustainable fair trade.

Washington Second District Congressman Rick Larsen opposes Public Health Care Option.

Washington health-care plan costs soar.  State workers premiums will increase.

King County government needs to change to meet changing responsibilities.

King County Executive candidate Dow Constantine proudly wears Liberal Label.

King County Executive candidate Ross Hunter says he’s moderate.  But proposes far-reaching changes.

Candidate Fred Jarrett emphasizes experience and analytical ability.

Money plays an important role in KC Executive race.  Larry Phillips has most.

King County Executive candidate Susan Hutchison says she is non-partisan.  The heck she is.  It appears the Republican strategy is to never tell the truth if a lie sounds better.

3,500 housing units with 6000 residents planned for South Snohomish County.

Some are attracted to mini-homes.

Berkeley summer youth program trains them to be energy auditors.

King County’s budget reductions for public defenders will deny justice to indigent defendants.

Plastic bags: chemical manufactures (with big bucks) against the environment (volunteers).

Maine community denies Nestle water for their bottled water.

Yakima Indians are restoring Yakima Valley sockeye spawning areas.  For more.

 

Nation and World  

 

Immediately Stop Illegal Actions against Union Organizing

 

We don’t just need more jobs.  We need more jobs which pay fair wages, offer job security, provide job safety protections and otherwise protect worker’s rights, (including rights to unionize and increased penalties for businesses that violate these rights.  (See the movie Norma Rae).  And rights which enable employees to meet their family and other obligations.  Obama must address increasing worker’s earnings.  We must have immigration reform.

 

Now we learn that the card check provision may be removed from the Employee Free Choice Act, but leaving the important mandatory mediation.  Until card check, contract mediation, and other labor legislation is passed, our Administration should strictly enforce existing labor laws.  We need card check.  We need to stiffen penalties for rampant employer violations of labor laws. 

 

As I noted previously, our Obama Administration doesn’t even include LABOR among the issues listed at the bottom of the homepage of Whitehouse.gov.  Little activity has been reported other than President Obama signing the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.  Our Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis was appointed later than most other cabinet heads.  I find no reports of what changes the Labor Department is making internally or externally, such as the many reports our Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is making about our State Department.  I believe the Obama Administration has delayed labor legislation to avoid antagonizing our business community before health care reform passes.

 

See Chuck Collins’ 2000 book, Economic Apartheid in America for measures which must be implemented.”  This is a must read for Liberals concerned with quality jobs and labor issues.  

 

 

John de Graaf: What Is Productivity For?

 

The Labor Day 2007 headline in the Seattle Times caught my eye immediately:  WE WORK HARD—U.S. AT THE TOP IN PRODUCTIVITY.  The article explained that the most recent International Labor Organization report confirmed what most of us take for granted—US workers produce more per capita wealth than workers in any other country, some $63,885 a year.   Due to early adoption of computer technologies, Americans are also highly productive per hour—ranking second only to Norway. 

 

But, the article explained, a big part of our annual lead comes because in the US, “more people were working longer hours to make ends meet.”  Despite a dramatic increase in productivity since 2001, “the share of national income going to corporate profits has dwarfed the amount going to workers paychecks,” according to the Associated Press.

 

So there you have it.  We’re number one in productivity.  We do have the Grossest Domestic Product.  But it’s a different story when you compare other indices of our quality of life with those in Europe, for example.   Europeans, as I will show, would do well to be wary when leaders like France’s Nicolas Sarkozy suggest they should be more like the United States, so as to compete for the gold ring of GDP dominance. 

 

That way lies a decline in health, well-being and sustainability.  And while there are no Utopias out there, other parts of the world will find better examples of livable societies on the other side of that Atlantic from New York.

 

Recently, another article caught my eye.  It seems a Princeton University study has discovered that Americans are getting shorter.  Shorter?  Well, not in absolute terms, but compared to Europeans.  Half a century ago, we Americans were the world’s tallest people.  Now we’re shorter than most Europeans, more than two inches shorter than the Dutch or the Danes.  In every European country, people have been growing faster than we are, and the study controls for the effects of immigration or racial diversity.

 

So who cares?  After all, I’m short myself.  Napoleon was short.  But the article explains that average height is a powerful indicator of the social health of a society.  It tells you how well infants are provided for.  So it figures that the Dutch and the Danes also rank on top in a study of child welfare in industrial countries released in February, 2007 by UNICEF.  The US, by contrast, ranks 20th of 21 nations studied.  Whoa!

