As we head for the end of 2008 and start reading the "Year in Review" lists, it's a good time to look back a little bit. Barack Obama, a Democrat who won with a grass roots/net roots strategy and who created a broad coalition and a movement for change, is headed to the White House. In spite of the rocky news this last year and in part because of it, we have to believe that things will get better in 2009. I heard this week that 1 in 10 Americans were on food stamps in September. That's a pretty sobering statistic. The numbers on the uninsured and the underinsured, the number of houses in foreclosure or close to it--all those statistics suggest a lot of suffering in America at the end of 2008.
Looking forward, I see that MoveOn.Org voted universal health care as it's #1 issue for 2009 (build a clean energy future and create jobs and end the Iraq war were also on the list). It seems there is broad agreement about what the issues are. The hard part is how to make something happen. The next six months will be a key time.
In spite of some reservations, I'm hopeful that the PickensPlan will help tip the balance toward action on global warming and our dependence on foreign oil. (My reservation is that dependence on our finite domestic supply of natural gas seems also problematic, but that amounts to quibbling given the basic agreement that action on renewables and conservation is long overdue and now URGENT.) I don't see major health care reform happening in the next 6 months, but some action is possible.
So--resolutions: Not to tune out in this next crucial period, not to waste an opportunity, even if it involves working with T. Boone Pickens. (If Bill Richardson can do it, I can too.) The politicians, especially at the state level, rely on our ignorance and apathy. Let's send a message that they'd better not assume we're tuning out, or we'll be here to throw them out.
What are your resolutions for 2009?
Friday, December 26, 2008
Friday, December 19, 2008
Haven't we seent his pattern?
I am just shamelessly quoting Kos here. But it does ring true, and so, so frustrating.
Seriously, this earlier post by Kagro encapsulates every frustration I've felt over the last eight years.
- Republicans ask for the absurd, threaten nuclear/economic armageddon if there's no action.
- Democrats cower in fear.
- We try to talk some sense into them.
- We get scolded for being unserious, and wanting the terrorists to win/people to lose their jobs.
- Democrats promise oversight!
- We roll our eyes.
- Democrats cave on every single point, but pretend to win anyway.
- We wonder what we ever did to deserve this sorry bunch of representatives.
- Republicans do whatever the hell they want.
- Democrats pretend that no one could've ever predicted Republican outrages and express "outrage". Sometimes, they even write a sternly worded letter!
- We make "no one could have foreseen" jokes and wonder what we ever did to deserve this sorry bunch of representatives.
- Rinse, lather, repeat.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Holiday Potluck 2008
 |  |
 |  |
CSCC held its annual Holiday Potluck last Thursday night. It was well-attended (about 40 people), and everyone enjoyed the good food and conversation. Thanks to Steve C. for sharing the photos, and thanks to all who came!
Friday, November 28, 2008
The subprime mortgage mess
A scandalous detail about the failings of the ratings agency in the mortgage mess as revealed in a column by Tom Friedman in the NYTimes: Standard & Poor's was not equiped to estimate what would happen to default rates if home prices went down. Their system was built on the assumption that home prices could only go up.
Apparently, they had never heard the term housing bubble.
Apparently, they had never heard the term housing bubble.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Appropriate Tasks
For these 3 months we're living with the slightly absurd situation of a discredited government remaining in power during a crisis. The absurdity is on full display here in a screenshot from MSNBC (from Matthew Yglesias):
Each man has a task appropriate to their abilities: Obama's is to deal with our mess, and Bush's is to pardon a turkey. It must be said, pardoning a turkey requires some skill, since Sarah Palin was unable to pull it off without a major disaster. But Bush can probably handle this.
But Obama has to try to calm markets and do whatever he can do behind the scenes to lead Paulson away from any major fiasco. This is just nuts. This is the kind of situation where a vote of no confidence needs to lead to a change of government, NOW!
Maybe it would be a good thing if the Constitution were more easily amended.
Update: The Onion! What a national treasure.
In Thanksgiving Tradition, Bush Pardons Scooter Libby In Giant Turkey Costume
Each man has a task appropriate to their abilities: Obama's is to deal with our mess, and Bush's is to pardon a turkey. It must be said, pardoning a turkey requires some skill, since Sarah Palin was unable to pull it off without a major disaster. But Bush can probably handle this.
But Obama has to try to calm markets and do whatever he can do behind the scenes to lead Paulson away from any major fiasco. This is just nuts. This is the kind of situation where a vote of no confidence needs to lead to a change of government, NOW!
Maybe it would be a good thing if the Constitution were more easily amended.
Update: The Onion! What a national treasure.
In Thanksgiving Tradition, Bush Pardons Scooter Libby In Giant Turkey Costume
Monday, November 24, 2008
Barnes is Domestic Policy
Here’s a January 2007 Melody Barnes op-ed on what a progressive president might say in a Sate of the Union address:
House Dems did Better than Obama
Yglesias points out a strange deflation of praise for how well House Dems did.
What is even weirder about house races going well is that public approval ratings for congress are very low.
All told, 56 percent of Americans voted for a House Democrat whereas only 52 percent voted for a Republican in 1994. That’s a larger majority than Obama got and, indeed, would have been considered a pretty crushing landslide on the presidential label.Before I read this, I definitely thought house Dems did well, picking up seats for second straight cycle which is rare, but not as bone crushingly well as I would have hoped given the overall political contex.
What is even weirder about house races going well is that public approval ratings for congress are very low.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Proposed by-law change
Here's the wording which, I anticipate, will be voted on in late December. It would require 2/3rds support from the voting members in order to pass:
Proposed new wording:
4.2) Membership is valid for one year, expiring on December 31st.
(TO REPLACE: Membership is valid for one year, from annual meeting to the next annual meeting.)
RATIONALE: Having memberships expire at the annual meeting (in March) leads to confusion. Having memberships expire on December 31st would simplify the situation and reduce confusion. Under this change, a 2009 membership would run for the calendar year 2009. Since CSCC has not held votes in January and February, the change will not deprive any current (2008) member of a voting privilege: it will simply allow more time to join for 2009. (The steering committee vote occurs sometime after the annual meeting in March.)
The steering committee discussed the by-laws at some length and decided that this was the only substantive change needed. We also decided not to take up valuable energy with this issue in the midst of the political season, which is why we are now tackling it at the end of the year.
I hope the change will prove uncontroversial since its only practical effect is to make it easier for everyone to remember whether or not they are currently a member. However, if you do have objections, feel free to voice them in the comments (anonymously if you prefer).
Proposed new wording:
4.2) Membership is valid for one year, expiring on December 31st.
(TO REPLACE: Membership is valid for one year, from annual meeting to the next annual meeting.)
RATIONALE: Having memberships expire at the annual meeting (in March) leads to confusion. Having memberships expire on December 31st would simplify the situation and reduce confusion. Under this change, a 2009 membership would run for the calendar year 2009. Since CSCC has not held votes in January and February, the change will not deprive any current (2008) member of a voting privilege: it will simply allow more time to join for 2009. (The steering committee vote occurs sometime after the annual meeting in March.)
The steering committee discussed the by-laws at some length and decided that this was the only substantive change needed. We also decided not to take up valuable energy with this issue in the midst of the political season, which is why we are now tackling it at the end of the year.
I hope the change will prove uncontroversial since its only practical effect is to make it easier for everyone to remember whether or not they are currently a member. However, if you do have objections, feel free to voice them in the comments (anonymously if you prefer).
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Brought tears to my eyes...
At the end of this long WaPo article on an 89 year old, Black member of the White House staff, and his wife who also worked there, came this absolute gut wrencher.
They talked about praying to help Barack Obama get to the White House. They'd go vote together. She'd lean on her cane with one hand, and on him with the other, while walking down to the precinct. And she'd get supper going afterward. They'd gone over their Election Day plans more than once.
"Imagine," she said.
"That's right," he said.
On Monday Helene had a doctor's appointment. Gene woke and nudged her once, then again. He shuffled around to her side of the bed. He nudged Helene again. He was all alone.
"I woke up and my wife didn't," he said later.
Some friends and family members rushed over. He wanted to make coffee. They had to shoo the butler out of the kitchen.
