TODAY'S TOPICS: EPA Acts, Ron Paul Reality Check, Banana Republic Facts, Bradley Manning, Gingrich Tax Plan
Finally…The EPA Acts on Mercury
Some good news for a change…while it took WAY to long to enact,
we can celebrate the fact that the EPA announced the other day that it will FINALLY
implement a rule to restrict the level of emissions for several harmful
substances (this is another example of something that WOULD NOT have happened
in a McCain/Palin Administration). This rule will:
• Prevent release of approximately 90 percent of the mercury in coal from being emitted into air as pollution, and cut emissions of other toxics such as arsenic
• Prevent 11,000 premature deaths and 4,700 heart attacks a year.
• Prevent 130,000 cases of childhood asthma symptoms and about 6,300 fewer cases of acute bronchitis among children each year.
• Create up to 46,000 short term construction jobs and 8,000 permanent jobs
A Ron Paul Reality Check
I think its past time I set the record straight about Ron
Paul. For too many years, from too many people, I’ve heard, and even lauded him
quite often myself, how great Ron Paul is. But, I think because we are now at a
time of significant upheaval, and a growing desire for something different and new,
we must not be fooled by false prophets pushing nothing more than the cult
ravings of a sociopath named Ayn Rand.
Now, let me be the first to say Ron Paul is the ONLY
principled Republican left in that party. Let me also say I LOVE the fact he is
a thorn in the GOP’s side, just as Ralph Nader has been for the Democrats (as has
occasionally Bernie Sanders/Kucinich).
Let me also say that the double edged sword that is today’s, and
certainly Ron Paul’s Libertarianism, is quite an extraordinary mishmash of
contradictions, absurdities, and yes, some important principles and policy
stands.
Before I get to some of what makes Ron Paul so good, and
some of what makes him batshit crazy (and that’s partly why I’m writing this
today…I fear too many young idealists and even disenfranchised progressives are
drinking his koolaide without knowing what’s really in it), I want to go to the
heart of this Libertarian “conflict” and perverse view of “freedom”.
One must realize that as passionate, and correct, Ron Paul
is about the inherent freedom the Constitution provides American citizens from
government abuses like wiretapping, the drug war, indefinite detention, and
from so much of our money going towards fighting aggressive wars for corporate
profit, he’s JUST AS PASSIONATE about the “freedom” of a corporation to do
whatever it wants without regulation, just as passionate in his believe that
social security and Medicare are UNCONSTITUTIONAL infringements on that “freedom” (comparing them to slavery),
just as passionate that ALL regulations that keep our air and water clean and
our food edible are encroachments on freedom, and he’s just as passionate that
we should get rid of ALL social safety net programs, from food stamps to
unemployment insurance to heating aid to poor families and on down the line.
And, similarly, things like child labor laws and the minimum wage, in Paul’s
world, are infringements on the “freedoms” of the business owners.
This then, is the heart of Libertarianism…that being that
government itself, and EVERYTHING it does (without making any distinctions
practically), is an inherent evil and a assault on liberty and freedom…which
can be defined by something as legitimate as a suspected terrorists right to a
trial (the good Ron Paul), to something as absurd as the freedom to pollute as much
as you want without interference from “big government”.
You can see where this kind ideology – from the insane mind
of Ayn Rand – inevitably leads: privatize EVERYTHING, social Darwinism…all in
the belief that some magic, fairy like hand of the “market” will solve all
social ills…and by cutting programs to the poor, deregulating wall street even
more, and yes, even privatizing public education, the magic market fairy will
make it all turn out good…for everyone!!
The only problem is this theory not only doesn’t work, it
NEVER HAS in the history of this planet, and every nation on it. In fact, the
only two true Libertarian nations on the earth today I believe are Somalia and
Haiti.
Put another way, imagine trying to play a football game without goal lines or sidelines???? Or play baseball with no strike zone or bases? It would be chaos...and the fact is, we, collectively, must define and determine the rules of the game in order to create a society that works the best we can for as many as we can. Libertarianism can't work, because its not designed to.
Put another way, imagine trying to play a football game without goal lines or sidelines???? Or play baseball with no strike zone or bases? It would be chaos...and the fact is, we, collectively, must define and determine the rules of the game in order to create a society that works the best we can for as many as we can. Libertarianism can't work, because its not designed to.