 

America the Short?  Next to last in child welfare?  Are we talking trends here?  What’s going on?  For most of the past 35 years, the United States has pursued an ideologically-driven economic strategy markedly different from that of nearly all western European nations.  From 1932 until 1972, the United States used government policies to increase economic opportunities for the poor, the middle-class, women, and minorities.  Wages kept pace with increases in productivity. 

 

But since then, and especially since Ronald Reagan declared that “government cannot be the solution because government is the problem,” we’ve followed a different path, toward what has sometimes been described as market fundamentalism. Increasingly, in the name of “personal responsibility,” our policies require more and more Americans to provide privately for all their own economic security.  For most of us, the “ownership society,” emphasizing privatization, de-regulation and massive tax cuts for the wealthy, is really a “you’re on your ownership” society. We’ve cut taxes dramatically for wealthier Americans, privatized and de-regulated large sections of the economy.  

 

By contrast, most northern and western European countries have followed a different path they call “the social contract.”  To work well, they argue, markets need strong rules, an activist government, and powerful protections for the rights of workers and consumers.  For the most part, the Europeans have continued to strengthen their social safety nets, offering increasingly generous unemployment compensation, old age pensions, paid family leave, long vacations, and other benefits such as universal health care.

 

Two different approaches.   It seems fair to ask which one has worked better.  And that question leads to another, more fundamental one: What’s the economy for, anyway?  How much stock can we take in the Dow Jones?  Is the Gross Domestic Product the measure (the grosser the better), and stuff the stuff, of happiness?  Is the good life the goods life? 

 

If so, then our way seems a winner.  US per capita GDP (the value of all goods and services sold on the market each year) is still 30% higher than the average in Western Europe, just as it was a generation ago. We’ve got bigger homes (and more storage lockers for what doesn’t fit into them), bigger cars, and more high-definition televisions.

 

But what if we measure success by the happiness, health, fairness, and security economies provide for their people?  Here’s just a short list of where we fall behind:

·       Poverty: Our poverty rate is two to three times European levels.  Ditto for child poverty.

·       Gap between the rich and poor:  Ours is by far the widest and growing wider.  Our middle-class, as a percentage of the population, is smaller than anywhere in Europe.  Since the introduction of “trickle down” economics by Reagan, America’s wealth has gushed up to the already wealthy.

·       Health: The US now ranks 50th in the world in longevity, down from 11th in 1980.  All but one European country does better.  We also rank 45th in infant mortality, worse than any European country.  We’ve got twice as many obese people as European countries do.  And the World Health Organization rates our health care system a dismal 37th in the world, despite the fact that we spend more on health care than any other country.

·       Mental Health:  US rates of anxiety and depression are among the highest in the world and double those in Europe.

·       Child Abuse:  More than double European rates.

·       Crime and Punishment:  We lead the industrial world in violent crime despite an incarceration rate 7-10 times higher than in other countries.

·       Environment:  We’re worst in air pollution, carbon dioxide emissions, and overall environmental sustainability, and next-to-worst in municipal waste per capita.

·       Savings and Security:  The US ranks next to last in personal savings in comparison with EU countries.  Ditto for rates of income replacement for unemployment or pensions.

 

That’s not the end of the dismal numbers, but I want to focus on one area where I think we can make an immediate difference.

 

As other essays in this book make clear, connecting more with the natural world and healing our planet, wounded by over-development and sick with greenhouse gasses and industrial wastes, is not only essential for our survival as a species but also for our sanity and connections with one another.  Experiencing the wonder and joy of creation in wild and sparkling places enables us to see, with John Muir, that “whenever you try to pick out anything by itself, you find it hitched to everything else in the universe.”  But what if you never get out there?  What if you never have time to get out there?

 

Richard Louv (Last Child in the Woods) and others have written eloquently about how American children are suffering from “nature deficit-disorder.”  Compared with a generation ago, children today spend only half as much unstructured time outdoors.  I worry that children who have not been exposed to the natural world will be less interested in protecting it. 

 

Many environmentalists became active because their parents introduced them to nature while on vacation.  I know I care about the earth because my father took me backpacking in the Sierra when I was very young.  When I made a film about David Brower, longtime leader of the Sierra Club, and perhaps the most effective environmentalist of the 20th Century, he told me the same was true for him.  At age six, his parents took him camping and the magic of the wilderness stayed with him forever.  Back then, it took them three days to get to Yosemite from Berkeley on gravel roads.  But fewer and fewer parents can find the time to take their children on vacations like that.