The lady whom he married 65 years ago will be buried today.
The butler cast his vote for Obama on Tuesday. He so missed telling his Helene about the black man bound for the Oval Office.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
538 and polling recap
I've been expecting an election post-mortem from Nate Silver comparing the 538 predictions to (1) the polls themselves, and (2) the other polling compilations (pollster and real clear politics). I'm surprised that it hasn't yet appeared, because it's an interesting question that deserves some sophisticated analysis, namely, when you try hard to learn as much as possible from aggregated polling data fit against demographics, how close does it get you?
In absence of the sophisticated analysis, we can do something simple minded: we can compare the predicted spread in the national popular vote to the actual spread (which is by now settled, regardless of what comes out of Missouri). Kos has some work on this here and here. For aggregators, 538 missed the popular vote difference by 0.4%, while Real Clear Politics and Pollster both came in over 2%. Score one for Nate.
Now for individual polls, Kos lists 14 pollsters (CNN, Rasmussen, Gallup, CBS, etc) and their deviation from the final popular vote ranged from 0.5 to 5.7, with median error around 2.5%. Conclusions to draw from this: Evidently quality aggregation adds significant value to the projection capability of pollsters. Given 14 different pollsters making predictions, the odds are that at least one of them would be nearly spot on by chance (so, not especially useful knowledge because you can't predict WHICH one will be spot on). So that Nate beat the whole field is remarkable.
Another conclusion is that low quality aggregation adds little value: it's not enough to simply average results. Pollster and Real Clear Politics came in about like typical single pollsters.
So, Nate evidently owns the quality aggregation. It will be interesting (to me at least) to see how this stands up to more sophisticated analysis.
In absence of the sophisticated analysis, we can do something simple minded: we can compare the predicted spread in the national popular vote to the actual spread (which is by now settled, regardless of what comes out of Missouri). Kos has some work on this here and here. For aggregators, 538 missed the popular vote difference by 0.4%, while Real Clear Politics and Pollster both came in over 2%. Score one for Nate.
Now for individual polls, Kos lists 14 pollsters (CNN, Rasmussen, Gallup, CBS, etc) and their deviation from the final popular vote ranged from 0.5 to 5.7, with median error around 2.5%. Conclusions to draw from this: Evidently quality aggregation adds significant value to the projection capability of pollsters. Given 14 different pollsters making predictions, the odds are that at least one of them would be nearly spot on by chance (so, not especially useful knowledge because you can't predict WHICH one will be spot on). So that Nate beat the whole field is remarkable.
Another conclusion is that low quality aggregation adds little value: it's not enough to simply average results. Pollster and Real Clear Politics came in about like typical single pollsters.
So, Nate evidently owns the quality aggregation. It will be interesting (to me at least) to see how this stands up to more sophisticated analysis.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Meeting without preconditions: We were warned!
John McCain warned us that Obama would meet with dastardly leaders without preconditions, and today we see that he was right. Obama is meeting with perhaps the least popular leader in the world, one who has been accused of significant human rights violations, and who has carelessly led his country to economic ruin. And the word is that Obama's not just meeting, he's planning to be concillatory, to forge a partnership. We should have known!
(borrowed from TPM reader DG)
(borrowed from TPM reader DG)
Friday, November 7, 2008
Friday Humor: The Aftermath
From The Onion. I wish this didn't ring so true, but it really, really does.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
The Exhale - Supreme Court Edition
So, Obama has won, and we're all starting to absorb the prospect of having a sane, functioning national government in the near future. One of the relatively important areas where this matters received surprisingly little attention during the campaign, namely, the Supreme Court. Let me outsource this to Brad DeLong, who writes
I think Brad's assessment of the justices is spot on. I would add that the three most likely retirements - likely to come in the next four years - are Ginsburg, Stevens, and Souter. That's three of the four justices usually considered the "liberal" side of the court (even though two of them are in fact Republicans). Losing more ground to the wacko side of the court would have been beyond bad. We already have bad, even very bad. Losing more ground would have been disasterous.
DeLong continues:
He goes on to propose a punitive solution for Congress to enact. His proposal is not the least bit likely to happen (he likes to expound these ideas as a matter of principle, and more power to him), and probably shouldn't happen. But in my opinion, we should take the time to reflect and be clearheaded about how truly awful our Supreme Court is, and how truly unacceptable their behavior was in the 2000 election.
One of the many steps of our long, slow national exhale.
At the moment the Supreme Court consists of one very smart centrist-liberal Democrat, Ruth Bader Ginsburg; one very smart centrist-centrist Democrat, Stephen Breyer; one very old good-hearted Republican, John Paul Stevens; one very tired center-right Republican, David Souter; one right-establishment Republican, Anthony Kennedy; and four raving Republican wingnuts with varying degrees of cleverness. Seven Republicans, only three of them attached to reality, and two Democrats.
This degree of Republican partisan entrenchment in the court is--in a word--bizarre. It is not a good thing.
I think Brad's assessment of the justices is spot on. I would add that the three most likely retirements - likely to come in the next four years - are Ginsburg, Stevens, and Souter. That's three of the four justices usually considered the "liberal" side of the court (even though two of them are in fact Republicans). Losing more ground to the wacko side of the court would have been beyond bad. We already have bad, even very bad. Losing more ground would have been disasterous.
DeLong continues:
Moreover. this Supreme Court forfeited any claim to be due deference from the other branches of the government when it prostituted its office to install George W. Bush as president eight years ago. It then established a new constitutional principle: that if an election is close and if one party has appointed an overwhelming majority of justices of the Supreme Court, that majority gets to decide the election.
Republican hack Alex Castellanos said last night, on CNN: "There is no way for us Republicans to win this election unless we had a 9-0 majority on the Supreme Court." That was a joke. But it really wasn't a joke at all, was it?
Think about that.
Is this a constitutional principle that we want established? No. But it will be established unless we declare that this is not, in fact, a constitutional moment we want to embrace.
He goes on to propose a punitive solution for Congress to enact. His proposal is not the least bit likely to happen (he likes to expound these ideas as a matter of principle, and more power to him), and probably shouldn't happen. But in my opinion, we should take the time to reflect and be clearheaded about how truly awful our Supreme Court is, and how truly unacceptable their behavior was in the 2000 election.
One of the many steps of our long, slow national exhale.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Monday, November 3, 2008
Dubya's legacy
This Historian takes apart Dubya's legacy. I am mostly looking to the future, but this line is a doozy (Gibbon wrote the definitive rise and fall of Roman Empire).
LOL
Not even Gibbon could supply a story as fatefully bizarre as the ultimate consummation of Reagan-Bush conservatism, its last act: the most massive shift of financial power from the private to the public sector since the New Deal. Rather like the Pope deciding that all along he really wanted a barmitzvah.
LOL
Friday, October 31, 2008
Courts Affirm Reality, Dump GOP Lawsuit
The Pennsylvania GOP, like many across the country, filed a grab-bag lawsuit against ACORN urging the courts to take immediate action. The GOP arguments, when shown the light of day in court, failed to impress Judge Robert Simpson, Jr., who refused to order ACORN to hand over its voter registration list.
From the article:
A victory for the reality party!
From the article:
Simpson said he was not convinced that the party and its fellow individual plaintiffs can ultimately prove their allegations that ACORN is fostering voter-registration fraud and that the state's election system lacks the safeguards to stop it.
A victory for the reality party!
Friday Humor: Wassup 2008
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Obama is such a Decent Person
He writes kids.
When Amy Mondschein dashed into Solomon Schechter Day School last Thursday, the head of the school and her son's teacher were waiting. The Enfield resident, whose son is a second-grader at the Jewish day school, was running late that day. Was she in trouble?
Far from it.
An envelope addressed to her son, Aron, 7, had been delivered to the school that morning. It was from Barack Obama, senator from Illinois and Democratic presidential candidate.
When Amy Mondschein dashed into Solomon Schechter Day School last Thursday, the head of the school and her son's teacher were waiting. The Enfield resident, whose son is a second-grader at the Jewish day school, was running late that day. Was she in trouble?
Far from it.