So when Ron Paul talks, eloquently, articulately, and
passionately about the need to end the wars, protect privacy, stop the drug war….also
remember, he wants to end medicare, social security, public education, food
stamps, aid to poor families…hell, he even wants to privatize OUR ROADS AND
BRIDGES.
So the question that will always stump Libertarians, and
people like Ron Paul (though somehow he thinks abortion should be ILLEGAL…which
is totally against Libertarian orthodoxy), is the fact that no man's activity
is so completely private as never to obstruct the lives of others in any way.
So freedom must be BALANCED…the freedom of Monsanto to
patent all seeds is an infringement on the freedom of small farmers to own and
plant their own gardens. The freedom of Wall Street to gamble our money away is
an infringement on the freedom of the masses to live a secure life. AS you can
see, this contradiction lies at the heart of libertarianism, and shows that,
every society, if it is to work for the masses (hence why Libertarianism has
NEVER worked ANYWHERE), must have certain rules in place to limit freedoms where necessary, by protecting others freedoms accordingly.
George Monbiot has a great description of Libertarianism
(which as I have said, is more of a fantasy cult than a real world economic doctrine),
saying, “In the name of freedom – freedom from regulation – the banks were
permitted to wreck the economy. In the name of freedom, taxes for the
super-rich are cut. In the name of freedom, companies lobby to drop the minimum
wage and raise working hours. In the same cause, US insurers lobby Congress to
thwart effective public healthcare; the government rips up our planning laws;
big business trashes the biosphere. This is the freedom of the powerful to
exploit the weak, the rich to exploit the poor.
Surely the plant should be regulated in order to enhance the
negative freedoms – freedom from pollution, freedom from poisoning – of its
neighbours? Modern libertarianism is the disguise adopted by those who
wish to exploit without restraint. It pretends that only the state intrudes on
our liberties. It ignores the role of banks, corporations and the rich in
making us less free. It denies the need for the state to curb them in order to
protect the freedoms of weaker people. This bastardised, one-eyed philosophy is
a con trick, whose promoters attempt to wrongfoot justice by pitching it
against liberty. By this means they have turned "freedom" into an
instrument of oppression.
I have only touched on Ron Paul’s long list of
VERY, VERY extreme positions. His view of “freedom” then also means he’s been
fiercely against civil rights protections (because those infringe on the
freedom to be a bigot in the marketplace). He's demonized gays, blacks, public
education, Social Security, while servicing as the John Birch Society's
favorite congressman. He's been a booster of the Constitution Party, which has
a Christian Reconstructionist platform. As one blogger noted, “So, if you're a
member of the anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-black, anti-senior-citizen,
anti-equality, anti-education, pro-communist-witch-hunt wing of the progressive
movement, I can see how he'd be your guy.”
Sam
Seder and Digby have a good discussion here about the sordid past of Ron
Paul and Libertarianism.
If you don’t believe me, here's an excerpt from Ron Paul's
2004 floor speech about the Civil Rights Act, in which he explains why he voted
against a House resolution honoring the 40th anniversary of the law.
Same goes for reproductive rights, as he sponsored of a bill
to overturn Roe v. Wade, with no-exceptions even if a rapist was the one to
have caused the pregnancy. While it's true that Paul advocates leaving
it to the states to determine whether same-sex marriages should be legally
recognized, it's not because he's a friend to LGBT people. Paul's position on
same-sex marriage stems from his beliefs about the limits of the federal
government's role vis-a-vis his novel interpretation of the Constitution. Let’s
be clear, “leaving it to the states” when it comes to the civil rights issues
of our time is a total and COMPLETE cop out…because that means that over half,
at least, of the states in this country will deny basic human rights.
And, let’s be clear too, earlier this year Ron Paul declared
both Social Security and Medicare to be unconstitutional, essentially saying
they should be abolished for the great evil that they are - just like slavery. Yes,
he compared SLAVERY to Social Security.
Believe me, I like Ron Paul better than any of the other
Republican candidates because he is so good, and so articulate, on a number of “civil
libertarian” type positions, from drugs, to privacy, to wars, to the Federal
Reserve (though I don’t think abolishing it altogether is really practical) and
even to corporate welfare. I relish watching him continue to drive the GOP establishment
nuts…and I hope he wins Iowa!!