 

Among industrial countries, only the US has no paid vacation law.  Europeans get at least four weeks by law after the first year on the job; most get six weeks or more.  By contrast, a quarter of American workers get none at all; the average is less than 14 days and we take only ten of those, afraid of the work that piles up when we’re gone.  For many workers, vacation time is used only for long weekends, to run errands at home.

 

How do you find time to experience nature in a situation like that, or time to do anything to protect it?

 

This is an outrage, and it’s time to call it so.  There are clear arguments for a paid vacation law:

·       Vacations are shown to improve health—those who take them have only about half as much risk of a heart attack.

·       Vacations are family-friendly.  For many of us, the memories of family vacations are the strongest memories we have of childhood, a time when we bonded most closely with our parents.  Having just taken a one-week camping trip with my son, I can attest to the value of this. 

·       Vacations help prevent worker burnout.  They improve productivity and, especially, creativity, central to success in the information economy.

 

This is not about slacking; this is about health and family and planet.  But the effort to reclaim vacations does challenge our values.  It asks the question, what do we do with progress?  Must we use all of our productivity gains to produce more and more stuff, more and more unequally distributed? 

 

Or do we value time in our lives—to learn, to think, to eat slowly, to build friendships and strengthen families, to love, to volunteer, to laugh and sing and paint and play, to exercise, to appreciate the wonders of the earth at their own pace, to read to a child or raft on a river?  To fight global warming and defend the earth for generations unborn? 

 

The issue of time is one that environmentalists must take seriously.  A 2007 study by the Center for Economic and Policy Research found that if Americans could only reduce their working hours to European levels they would almost automatically cut their energy use and carbon footprints by 20 percent or more.

 

What is progress for?  What is productivity for?  What’s the economy for, anyway?  When will we raise these questions to a crescendo that cannot be ignored?   I know from speaking around the country that people are waiting to hear these things, wanting to hear them.  A few months ago, a desk clerk at a hotel in Florida told me her employer had cancelled her two-week vacation for seven years in a row, paying her extra to work instead, but not offering her the choice.  “It’s not that I don’t need the money,” she said.  “I’m a single mom and I’m a clerk in a hotel after all.  But I need the time more.  I’m desperate for some time off, but I’d have to quit this job to get it and I can’t afford to do that.”

 

The American “conservative revolution,” with its focus on income growth and consumption, has had more than a generation to prove itself, and as I have shown, it has failed to make life better while threatening the support systems all life depends on.  The working definition of insanity is to keep doing the things we’ve been doing hoping for a different result.

 

It’s time for a change.  America needs a break.  Let’s give the most “productive” workers on the planet some time to enjoy the fruits of their labor.  And let’s give our children a chance to get back in the woods!

 

A portion of this chapter appeared previously in COMMON GROUND magazine.

 

Resources

Books

De Graaf, J., David Wann, Thomas Naylor. 2001. Affluenza: The All-Consuming Epidemic. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Louv, R. 2005. Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children From Nature-Deficit Disorder. Chapel Hill, North Carolina: Algonquin Books.

McKibben, Bill. 2007. Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future. New York: Times Books/Henry Holt & Co.

Wann, David. 2007. Simple Prosperity: Finding Real Wealth in a Sustainable Lifestyle. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

 

Websites

Take Back Your Time’s website is www.timeday.org.

WHAT’S THE ECONOMY FOR ANYWAY?’s Web site is www.citizeneconomy.org.

Also see The Story of Stuff www.storyofstuff.org.

 

Here’s the Beef

Proof that humans haven’t evolved very far (video).

Our New Economy must primarily serve our people and environment.

Our recession and recovery: What’s happened?  What’s happening?  What will happen?

Federal Reserve reports U.S. recession is easing.

Economy down.  Charitable contributions down.  Volunteering up.

Confidence in economic recovery produces purchases of corporate bonds, providing business capital.

Our recession extends to suburbia and exurbia.

Top 1% of high income people received tax cuts of 5.8%.  They oppose 0.9% health care tax increase.

New medicines and technologies save lives, but cost lots.  Must avoid those that don’t help.

Early childhood investments in the stimulus-recovery package will pay dividends for a lifetime.  