An envelope addressed to her son, Aron, 7, had been delivered to the school that morning. It was from Barack Obama, senator from Illinois and Democratic presidential candidate.
Live blogging the Carney-Hackett Debate
So here I am in Trout auditorium, listening to a question about the impact of technology on politics, while I live blog. The question come from a session hosted by PCN of a live audience doing a discussion with two BU Poli Sci professors, Dr. Robin Jacobson, and Dr. Atiya Stokes-Brown. Yeah media irony!
Some of the choice call-in questions:
"One is a socialist, the other for corporations, so they are both a problem."
"Who will do more for the uninsured?"
A long question from the audience that seemed to be saying that there is not enough discussion of sexism against Sarah Palin relative to discussion of racism against Barack Obama. I think.
Now they are doing overview of Carney-Hackett debate.
Some of the choice call-in questions:
"One is a socialist, the other for corporations, so they are both a problem."
"Who will do more for the uninsured?"
A long question from the audience that seemed to be saying that there is not enough discussion of sexism against Sarah Palin relative to discussion of racism against Barack Obama. I think.
Now they are doing overview of Carney-Hackett debate.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Joe Biden & Bill Clinton in Central PA
You want prominent politicians? We got prominent politicians!
Bill Clinton is speaking TODAY at State College.
Joe Biden is speaking tomorrow in Williamsport
Anyone attending these events, please give us a summary in the comments.
Bill Clinton is speaking TODAY at State College.
- Wednesday, October 29 at 4:00 pm. Doors open at 2:00 pm
- Penn State University, Recreation Hall, Corner of Atherton Street and Curtin Road,
University Park - Open to public. Tickets not required. RSVP recommended, http://pa.barackobama.com/UniversityPark
Joe Biden is speaking tomorrow in Williamsport
- Thursday, October 30 at 4:00 pm
- Lycoming College, 700 College Place, Williamsport
- Open to public. Tickets not required. RSVP recommended, http://pa.barackobama.com/WilliamsportChange
Anyone attending these events, please give us a summary in the comments.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
A bit of Halloween fun
(Sent in by a CSCC member... enjoy! -JG)
Halloween Blues
by Terri Peterson
'Twas Halloween night and the ghosts were abundant
Though their moaning and wailing seemed somewhat redundant.
Four years of W. rendered the nation
Unable to counter our crushing inflation.
The ghouls couldn't figure what could be more scary
Than a neocon-appointed judiciary.
Witches grimly realized they would never be no
More publicly hateful than Dana Perino.
Dick Cheney steals hope from each heart as he passes,
Mike Chertoff is happy to spy on the masses,
Torture's accepted for interrogation;
Karl Rove spins a tight web of misinformation.
Dubya's last months as commander in chief
Offer anything but what can be termed relief.
Hubris and recklessness mixed with pure greed
Left common dreams strewn in the mean streets to bleed.
Our houses are gone! And our banks are all failing!
700 billion dollar bailouts are bailing.
Emergency management plans are mismanaged.
Health care reform? It seems hopelessly damaged.
But the Bush years are ending, election day's nearing
For months we've heard nothing but conventioneering.
And who has the GOP picked to replace
Dubya and Cheney in this presidential race?
John McCain is the GOP's nominee stooge,
A sellout whose temper is said to be huge,
Nicknamed "McNasty", he flies off the handle
When asked of his role in the Keating Five scandal.
As for Sarah Palin, who's been chosen for VEEP,
The thought of her makes children cry in their sleep.
For deep in the bulb of her power she-mullet,
Lies the knife kept close by to stab moose in the gullet.
McNasty and the V-PILF are deep in cahoots
With CEOs buffing their gold parachutes.
Global suffering from New Orleans to Darfur?
Not important. Most of those people are poor.
The Halloween world demanded reclamation
Of Halloween business and horrification.
Paranoia and fear was their job to foment,
And not generated by one's government.
They looked to the right, who thought none could be tougher,
Than an ex-POW and his wolf-hunting fluffer,
To maintain terror-quo. Our good ghouls were bereft.
Their hearts filled with despair; then they looked to the left.
Look! Barack Obama! Energized by compassion,
Who views social justice as not just a fashion,
Can discuss real concerns without tripping alarms,
Plus, his wife's pretty fierce. Have you checked out her arms?
Joe Biden, an expert in foreign affairs
Has been tapped for V.P.; as a statesman he dares
To put people's needs first before corporate lust.
Both aim, as leaders, to rebuild public trust.
So the ghosts and the witches all hope that you're certain,
When you go to the voting booth and draw the curtain,
To pick the team that inspires hope and not fright,
And vote Obama-Biden on election night.
Halloween Blues
by Terri Peterson
'Twas Halloween night and the ghosts were abundant
Though their moaning and wailing seemed somewhat redundant.
Four years of W. rendered the nation
Unable to counter our crushing inflation.
The ghouls couldn't figure what could be more scary
Than a neocon-appointed judiciary.
Witches grimly realized they would never be no
More publicly hateful than Dana Perino.
Dick Cheney steals hope from each heart as he passes,
Mike Chertoff is happy to spy on the masses,
Torture's accepted for interrogation;
Karl Rove spins a tight web of misinformation.
Dubya's last months as commander in chief
Offer anything but what can be termed relief.
Hubris and recklessness mixed with pure greed
Left common dreams strewn in the mean streets to bleed.
Our houses are gone! And our banks are all failing!
700 billion dollar bailouts are bailing.
Emergency management plans are mismanaged.
Health care reform? It seems hopelessly damaged.
But the Bush years are ending, election day's nearing
For months we've heard nothing but conventioneering.
And who has the GOP picked to replace
Dubya and Cheney in this presidential race?
John McCain is the GOP's nominee stooge,
A sellout whose temper is said to be huge,
Nicknamed "McNasty", he flies off the handle
When asked of his role in the Keating Five scandal.
As for Sarah Palin, who's been chosen for VEEP,
The thought of her makes children cry in their sleep.
For deep in the bulb of her power she-mullet,
Lies the knife kept close by to stab moose in the gullet.
McNasty and the V-PILF are deep in cahoots
With CEOs buffing their gold parachutes.
Global suffering from New Orleans to Darfur?
Not important. Most of those people are poor.
The Halloween world demanded reclamation
Of Halloween business and horrification.
Paranoia and fear was their job to foment,
And not generated by one's government.
They looked to the right, who thought none could be tougher,
Than an ex-POW and his wolf-hunting fluffer,
To maintain terror-quo. Our good ghouls were bereft.
Their hearts filled with despair; then they looked to the left.
Look! Barack Obama! Energized by compassion,
Who views social justice as not just a fashion,
Can discuss real concerns without tripping alarms,
Plus, his wife's pretty fierce. Have you checked out her arms?
Joe Biden, an expert in foreign affairs
Has been tapped for V.P.; as a statesman he dares
To put people's needs first before corporate lust.
Both aim, as leaders, to rebuild public trust.
So the ghosts and the witches all hope that you're certain,
When you go to the voting booth and draw the curtain,
To pick the team that inspires hope and not fright,
And vote Obama-Biden on election night.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Rock for Change '08
What a glorious Sunday afternoon! We had beautiful weather. We had bands:
We had brats:
We had a crowd:
And we had Earl Pickens:
CSCC-endorsed candidates Trey Casimir and Steve Connolley both spoke, and a good time was had by all! (Click on pics for larger images)
We had brats:
We had a crowd:
And we had Earl Pickens:
CSCC-endorsed candidates Trey Casimir and Steve Connolley both spoke, and a good time was had by all! (Click on pics for larger images)
IOKIYAR Wall Street Journal edition
IOKIYAR- Ee- oh-kee-yar.
Its OK If You Are A Republican.
I love that one. My Father in Law sent me this op ed from the Wall Street Journal by one Pete DuPont called the "Europeanization of America." I point out some of the problems with his list of horrible things that will befall us below. But let me make a metapoint. When it comes to questions of curriculum or culture, the Conservatives are usually quick to invoke the idea of a deep and abiding continuum of "Western" thought from the Greeks through to our own superior culture and soceity. I point out that much of that Western traditions happened, in, you know, Europe. Of course, when it suits their purpose, they are quick to use "Europe," historically and currently a place marked for its unity and homogeneity of peoples, languages, culture, and for its ability to get along just hunky dory without wars of words or weapons, as the qunitessential example of degenerate, misguided and dangerous cultural, social,a nd economic precedent.