All I ask is for you not to get to enamored with the man…and consider the entire platform he's pushing (and read up on Ayn Rand)....because
there’s a whole lot more to the picture than meets the eye. At the end of the day,
Ayn Rand Libertarianism is NOTHING more than one big rationalization and
justification for selfishness and greed. At its core, it’s almost trying to
flip the kinds of things Jesus said, that compassion, empathy and collectivism
are what leads to a health society, to instead, what is best for everyone is if
we have no compassion, we strive only for our own selfish needs, and somehow,
that leads to the best for everyone.
If we just had less environmental protections, the
environment would be better! If we just had fewer programs to help the poor and
middle class, they’d do better! If we just privatized everything everyone could
afford it! In other words…it’s an insane fantasy that rationalizes being a
sociopath.
America’s Economic Realities v. GOP "Solutions"
And this now leads us to the new study indicating that, due
to rising living costs, a record number of Americans — nearly 1 in 2 — has
fallen into poverty or are scraping by on earnings that classify them as low
income.
The latest census data depict a middle class that's
shrinking as unemployment stays high and the government's safety net frays. The
new numbers follow years of stagnating wages for the middle class that have
hurt millions of workers and families.
From the study: Mayors in 29 cities say more than 1 in 4
people needing emergency food assistance did not receive it. Many middle-class
Americans are dropping below the low-income threshold — roughly $45,000 for a
family of four — because of pay cuts, a forced reduction of work hours or a
spouse losing a job. Housing and child-care costs are consuming up to half of a
family's income. About 97.3 million Americans fall into a low-income category,
commonly defined as those earning between 100 and 199 percent of the poverty
level, based on a new supplemental measure by the Census Bureau that is
designed to provide a fuller picture of poverty. Together with the 49.1 million
who fall below the poverty line and are counted as poor, they number 146.4
million, or 48 percent of the U.S. population. That's up by 4 million from
2009, the earliest numbers for the newly developed poverty measure…Across the
29 cities, about 27 percent of people needing emergency food aid did not
receive it. Many mayors cited the challenges of meeting increased demands for
food assistance, expressing particular concern about possible cuts to federal
programs such as food stamps and WIC, which assists low-income pregnant women
and mothers. Unemployment led the list of causes of hunger in cities, followed
by poverty, low wages and high housing costs.”
Here are some other factoids to consider when you see the GOP fighting to cut taxes for corporations and the rich while cutting programs for the poor and raising taxes on the middle class:
- Approximately 57 percent of all children in the United States are living in homes that are either considered to be "low income" or impoverished.
- The average amount of time that a worker stays unemployed in the United States is now over 40 weeks.
- There are fewer payroll jobs in the United States today than there were back in 2000 even though we have added 30 million extra people to the population since then.
- Since December 2007, median household income in the United States has declined by a total of 6.8% once you account for inflation.
- According to author Paul Osterman, about 20 percent of all U.S. adults are currently working jobs that pay poverty-level wages.
- Back in 1980, less than 30% of all jobs in the United States were low income jobs. Today, more than 40% of all jobs in the United States are low income jobs.
- One recent survey found that one out of every three Americans would not be able to make a mortgage or rent payment next month if they suddenly lost their current job.
- According to a recent study conducted by the BlackRock Investment Institute, the ratio of household debt to personal income in the United States is now 154 percent.
- If you can believe it, the median price of a home in Detroit is now just $6000.
- According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 18 percent of all homes in the state of Florida are sitting vacant. That figure is 63 percent larger than it was just ten years ago.
- Electricity bills in the United States have risen faster than the overall rate of inflation for five years in a row.
- According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, health care costs accounted for just 9.5% of all personal consumption back in 1980. Today they account for approximately 16.3%.
- One study found that approximately 41 percent of all working age Americans either have medical bill problems or are currently paying off medical debt.
- If you can believe it, one out of every seven Americans has at least 10 credit cards.
- According to the Employee Benefit Research Institute, 46 percent of all American workers have less than $10,000 saved for retirement, and 29 percent of all American workers have less than $1,000 saved for retirement.
- Today, one out of every six elderly Americans lives below the federal poverty line.
- According to a study that was just released, CEO pay at America's biggest companies rose by 36.5% in just one recent 12 month period.