Our education reforms must (1) reduce dropout rates and (2) produce world quality education.

Will CNN control run-amok Lou Dobbs?

China is recovering fastest from global recession.

China seeks minerals in Congo.  And Latin America.

China wants U.S. to reduce debt.  U.S. wants China to become less dependent upon exports.  More.

Iraqi Kurds hold competitive election.  Results challenge incumbent corrupt parties.

Our U.S. should strongly oppose the Guatemalan military coup.

Our international institutions need to be democratized.

 

-Our Liberal Spirit-

Belligerence

This commentary is stimulated by the recent arrest of Harvard Professor Henry Lewis Gates.

 

I am not an attorney.  I suspect that resisting arrest is almost always illegal.  I suspect that verbally expressing belligerence to a law enforcement officer is almost never illegal.  I believe it shouldn’t be illegal.  If you are like me, you may often feel belligerent when confronted by a law enforcement or other official:  Border crossing guards stand high on my list.  If you are like me, you know that expressing such belligerence is one of the quickest ways to increase your difficulties.  Quick release most likely comes from disciplined fake politeness.

 

One can understand that law enforcement officers need to be firmly in control of situations in which they are considering an arrest.  It is easy for them to extend this control beyond controlling behavior to demanding attitudinal submission and respect.  Because belligerent attitudes easily lead to belligerent behavior. 

 

Some of us enjoy belligerent behavior toward us.  Some enjoy fighting.  But most of us, including officials, don’t.  Law enforcement officers with their lethal power should be held to a higher standard.  They need to be prepared to accept the likely belligerence that they encounter, responding with fake politeness to calm the situation and avoid physical struggle.

 

I also believe that the use of handcuffs behind the back is often overdone.  It is necessary to handcuff people who may try to escape or behave dangerously.  But not behind their back if they don’t have the capacity to run.  Gates is 58 years old and looks it, 5 foot 7 inches tall, weighs 150 pounds, has legs of unequal length and uses a cane.  It was not appropriate to handcuff Gates behind his back. 

 

I believe it is obvious that the officer should have shown his identification.  He should have recognized that Professor Henry Lewis Gates was unlikely to be a burglar.  He should not have arrested Gates for disorderly conduct or creating a public disturbance.  I can understand why Gates just after returning from a trip and having difficulty entering his home failed to offer disciplined failed politeness.

 

The officer is said to have a fine record, including teaching a course in racial profiling for five years.  In spite of that, I believe he needs retraining.  Future incidents should be followed by suspension of duties which involve arrests.  Officers have important and tough jobs.  They should be the most sensitive and law abiding among us.

 

What part did racism play in this incident?  It is difficult to be sure.  The officer might have treated a White Harvard professor the same way.  It’s almost impossible to read people’s minds.  But a pattern of different actions toward members of different ethnic groups suggests ethnic discrimination.  Have similar incidents occurred involving Blacks, but not Whites? 

 

I am disgusted at the group of law enforcement officials who demanded an apology from President Obama.  There is nothing wrong with raising questions about police conduct.  I have personal experience with talking with police who criticized their own department, but in public acted as though there were nothing to criticize.  Of course attorneys, doctors, professors and other professionals and non-professionals also are protective of their colleagues.  Police refuse to snitch, yet expect neighbors to snitch on their wrongdoers.  Dave Thomas

 

-Recommended Books-    See our list of books for liberals

 

Ray Raphael, 2002, The First American Revolution, Before Lexington and Concord

Lawrence Goodwyn, 1976, The Populist Moment, A Short History of the Agrarian Revolt in America

Roy Morrison, 1997, We Build the Road as We Travel, Mondragon, a Cooperative Social System

 

Our United States has experience various grassroots political movements.  Ray Raphael describes the grassroots movement in Massachusetts (and other states) which sparked our revolution.  Lawrence Goodwyn describes the Populist Movement of the late 1880 which post civil war political identifications with a new identification oriented to fighting the oppressive economic establishment.  Both books are well written and easy to read.  They are must reading for anyone who wants to seriously understand what’s necessary to create a New Politics.

 

Roy Morrison (see previous review.) describes a more limited contemporary Basque movement in Spain which shares certain features with our two above noted movements.  I am impressed by the important interplay of the abusive political environment, grassroots organizing, evolution of movement ideology (and message), creation of movement structures, through experiment and replication decisions.