Contradiction? IOKIYAR.
Argumentation marked by selective cherry picking of ideas to meet pre-conceived notions? IOKIYAR.
Anyway, back to Mr. Du Pont's list of baseless assertions and falsehoods. My responses come after the arrows --> .
I don't know where they get this stuff. Off the top of my head...
* The U.S. military will withdraw from Iraq quickly and substantially, regardless of conditions on the ground or the obvious consequence of emboldening terrorists there and around the globe.
--> The Iraqi government has signed on to this, so it is what they want. If victory is a sovereign Iraq, then that is prima facie evidence of their sovereignty isn’t it?
* Protectionism will become our national trade policy; free trade agreements with other nations will be reduced and limited.
--> he has said that we should strengthen environmental and labor protections. Ricardo himself, the grandpa of free trade theory, wrote that the factors that matter are natural factors like climate and not artificial ones like costs of labor. Why not have a global wage floor pegged to currency differences. Or at least one for companies operating in the global economy? We have other global regulations for the flow of capital or copyright protection. Fair trade is a real policy agenda, even if he wants to put his fingers in his ears.
* Income taxes will rise on middle- and upper-income people and businesses, and individuals will pay much higher Social Security taxes, all to carry out the new president's goals of "spreading the wealth around."
--> Out of context quote. Obama said we all benefit when there is a middle class that ahs money to spend. Also, is he arguing for an end to progressive taxation? Also, the proportion of the federal budget that comes from payroll taxes has been GOING UP. There is wealth transfer-from the working classes UP, compared to what it was in the past.
* Federal government spending will substantially increase. The new Obama proposals come to more than $300 billion annually, for education, health care, energy, environmental and many other programs, in addition to whatever is needed to meet our economic challenges. Mr. Obama proposes more than a 10% annual spending growth increase, considerably higher than under the first President Bush (6.7%), Bill Clinton (3.3%) or George W. Bush (6.4%).
--. Is he arguing for a contraction of spending in the face of a classic Keynesian fall in aggregate demand? Has he factored in any reductions in military spending?
* Federal regulation of the economy will expand, on everything from financial management companies to electricity generation and personal energy use.
--> I guess because he said so and because Democrats and liberals are the boogey man. BOO!
* The power of labor unions will substantially increase, beginning with repeal of secret ballot voting to decide on union representation.
--> I have mixed feelings about labor organizing and secret ballots vs card checks. However, I don't see the unalloyed evil of increased Union power relative to corporate power.
* Free speech will be curtailed through the reimposition of the Fairness Doctrine to limit the conservative talk radio that so irritates the liberal establishment.
--> As a liberally and free speech lover, I would not favor a return to the fairness doctrine, but more openness of broadband for more forms of communication. Also, we need to stop using copyright as a knee jerk reaction to bolster Disney's profits. In the digital era, everything is a copy, so we need to rethink the balance between fair use and private interests. Anyway, again, has Obama said he wants the fairness doctrine to come back?
Its OK If You Are A Republican.
I love that one. My Father in Law sent me this op ed from the Wall Street Journal by one Pete DuPont called the "Europeanization of America." I point out some of the problems with his list of horrible things that will befall us below. But let me make a metapoint. When it comes to questions of curriculum or culture, the Conservatives are usually quick to invoke the idea of a deep and abiding continuum of "Western" thought from the Greeks through to our own superior culture and soceity. I point out that much of that Western traditions happened, in, you know, Europe. Of course, when it suits their purpose, they are quick to use "Europe," historically and currently a place marked for its unity and homogeneity of peoples, languages, culture, and for its ability to get along just hunky dory without wars of words or weapons, as the qunitessential example of degenerate, misguided and dangerous cultural, social,a nd economic precedent.
Contradiction? IOKIYAR.
Argumentation marked by selective cherry picking of ideas to meet pre-conceived notions? IOKIYAR.
Anyway, back to Mr. Du Pont's list of baseless assertions and falsehoods. My responses come after the arrows --> .
I don't know where they get this stuff. Off the top of my head...
* The U.S. military will withdraw from Iraq quickly and substantially, regardless of conditions on the ground or the obvious consequence of emboldening terrorists there and around the globe.
--> The Iraqi government has signed on to this, so it is what they want. If victory is a sovereign Iraq, then that is prima facie evidence of their sovereignty isn’t it?
* Protectionism will become our national trade policy; free trade agreements with other nations will be reduced and limited.
--> he has said that we should strengthen environmental and labor protections. Ricardo himself, the grandpa of free trade theory, wrote that the factors that matter are natural factors like climate and not artificial ones like costs of labor. Why not have a global wage floor pegged to currency differences. Or at least one for companies operating in the global economy? We have other global regulations for the flow of capital or copyright protection. Fair trade is a real policy agenda, even if he wants to put his fingers in his ears.
* Income taxes will rise on middle- and upper-income people and businesses, and individuals will pay much higher Social Security taxes, all to carry out the new president's goals of "spreading the wealth around."
--> Out of context quote. Obama said we all benefit when there is a middle class that ahs money to spend. Also, is he arguing for an end to progressive taxation? Also, the proportion of the federal budget that comes from payroll taxes has been GOING UP. There is wealth transfer-from the working classes UP, compared to what it was in the past.
* Federal government spending will substantially increase. The new Obama proposals come to more than $300 billion annually, for education, health care, energy, environmental and many other programs, in addition to whatever is needed to meet our economic challenges. Mr. Obama proposes more than a 10% annual spending growth increase, considerably higher than under the first President Bush (6.7%), Bill Clinton (3.3%) or George W. Bush (6.4%).
--. Is he arguing for a contraction of spending in the face of a classic Keynesian fall in aggregate demand? Has he factored in any reductions in military spending?
* Federal regulation of the economy will expand, on everything from financial management companies to electricity generation and personal energy use.
--> I guess because he said so and because Democrats and liberals are the boogey man. BOO!
* The power of labor unions will substantially increase, beginning with repeal of secret ballot voting to decide on union representation.
--> I have mixed feelings about labor organizing and secret ballots vs card checks. However, I don't see the unalloyed evil of increased Union power relative to corporate power.
* Free speech will be curtailed through the reimposition of the Fairness Doctrine to limit the conservative talk radio that so irritates the liberal establishment.
--> As a liberally and free speech lover, I would not favor a return to the fairness doctrine, but more openness of broadband for more forms of communication. Also, we need to stop using copyright as a knee jerk reaction to bolster Disney's profits. In the digital era, everything is a copy, so we need to rethink the balance between fair use and private interests. Anyway, again, has Obama said he wants the fairness doctrine to come back?
Friday, October 24, 2008
McCain in Hersheypark on Tuesday
Just got a call from a friendly McCain robot (does the McCain campaign have any actual humans making calls, or are they all robo-calls?) saying that McCain and Palin will be in Hershey on Tuesday morning, in case anyone is interested in seeing a McCain rally up close and personal.
Details are here. The call (and the website) seemed to imply that you had to pick up tickets in advance from a "Victory Office" (a.k.a. McCain office), the nearest of which (for us) is in Harrisburg. I wonder if that's just to get a head count, or if they are screening people like Bush-Cheney used to do.
On a broader note, I realize that not everyone who goes to McCain-Palin rallies are there because they hate Obama, but more and more devastating videos (like these) are surfacing on the Internet that show people at rallies saying really vitriolic, horrible things. And these are our neighbors--the first video in that link is from Johnstown, PA. What do we (as CSCC, or as individuals) do about this? Not in the context of the election, I mean afterwards. Even if/when Obama wins the election, what can we do to convince people like the ones in these videos that our president is not a Socialist Terrorist? Or that we, as Democrats, are not Socialist Terorists?
At the beginning of this election, I believed fully that Obama was a transformative figure who would change the tone of politics and bring people together. And I do still believe, as Colin Powell said, that he has crossed ethnic, racial and generational lines to do that. But then we have people like this who make our country seem more fractured than ever. What can we do?