- Today, the "too big to fail" banks are larger than ever. The total assets of the six largest U.S. banks increased by 39 percent between September 30, 2006 and September 30, 2011.
- The six heirs of Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton have a net worth that is roughly equal to the bottom 30 percent of all Americans combined.
- Child homelessness in the United States is now 33 percent higher than it was back in 2007.
- Since 2007, the number of children living in poverty in the state of California has increased by 30 percent.
- Today, one out of every seven Americans is on food stamps and one out of every four American children is on food stamps.
GOP Plans to Address Crises???
So how in the world, in light of these facts, can the GOP be fighting so hard to do the opposite of what's needed, and, how could Democrats like Obama be so willing to cut deals with them that would greatly exacerbate this pain and suffering? Well, before I get to some of the economic plans being thrown around
by the GOP Clown Car, its important to remember why they will NEVER mention
things like poverty, nor ever try to solve it.
As Robert Eskow notes, “…there
is a self-serving logic to the Right’s aversion to a systemic approach to
poverty mitigation. Really serious anti-poverty strategies would require its
corporate benefactors to raise wages, dispense with union-busting, support
minimum-wage hikes, embrace national healthcare, and stop discriminating on the
basis of race, gender, age and disability. This burdensome outlook is what
angers conservatives. The truth threatens their worldview. ..Progressives tend
to think more readily in terms of systems than conservatives. We see this in
the answers to a question like, "What causes crime?" Progressives
tend to give answers like economic hardship, or lack of education, or
crime-ridden neighborhoods. Conservatives tend more to give an answer like
"bad people -- lock 'em up, punish 'em." This is a consequence of a
lifetime of thinking in terms of social connection (for progressives) and
individual responsibility (for conservatives). Thus conservatives did not see
the president's plan, which relied on systemic causation, as a plan at all for
directly addressing the deficit.”
These same differences in systemic thinking between
progressives and conservatives can be seen in issues like global warming and
financial reform. We must understand these differing worldviews if we are to
understand why THERE CAN NEVER BE true compromise with the GOP to solve
anything. They must be made to be inconsequential in this country…and that may
take a long time…but it begins by recognizing their motives and nature.
Eskow continues, “Conservatives have not recognized human
causes of global warming, partly because they are systemic, not direct. When a
huge snowstorm occurred in Washington DC recently, many conservatives saw it as
disproving the existence of global warming -- "How could warming cause snow?"
Similarly, conservatives, thinking in terms of individual responsibility and
direct causation, blamed homeowners for foreclosures on their homes, while
progressives looked to systemic explanations, seeking reform in the financial
system.
The not-so-hidden assumption in Gingrich's slur is that he's
talking about urban poverty and black and Hispanic kids. Actually, poverty is
worse in rural areas than in cities or suburbs. Worse in Appalachia than in
Chicago. More poor children are white than black."
Romney and Gingrich Tax Plans
So, let’s take a step back here and look at the larger
picture: U.S.
income gap is at its highest level since 1929. Now, in light of all those
HORRIFIC numbers illustrating our transformation into a neo-feudal state
resembling a Banana Republic, Mitt Romney, the likely GOP nominee for
President, announced his economic plan that would provide $6.6 TRILLION in budget-busting tax cuts to the wealthiest
Americans and corporations.
AS for Newt, he plans to give the rich even MORE, and it
would increase the federal budget deficit by about $850 billion – in a single
year! Newt actually wants to ELIMINATE the capital gains tax altogether! That
means, in a sense, wealth would no longer be taxed at all…while work would
remain overtaxed (and most of us work…and don’t have huge amounts of wealth
that makes more wealth for us doing nothing).
Here's more: The average millionaire would get a whopping $615,689 annual tax cut. That change would boost their after-tax income by 28.7 percent and put their average tax rate at 11.9 percent. Those in the wealthiest top 0.1 percent would receive an annual tax cut of
more than $2 MILLION each — on top of what they’re already getting from the
Bush tax cuts. Millionaires would pay a lower tax rate than middle class
families making $40-50,000 a year. In the best year of his plan, 2015, the deficit would be a
whopping $1.2 TRILLION — even after taking into account the draconian spending
cuts imposed by the Paul Ryan GOP budget plan.