Details are here. The call (and the website) seemed to imply that you had to pick up tickets in advance from a "Victory Office" (a.k.a. McCain office), the nearest of which (for us) is in Harrisburg. I wonder if that's just to get a head count, or if they are screening people like Bush-Cheney used to do.
On a broader note, I realize that not everyone who goes to McCain-Palin rallies are there because they hate Obama, but more and more devastating videos (like these) are surfacing on the Internet that show people at rallies saying really vitriolic, horrible things. And these are our neighbors--the first video in that link is from Johnstown, PA. What do we (as CSCC, or as individuals) do about this? Not in the context of the election, I mean afterwards. Even if/when Obama wins the election, what can we do to convince people like the ones in these videos that our president is not a Socialist Terrorist? Or that we, as Democrats, are not Socialist Terorists?
At the beginning of this election, I believed fully that Obama was a transformative figure who would change the tone of politics and bring people together. And I do still believe, as Colin Powell said, that he has crossed ethnic, racial and generational lines to do that. But then we have people like this who make our country seem more fractured than ever. What can we do?
Rock for Change This Sunday
(A note about this already went out to the CSCC mailing list, but I thought a reminder would be helpful. This message is from Sue Mahon, of Volunteers for Obama, about the concert on Sunday. Personally, the quote from Earl Pickens cracked me up. -JG)
Dear friends -
I would like to invite you to an all-day rally and free concert this Sunday, October 26th, at Hufnagle Park in Lewisburg in support of the Democratic candidates Barack Obama (President), Steve Connolley (State Representative), Trey Casimir (State Senate), and Chris Carney (U.S. House of Representatives). The concert starts at 11 a.m. and goes until 5pm and the featured acts are: Depotorhead (11am), Faculty Lounge (12 p.m.), The Blind Chitlin Kahunas (1 p.m.), Earl Pickens & The Band Named Thunder (2 p.m.), The Sweetbriars (3 p.m.), and Nicholas Horner (4 p.m.).
Unless you've been living on Mars for the past few years, you will know that this is an amazing line-up of the best of our local bands, all gathered in one place on one day. And all have jumped at the chance to share their music with us in support of our Democratic candidates.
So don't let them down! Or as Earl Pickens, a vocal Obama supporter who had the thrill of opening for Barack Obama at a campaign rally in Lancaster in April after the campaign took note of his "Obama Everywhere" youtube videos, had this to say: “You can't spell 'Barack Obama' without R-O-C-K. Try it. You can't do it. You can only spell 'Baa bama'. And you can't spell 'rally' without "P-I-C-K-E-N-S." Okay, you can actually still spell rally. The point is: this rally is going to rock. Great bands, a great cause, in a great location. What else do you want? Grilled bratwurst? Done. There will be grilled bratwurst at this event. Now you HAVE to go.”
During the concert, there will be a free full kids program, where children can get involved by coloring pictures, making spirit sticks to wave during the shows, getting their faces painted, or playing games with other children. Local artist Nancy Cleaver will also be creating her gorgeous 10' diameter Peace Mandala next to the gazebo.
And last, but not least - especially if it's a bit chilly! - there WILL be grilled bratwurst to warm you up. And hot drinks, hamburgers and chicken. So please do come and join us - and send this e-mail on to all your friends! The concert is open to all and there will be volunteers on hand to answer questions and sign people up if they'd like to help 'Get Out the Vote'. The Obama campaign has organized a final push up to November 4th, and every person interested in helping elect these candidates is encouraged to get involved.Anyone with questions is encouraged to call me at 570-244-6883, Charles Facka at 570-246-8069 or Earl Pickens at 570-522-8123.
[Update:] In case of inclement weather, Brasserie Louis has generously offered to open their doors for us for the event. So thank you, Brasserie! We plan on doing a little drought dance for good weather, but should we not succeed, I can think of no better place to spend a Sunday afternoon listening to great music and mingling with friends and family than the Brasserie. For those of you who don't know where it is - it's at 101 Market Street in Lewisburg. See you there!
Dear friends -
I would like to invite you to an all-day rally and free concert this Sunday, October 26th, at Hufnagle Park in Lewisburg in support of the Democratic candidates Barack Obama (President), Steve Connolley (State Representative), Trey Casimir (State Senate), and Chris Carney (U.S. House of Representatives). The concert starts at 11 a.m. and goes until 5pm and the featured acts are: Depotorhead (11am), Faculty Lounge (12 p.m.), The Blind Chitlin Kahunas (1 p.m.), Earl Pickens & The Band Named Thunder (2 p.m.), The Sweetbriars (3 p.m.), and Nicholas Horner (4 p.m.).
Unless you've been living on Mars for the past few years, you will know that this is an amazing line-up of the best of our local bands, all gathered in one place on one day. And all have jumped at the chance to share their music with us in support of our Democratic candidates.
So don't let them down! Or as Earl Pickens, a vocal Obama supporter who had the thrill of opening for Barack Obama at a campaign rally in Lancaster in April after the campaign took note of his "Obama Everywhere" youtube videos, had this to say: “You can't spell 'Barack Obama' without R-O-C-K. Try it. You can't do it. You can only spell 'Baa bama'. And you can't spell 'rally' without "P-I-C-K-E-N-S." Okay, you can actually still spell rally. The point is: this rally is going to rock. Great bands, a great cause, in a great location. What else do you want? Grilled bratwurst? Done. There will be grilled bratwurst at this event. Now you HAVE to go.”
During the concert, there will be a free full kids program, where children can get involved by coloring pictures, making spirit sticks to wave during the shows, getting their faces painted, or playing games with other children. Local artist Nancy Cleaver will also be creating her gorgeous 10' diameter Peace Mandala next to the gazebo.
And last, but not least - especially if it's a bit chilly! - there WILL be grilled bratwurst to warm you up. And hot drinks, hamburgers and chicken. So please do come and join us - and send this e-mail on to all your friends! The concert is open to all and there will be volunteers on hand to answer questions and sign people up if they'd like to help 'Get Out the Vote'. The Obama campaign has organized a final push up to November 4th, and every person interested in helping elect these candidates is encouraged to get involved.Anyone with questions is encouraged to call me at 570-244-6883, Charles Facka at 570-246-8069 or Earl Pickens at 570-522-8123.
[Update:] In case of inclement weather, Brasserie Louis has generously offered to open their doors for us for the event. So thank you, Brasserie! We plan on doing a little drought dance for good weather, but should we not succeed, I can think of no better place to spend a Sunday afternoon listening to great music and mingling with friends and family than the Brasserie. For those of you who don't know where it is - it's at 101 Market Street in Lewisburg. See you there!
Cultural Warrior
Wow! Yesterday Brian Williams asked Sarah Palin if those who bomb abortion clinics are terrorists. She replied "I don’t know if you’re going to use the word ‘terrorist’ there."
Well, I know I am going to use the word terrorist there.
It has come to this: we have a vice-presidential candidate who can openly state that radical rightists who commit violence, often murder, against innocent Americans, should not be termed "terrorists." Her hesitation to label this terrorism is not due to squeamishness about using the word, it must be said.
She tossed out the dog whistle. We're on to the next stage. Unbelievable.
Well, I know I am going to use the word terrorist there.
It has come to this: we have a vice-presidential candidate who can openly state that radical rightists who commit violence, often murder, against innocent Americans, should not be termed "terrorists." Her hesitation to label this terrorism is not due to squeamishness about using the word, it must be said.
She tossed out the dog whistle. We're on to the next stage. Unbelievable.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Candidates' Forum
Tonight, the League of Women Voters (LWV) hosted a "Candidates' Night" at Lewisburg High School. In the first half, Steve Connolley (D) and Russ Fairchild (R) fielded questions from the LWV and audience members. In the second half, Trey Casimir (D), Gene Yaw (R) and Mike Dincher (I) did the same. Nothing too controversial or outrageous was said, but I thought I'd share some impressions -- others who were there, please feel free to comment.