Newt's would would increase the federal budget deficit by about $850 billion – in a single
year! Newt actually wants to ELIMINATE the capital gains tax altogether! That
means, in a sense, wealth would no longer be taxed at all…while work would
remain overtaxed (and most of us work…and don’t have huge amounts of wealth
that makes more wealth for us doing nothing).
He would drop the corporate tax rate to 12.5 percent from 35 percent, allow businesses to write off capital expenses and eliminate taxes on capital gains and estates, according to his website.
The publicly held debt would double by 2019 and triple by 2024.
Why you ask? Doesn’t the GOP want to cut the deficit???? NO,
NO, NO. What they want is to explode it through tax cuts and war/military so
they can then decimate the New Deal, and privatize Medicare and Social Security
(and public education). This has been the game plan since 1980…and they’ve been
more successful than anyone could have dreamed.
The Progressive Alternative
The progressive alternative to Libertarianism (Paul) and
crony capitalism (Romney/Gingrich) is what people like Bernie Sanders and
Elizabeth Warren describe. You know...how America built the broad middle class,
through unions, worker rights, high taxes on the super rich, and HUGE investments
in infrastructure, education, the GI bill, research and development, while
strictly regulating finance/Wall Street. For fifty years, since FDR, the Wall
Street gamblers and speculators in investment houses were not allowed to
combine with banks carrying federally guaranteed consumer accounts. Progressive
taxes featured a top rate of 90 percent.
As Robert Reich points out, “During this time (i.e. 50's-70's), the economy
grew and we all grew together. The rich got richer, but so did the middle and
working class. In fact, incomes on the bottom grew faster than those on the
top, building the broad middle class that was at the heart of what made America
exceptional.
Warren then described how this system was dismantled, with
the election of Ronald Reagan providing a good marker. Wall Street was
deregulated—and we suffered one banking crisis after another. Investments in
infrastructure were starved. Colleges were gradually privatized, with more and
more of the costs placed on students. Taxes were lowered on the top end, and
America moved back to the extreme inequality that we had not witnessed since
1929. The result was the wealthiest few captured literally all the
rewards of growth. And 90% of America struggled to stay afloat with stagnant
wages, rising prices and growing debt. "
VIDEO SECTION
Robert Reich on Gingrich’s insane tax plan:
Aasif Mandvi (Daily Show) explains why, without Lowe's, the
jihadist goal is unachievable.
Enjoy one of the best Reps in Congress we've got: Jan Schakowsky call the GOP grinches out:
ARTICLE SECTION
A Christmas Message From America's Rich, by Matt
Taibbi
A FEW CLIPS:
It seems America’s bankers are tired of all the abuse.
They’ve decided to speak out. True, they’re doing it from behind the ropeline,
in front of friendly crowds at industry conferences and country clubs, meaning
they don’t have to look the rest of America in the eye when they call us all
imbeciles and complain that they shouldn’t have to apologize for being so
successful.
SNIP
The Blackstone billionaire, remember, is one of the more uniquely
abhorrent, self-congratulating jerks in the entire world – a man who famously
symbolized the excesses of the crisis era when, just as the rest of America was
heading into a recession, he
threw himself a $5 million birthday party, featuring private performances
by Rod Stewart and Patti Labelle, to celebrate an IPO that made him $677
million in a matter of days (within a year, incidentally, the investors who
bought that stock would lose
three-fourths of their investments).
SNIP
But it seems to me that if you’re broke enough that you’re
not paying any income tax, you’ve got nothing but skin in the game. You've got
it all riding on how well America works.
You can’t afford private security: you need to depend on the
police. You can’t afford private health care: Medicare is all you have. You get
arrested, you’re not hiring Davis, Polk to get you out of jail: you rely on a
public defender to negotiate a court system you'd better pray deals with
everyone from the same deck. And you can’t hire landscapers to manicure your
lawn and trim your trees: you need the garbage man to come on time and you need
the city to patch the potholes in your street.
And in the bigger picture, of course, you need the state and
the private sector both to be functioning well enough to provide you with
regular work, and a safe place to raise your children, and clean water and
clean air.