Clearest Contrast(s) of the Night #1: Right to Choose
The Senate candidates were asked about their position on a woman's right to choose. Trey gave what I thought was a very clear, well-spoken progressive position: that such matters should be private decisions between a woman, her family, doctor and clergy and that government should stay the h*** out. (That's actually what he said.) This got applause from the audience. Gene Yaw said he was pro-life, with rape, incest, and health of the mother being the only reasons for exception. One person clapped for him, kind of awkwardly. I don't actually remember what Mike Dincher said, but I think it was also basically the Republican position (criminalizing abortion).
Most Unnecessary Question of the Night:
The House candidates were asked about their position on landowners' royalties for natural gas drilling. Since this isn't really very relevant for Union or Snyder counties, it was kind of an awkward moment. This was one of the questions from the audience, written on an index card and pre-screened by the LWV -- it was kind of strange that it was selected.
Clearest Contrast of the Night #2: State Employees/Retirees
The House candidates were asked whether they would support a bill to give cost-of-living increases to state retirees, who haven't had one in at least 7 years while state legislators have voted to increase their own pensions. Russ gave a long answer about cost-of-living increases being a complicated issue and needing actuaries to look at the problem. Steve said: "Yes, I would."
Most Slightly Absurd Statement of the Night:
When House candidates were asked a question about what they would do to get the Shamokin Dam Thruway back on track, Russ Fairchild claimed it had been a "priority" of his, ever since the project was first conceived... in 1968! And yet, we still have no Thruway. Hmm. I think I could see little question marks appear over the audience members' heads.
Clearest Contrast of the Night #3: Healthcare
The Senate candidates were asked about what we can do to reduce healthcare costs. Trey made a bolder statement than Obama in this regard, saying that we should realize we are eventually headed toward a single-payer system like the rest of the civilized world, and we should start preparing for it to make the transition effective and financially responsible. He quoted a statistic that Pennsylvania has a low uninsured rate, with ~92% of the population insured; however, almost half of this is government-sponsored insurance anyway (including Medicare, Medicaid, and the state employees' insurance program). He talked about the need to reduce emergency room visits by uninsured people that are hurting the hospitals.
Yaw and Dincher gave similar answers, with Yaw saying that he was absolutely opposed to government-run insurance because the government wasn't effective at running anything. (Trey later shot back at this, pointing out that we have some very effective government services like police and fire companies (I would have added the USPS), and that Medicare spends about 5-6% of its costs on overhead, whereas some private insurance companies spend up to 50%.) Yaw also made some point about healthcare costs being hard to reduce, because if "a machine" (I assume he meant like an MRI machine) cost $1 million, then that's what the hospital has to spend. He also suggested that the U.S. adopt a strategy like Massachusetts where, since Romney's tenure as governor, they have a mandate that citizens must purchase health insurance, just as PA drivers must purchase car insurance before they can drive a car. Dincher generally advocated a "free market" approach, saying that Americans don't "check their receipt" when they leave a doctor's office or hospital like they do when they leave a regular store, and so the problem is there's no incentive for "smart shopping" or cost containment.
I don't pretend to know a whole lot about this issue, but I do know a little bit, in that I generally work in the healthcare industry. For a good source of information on the subject (and especially healthcare costs in Massachusetts), I recommend Boston University's School of Public Health website. There, some of the things you quickly learn are:
My understanding is that increases in health insurance premiums have far outpaced inflation or spending on any other sector of the economy in the last decade, and it's due to a combination of increased administrative costs, more expensive new drugs and technology, waste, and fraud/error. And contrary to what Yaw implied, the new drugs and technology costs are not the biggest of those driving factors.
Best (Only) Joke of the Night:
Steve thanked the LWV for hosting the forum, and for printing the "Voter's Guide" that includes bios, descriptions and photos of all the candidates. Steve apologized for not realizing that he was supposed to send in his high school yearbook photo (as Russ Fairchild seems to have done, see PDF link above).
Clearest Contrast(s) of the Night #1: Right to Choose
The Senate candidates were asked about their position on a woman's right to choose. Trey gave what I thought was a very clear, well-spoken progressive position: that such matters should be private decisions between a woman, her family, doctor and clergy and that government should stay the h*** out. (That's actually what he said.) This got applause from the audience. Gene Yaw said he was pro-life, with rape, incest, and health of the mother being the only reasons for exception. One person clapped for him, kind of awkwardly. I don't actually remember what Mike Dincher said, but I think it was also basically the Republican position (criminalizing abortion).
Most Unnecessary Question of the Night:
The House candidates were asked about their position on landowners' royalties for natural gas drilling. Since this isn't really very relevant for Union or Snyder counties, it was kind of an awkward moment. This was one of the questions from the audience, written on an index card and pre-screened by the LWV -- it was kind of strange that it was selected.
Clearest Contrast of the Night #2: State Employees/Retirees
The House candidates were asked whether they would support a bill to give cost-of-living increases to state retirees, who haven't had one in at least 7 years while state legislators have voted to increase their own pensions. Russ gave a long answer about cost-of-living increases being a complicated issue and needing actuaries to look at the problem. Steve said: "Yes, I would."
Most Slightly Absurd Statement of the Night:
When House candidates were asked a question about what they would do to get the Shamokin Dam Thruway back on track, Russ Fairchild claimed it had been a "priority" of his, ever since the project was first conceived... in 1968! And yet, we still have no Thruway. Hmm. I think I could see little question marks appear over the audience members' heads.
Clearest Contrast of the Night #3: Healthcare
The Senate candidates were asked about what we can do to reduce healthcare costs. Trey made a bolder statement than Obama in this regard, saying that we should realize we are eventually headed toward a single-payer system like the rest of the civilized world, and we should start preparing for it to make the transition effective and financially responsible. He quoted a statistic that Pennsylvania has a low uninsured rate, with ~92% of the population insured; however, almost half of this is government-sponsored insurance anyway (including Medicare, Medicaid, and the state employees' insurance program). He talked about the need to reduce emergency room visits by uninsured people that are hurting the hospitals.
Yaw and Dincher gave similar answers, with Yaw saying that he was absolutely opposed to government-run insurance because the government wasn't effective at running anything. (Trey later shot back at this, pointing out that we have some very effective government services like police and fire companies (I would have added the USPS), and that Medicare spends about 5-6% of its costs on overhead, whereas some private insurance companies spend up to 50%.) Yaw also made some point about healthcare costs being hard to reduce, because if "a machine" (I assume he meant like an MRI machine) cost $1 million, then that's what the hospital has to spend. He also suggested that the U.S. adopt a strategy like Massachusetts where, since Romney's tenure as governor, they have a mandate that citizens must purchase health insurance, just as PA drivers must purchase car insurance before they can drive a car. Dincher generally advocated a "free market" approach, saying that Americans don't "check their receipt" when they leave a doctor's office or hospital like they do when they leave a regular store, and so the problem is there's no incentive for "smart shopping" or cost containment.
I don't pretend to know a whole lot about this issue, but I do know a little bit, in that I generally work in the healthcare industry. For a good source of information on the subject (and especially healthcare costs in Massachusetts), I recommend Boston University's School of Public Health website. There, some of the things you quickly learn are:
- Trey's point about Medicare spending less on overhead than private insurers is absolutely correct.
- Massachusetts (with its insurance mandate) has the highest healthcare spending in the world -- $62.1B in 2006, which is 33% above even the U.S. average, which in turn is higher than any other country.
- Healthcare costs absorbed 1/4th of U.S. economic growth from 2000-2005.
- U.S. prices for prescription drugs are 81% above foreign prices.
My understanding is that increases in health insurance premiums have far outpaced inflation or spending on any other sector of the economy in the last decade, and it's due to a combination of increased administrative costs, more expensive new drugs and technology, waste, and fraud/error. And contrary to what Yaw implied, the new drugs and technology costs are not the biggest of those driving factors.
Best (Only) Joke of the Night:
Steve thanked the LWV for hosting the forum, and for printing the "Voter's Guide" that includes bios, descriptions and photos of all the candidates. Steve apologized for not realizing that he was supposed to send in his high school yearbook photo (as Russ Fairchild seems to have done, see PDF link above).
Overall, it was a good, civil discussion of issues without any mudslinging or personal attacks, which is always nice to see. I understand why the LWV likes the format it uses, but it would have been nice to allow the moderator a chance to follow up on questions, or to take more informal feedback from the audience. As it was, with very strictly-timed responses and not much opportunity to build one question onto another, it seemed a little more rigid than it needed to be.
KEEP THE CAPS ON
I've been thinking about the challenge of crafting a message about state and local issues. Here's an idea that might work.
The issue is electricity rate caps. The rate caps have come off in Lewisburg (Citizens Electric) and rates are up significantly (40%?). PPL's rate caps are set to come off in 2010 I believe, but there is still no meaningful competition in the electric market. Even though consumers have forked over something like $13 billion to make that happen, the companies spent the money on other things apparently--or so I'm told.
I don't think a message of "We've been ripped off and we want our money back" is going to work. In the short term, the best we can do is what Gov. Rendell has talked about: delaying the expiration of the rate caps.
Here's my idea for a video message campaign: Person lowers thermostat to 58 degrees, turns to camera, puts on a stocking cap and says: "Lets keep the caps on." The challenge would be to get other people to shoot there own video of themselves putting on a cap and saying, "Let's keep the caps on." The idea plays on the overall energy price problems--more people are shivering because of high fuel oil prices than high electricity prices--but it makes a serious point: real people are going to feel the pinch because of the flaws in Pennsylvania's deregulation plans. Policy makers need to be reminded of that.
The issue is electricity rate caps. The rate caps have come off in Lewisburg (Citizens Electric) and rates are up significantly (40%?). PPL's rate caps are set to come off in 2010 I believe, but there is still no meaningful competition in the electric market. Even though consumers have forked over something like $13 billion to make that happen, the companies spent the money on other things apparently--or so I'm told.
I don't think a message of "We've been ripped off and we want our money back" is going to work. In the short term, the best we can do is what Gov. Rendell has talked about: delaying the expiration of the rate caps.
Here's my idea for a video message campaign: Person lowers thermostat to 58 degrees, turns to camera, puts on a stocking cap and says: "Lets keep the caps on." The challenge would be to get other people to shoot there own video of themselves putting on a cap and saying, "Let's keep the caps on." The idea plays on the overall energy price problems--more people are shivering because of high fuel oil prices than high electricity prices--but it makes a serious point: real people are going to feel the pinch because of the flaws in Pennsylvania's deregulation plans. Policy makers need to be reminded of that.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Carney Interview
Here is Chris' interview with a blogger. It is more in depth than much that I have seen. I don't know what he is saying about the FISA bill and retroactive immunity...
I'd like as much face time for our little blog!
Jordi
An excerpt:
I'd like as much face time for our little blog!
Jordi
An excerpt:
There is a provision of the Military Commissions Act that says the government can declare a United States citizen an enemy combatant and hold them without habeas corpus.
When you suspend the constitution you have to be little bit nervous about that. I swore a couple of times to protect and defend the constitution both as a military officer and as a member of Congress. You can hold people in this country by charging them under the 5th amendment and charge them with a crime and they get due process. American citizens should not be deprived due process.
So do you favor repealing that provision of the act?
As long as there is a legal way to cover them if they are an American citizen they get full rights as an American citizen.
Is that a yes?
That’s a yes. When we ignore our own rules we hurt ourselves as a nation. We hurt our ethic, we hurt what we stand for in the eyes of our people and the eyes of the world.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Colin Powell Endorsement
Everyone has probably seen it, but in case you haven't, here's the Colin Powell endorsement:
The best part comes at around 5:20 where he explicitly endorses Trey Casimir and Steve Connolley as well!
I'm no Colin Powell fan. But this is a good event for two reasons. One, it pushes the fringe robocalling/Rush Limbaugh element further to the fringe, since a lot of the more moderate conservatives out there will be educated by the far right's reaction to the Powell endorsement. And two, pragmatically, it puts McCain on the defensive in the media for a day or two, which brings us a day or two closer to the election. The analogy in football would be picking up a 1st down while you're running out the clock.
The best part comes at around 5:20 where he explicitly endorses Trey Casimir and Steve Connolley as well!
I'm no Colin Powell fan. But this is a good event for two reasons. One, it pushes the fringe robocalling/Rush Limbaugh element further to the fringe, since a lot of the more moderate conservatives out there will be educated by the far right's reaction to the Powell endorsement. And two, pragmatically, it puts McCain on the defensive in the media for a day or two, which brings us a day or two closer to the election. The analogy in football would be picking up a 1st down while you're running out the clock.
More Letters
I had a letter published in the Daily Item on Friday, a "response to a response."
Steva Stowell-Hardcastle, a CSCC member, had an excellent "My Turn" essay published on 10/9/08 about some of the intolerance and racism that canvassers for the Obama campaign have encountered in this area. A few days later, this letter was published. Not only did it try to equate Steva's essay with "race-baiting," but it also made an outrageous assertion, suggesting (without sarcasm) that Republicans might actually get killed if they try to canvass in "any major city" (which seemed to be some kind of secret code for places where scary people live). I felt compelled to respond with the following letter:
The link to Steva's original essay seems to have disappeared from the DI site, but I will try and find a link or post an original copy soon, because it is well worth reading.
Steva Stowell-Hardcastle, a CSCC member, had an excellent "My Turn" essay published on 10/9/08 about some of the intolerance and racism that canvassers for the Obama campaign have encountered in this area. A few days later, this letter was published. Not only did it try to equate Steva's essay with "race-baiting," but it also made an outrageous assertion, suggesting (without sarcasm) that Republicans might actually get killed if they try to canvass in "any major city" (which seemed to be some kind of secret code for places where scary people live). I felt compelled to respond with the following letter:
I believe Steva Stowell-Hardcastle's essay about encounters with racism in the Susquehanna Valley was misinterpreted by the gentleman who described it as "race-baiting." She never suggested that racism is limited to Valley residents, or conservatives, or even white people. Her point was that racism is not a family, Christian or American value and should not be tolerated anywhere. The writer, in contrast, seems to suggest that because some black or liberal people may be racist, then people like Ms. Stowell-Hardcastle should not point out racist remarks or attitudes where they see them. I do not understand how he makes this connection. He is right that racism is not just a white behavior. But it is a learned behavior, often passed down between generations, and it can be "unlearned," too. The first step is to recognize it, call it out and be vigilant in making clear that our society will not tolerate it anymore. That goes for Americans of all races and political persuasions.I am glad that my letter got published, but man! I couldn't believe that they published the other letter in the first place.
Finally, the writer claims that Obama campaigners should be thankful to campaign "freely and safely" here because if a Republican campaigned in "any major city" (meaning where non-white people live?) they would be physically harmed. It is exactly this kind of unfounded accusation that allows otherwise well-intentioned people to continue believing that racist words "aren't hurting anybody," and racist fears and attitudes are justified. Besides the fact that the writer offers no evidence of any such incidents, McCain has offices in most major cities, including Philadelphia and even Los Angeles. Let's agree that to change racist attitudes in the Valley and this great country of ours -- from all sides -- we need to hold everyone to a higher standard as the writer suggests and let facts, not fears, be our guide.
The link to Steva's original essay seems to have disappeared from the DI site, but I will try and find a link or post an original copy soon, because it is well worth reading.
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Amercian Fascism raises its head
Who knows if she is out of line or represents a new strain of media saavy American Fascism, but
CONGRESSWOMAN Michelle Bachman, yes, an elected official, calls for investigations into "un-American" activities of her fellow elected officials.
She constantly conflates liberal, leftist, and un-American in a noxious cocktail of McCarthyism, Nixonian innuendo, and demagoguery.
Video
Katrina Vanden Heuvel of The Nation and Pat Buchanan respond.
CONGRESSWOMAN Michelle Bachman, yes, an elected official, calls for investigations into "un-American" activities of her fellow elected officials.
She constantly conflates liberal, leftist, and un-American in a noxious cocktail of McCarthyism, Nixonian innuendo, and demagoguery.
Video
Katrina Vanden Heuvel of The Nation and Pat Buchanan respond.
Friday, October 17, 2008
ACORN and NY Times
NY times editorial page tackles ACORN false scandal. They are mostly on target. I couldn't resist posting a comment.
Here it is:
Here it is:
1% of 1.3 million registrations is 1,300.