SNIP
Most of us 99-percenters couldn’t even let our dogs leave a
dump on the sidewalk without feeling ashamed before our neighbors. It's called
having a conscience: even though there are plenty of things most of us could
get away with doing, we just don’t do them, because, well, we live here. Most
of us wouldn’t take a million dollars to swindle the local school system, or
put our next door neighbors out on the street with a robosigned foreclosure, or
steal the life’s savings of some old pensioner down the block by selling him a
bunch of worthless securities.
But our Too-Big-To-Fail banks unhesitatingly take billions
in bailout money and then turn right around and finance the export of jobs to
new locations in China and India. They defraud the pension funds of state
workers into buying billions of their crap mortgage assets. They take
zero-interest loans from the state and then lend that same money back to us at
interest. Or, like Chase, they bribe the politicians serving countries and
states and cities and even school boards to take on crippling debt deals.
The
intellectual cowardice of Bradley Manning’s critics, Glenn Greenwald
A FEW CLIPS:
After imprisoning Private First Class Bradley Manning for
eighteen months, the U.S. Army last week finally began the preliminary stage of
his court-martial proceeding, and that initial process ended on Thursday.
Manning faces over 30 charges; the most serious — “aiding the enemy” — carries
a death sentence (though prosecutors are requesting “only” life in prison for
the 24-year-old soldier). The technical purpose of this week’s hearing was to
determine if there is sufficient evidence to warrant a full court-martial
proceeding; the finding (that there is such evidence) is a virtual
inevitability. Manning’s counsel, Lt. Col. David Coombs, spent the week
challenging the Army’s evidence, suggesting that his client may have suffered
“diminished capacity” by virtue of his gender struggles and emotional
instability, and finally, forcefully arguing
that the leaks were an act of political conscience and that the Army has
severely “overcharged” Manning in an attempt to coerce incriminating statements
against WikiLeaks (Kevin
Gosztola and The Guardian were at the hearing and have recaps of
what happened over the last week; my general view of Manning was set forth in
an Op-Ed in The Guardian last week, and my specific
view of the gender defense is here).
SNIP
When President Obama declared Manning guilty, he made the same claim: “No it
wasn’t the same thing. Ellsberg’s material wasn’t classified in the same way.”
One problem for those wishing to make this claim is that
Ellsberg himself has been one of Manning’s most vocal defenders, repeatedly insisting that the two
leaks are largely indistinguishable. But the bigger problem for this claim is
how blatantly irrational it is. As Ellsberg clearly details in this Al Jazeera
debate, he — Ellsberg — dumped 7,000 pages of Top Secret documents: the
highest known level of classification; by contrast, not a single page of what
Manning is alleged to have leaked was Top Secret, but rather all bore a much
lower-level secrecy designation. In that sense, Obama was right: “Ellsberg’s
material wasn’t classified in the same way” — the secrets Ellsberg leaked
were classified as being far more sensitive.
To the extent one wants to distinguish the two leaks, Ellsberg’s
was the far more serious breach of secrecy. The U.S. Government’s own pre-leak
assessment of the sensitivities of these documents proves that. How can someone
— in the name of government secrecy and national security — praise the release
of thousands of pages of Top Secret documents while vehemently condemning the
release of documents bearing a much lower secrecy classification?
SNIP
The clear reality, though, is that those who condemn Manning
now and want to see him imprisoned for decades are the direct heirs of those
who, in the early 1970s, wanted to see Dan Ellsberg imprisoned for life. Those
who now condemn both Ellsberg and Manning — like those who support the
executive power abuses and secrecy of both the Bush and Obama administrations —
are authoritarians to be sure, but at least they’re sincere and consistent in
their views; it’s those who support one but condemn the other who are
incoherent at best.
As Ellsberg himself makes clear, everything that is being
said now to condemn Manning — everything – was widely said about Ellsberg
at the time of his leak. Back then, Ellsberg was repeatedly accused of
being a traitor, of violating his oath, of endangering America’s national
security, of aiding its enemies, of taking the law into his own hands; he was
smeared and had his sanity continuously called into question. Had it not been
for the Nixon administration’s overzealous attempts to destroy him by breaking
into the office of his psychiatrist — the primary act that caused the charges
against Ellsberg to be dismissed on the grounds of government misconduct —
there is a real possibility that Ellsberg would still be in a federal prison
today. He’s viewed as a hero now only because the passage of time has proven
the nobility of his act: it’s much easier to defend those who challenge and
subvert political power retrospectively than it is to do so at the time.