Think of ACORN as a business, like hiring people at an airport to solicit credit card registrations.
And add the fact that all registration forms MUST be turned in. Otherwise, you can have canvassers collect registration forms, and then throw out all the Republican ones. Wouldn't that be bad? So, turning in all of them seems like a good idea.
And then those forms are checked by election officials to make sure they are correct. ACORN flags those forms it thinks are flawed. So, those 1,300 flawed (we do not know intent of person who filled them out, so I won't say fraudulent) are then weeded out. By two rounds of quality control: first by ACORN, and second, by the good-intentioned and hard-working election officials.
Isn't that, you know, the system WORKING?
And, how many service companies that process paperwork in our society have a 1% error rate?
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Anti-Obama Truck(s): Update
(This message is from Rick Thomas, UCDC Chair, and seemed like the kind of thing we should all be made aware of. -JG)
I don’t know how many of you heard the story on WKOK today about the weirdness on Market Street Wednesday afternoon. Here’s a report on WKOK’s web site:
Now, while the truck parked down town may have been just weird, and perhaps DID fall within the realms of free speech, I’m not sure the guy driving the truck I saw would fall into that same category. BTW, the truck I saw was NOT the truck that was in town. I followed the truck up Water Street, and he then turned left and crossed the bridge, heading east. I turned right and stopped by our campaign office and the Obama office, just to see if anyone else has seen this particular vehicle running around town. They hadn’t.
I’m asking that folks keep an eye out for this vehicle. I really think that this guy has crossed the line not only of truthfulness, but also seems to be encouraging physical violence to both Muslims and a presidential candidate. If anyone can get a license number for this truck, please write it down and get it to me. I will turn it over to the police and to the PA State Democratic Committee, with the request that the driver of the truck be questioned as to just what the intent of the message is. I believe it’s a fair question to ask. The Secret Service might be interested in it, too.
But I would ask that YOU not be the one to encounter the owner of the vehicle, in that if he’s encouraging violence, he’s liable to not stop at just Muslims and presidential candidates.
Thanks,
Rick
I don’t know how many of you heard the story on WKOK today about the weirdness on Market Street Wednesday afternoon. Here’s a report on WKOK’s web site:
I saw a picture of the truck, and it was truly strange. But I saw something today that was down right scary. On my way from a meeting at the Best Western near Country Cupboard today around noon, I heard the report on WKOK. Three vehicles in front of me was a pick up truck (an older Ford F-350 with a King Cab, dark green in color, and with a chrome trim around the top of the bed) and I noticed a fairly large sign across the top of the back window. Now, bear in mind that there were two cars in front of me and that I couldn’t read the license plate, but I had no problem reading the sign across the back. It said “BASH A MUSLIM. BASH OBAMA”Anti-Obama sign called ‘distasteful’ in Lewisburg
LEWISBURG – What most called a “distasteful” political sign caught the
attention of Lewisburg residents Wednesday afternoon. The sign, sitting in the
back of a pickup truck in the 300 block of Market Street showed a picture of
Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama, smoking a cigarette and wearing
a hat shaped like an acorn.
On the sign, the words, “Fellow members of ACORN will help me form my
administration…Thanks, you made it happen.” Nancy, of Lewisburg, found the sign
offensive. She said no matter which political party you favor, it is unfair
politics and not the way we should be voting.
Union County Chairman of the Republican Party, Yvonne Morgan, agreed,
saying she thinks it promotes ill will among citizens in Union County. She also
said she tried to contact the police, but they told her it was free speech. No
word on who owns the truck or who put up the sign. (Sara Bartlett)
Now, while the truck parked down town may have been just weird, and perhaps DID fall within the realms of free speech, I’m not sure the guy driving the truck I saw would fall into that same category. BTW, the truck I saw was NOT the truck that was in town. I followed the truck up Water Street, and he then turned left and crossed the bridge, heading east. I turned right and stopped by our campaign office and the Obama office, just to see if anyone else has seen this particular vehicle running around town. They hadn’t.
I’m asking that folks keep an eye out for this vehicle. I really think that this guy has crossed the line not only of truthfulness, but also seems to be encouraging physical violence to both Muslims and a presidential candidate. If anyone can get a license number for this truck, please write it down and get it to me. I will turn it over to the police and to the PA State Democratic Committee, with the request that the driver of the truck be questioned as to just what the intent of the message is. I believe it’s a fair question to ask. The Secret Service might be interested in it, too.
But I would ask that YOU not be the one to encounter the owner of the vehicle, in that if he’s encouraging violence, he’s liable to not stop at just Muslims and presidential candidates.
Thanks,
Rick
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Anti-Obama Truck in Lewisburg Today
Apparently, there is currently a large truck parked on Market St., Lewisburg with a large billboard on the side showing a cartoonish picture of Obama, condemning his ties to ACORN (the organization of community workers who the conservatives have lately been accusing of voter registration fraud).
Can anyone get a picture of this? And/or find out who is responsible for sponsoring it?
Can anyone get a picture of this? And/or find out who is responsible for sponsoring it?
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
"Increasingly Feisty" Crowd at Palin-Hackett Event
Sarah Palin was on the stump in Scranton today, and Chris Hackett opened for her. According to the Times-Tribune, the crowd booed loudly whenever Hackett mentioned Obama, and one man shouted "Kill him!" (Scroll down to 1:25 pm.)
Hackett didn't denounce his supporter.
Hackett didn't denounce his supporter.
Monday, October 13, 2008
How the right will try and steal the election
I think the chances that they can actually change the outcome of the election are small. But they will try through a variety of means. I hope our local UCDC and state party is on top of this. Furthermore, these kind of stories point out why election reform should be a constant issue for the progressives and CSCC.
The Right, and I don't know how much it is the official Republican party or a shadow party that operates as a network of activists in the party and in various outside groups, have a variety of tools at their disposal
- Confuse the issue of fraud in registering and fraud at the ballot box. If Mickey Mouse registers, Mickey Mouse will not vote.
- Invoke false history about how Kennedy did it in 1960, so we it all ends justifies means this time around.
- Push laws or execution of laws that result in purging people from polling registers. Sometimes this is legal, think FL felons being purged by law. In that case, we need to fight those laws. Other times they use such laws to purge many people who should not be.
- Use direct marketing data, like change of address cards, to cross reference voting registers so they can challenge voters at the polling place. Even if the voter is eventually cleared, or given a provisional vote, this tactic drums up fear that there is something "afoul" with the voting process since X number of people were challenged. It also has the benefit of making people nervous that they have done something wrong. The whiff of criminalization probably makes some voters antsy (especially those historically subjected to disenfranchisment efforts like poll taxes).
- Invoke the FL 2000 mess as the frame that the 'systems is broke." Where broke for them means that too many Americans who "don't think like us" are trying to vote.
-Systematically underfund poorer or more dense areas to create long lines.
-Fight a national work holiday for elections (I mean, good grief!).
Even if none of this yields them the election, it does allow them to sulk for 8 years and claim that the Obama and the Democrats "stole" the election for the "true" Americans. Yes, and with all the racist and nativist undertones that feeling carries.
We need a landslide not just to win, to reverse policies, to change course. We need a landslide to so utterly crush the conservative movement that it is forced to rethink itself and its ideas.
They are drowning. Throw them an anvil.
This very good piece from Huffington Post addresses the ACORN lies:
The Right, and I don't know how much it is the official Republican party or a shadow party that operates as a network of activists in the party and in various outside groups, have a variety of tools at their disposal
- Confuse the issue of fraud in registering and fraud at the ballot box. If Mickey Mouse registers, Mickey Mouse will not vote.
- Invoke false history about how Kennedy did it in 1960, so we it all ends justifies means this time around.
- Push laws or execution of laws that result in purging people from polling registers. Sometimes this is legal, think FL felons being purged by law. In that case, we need to fight those laws. Other times they use such laws to purge many people who should not be.
- Use direct marketing data, like change of address cards, to cross reference voting registers so they can challenge voters at the polling place. Even if the voter is eventually cleared, or given a provisional vote, this tactic drums up fear that there is something "afoul" with the voting process since X number of people were challenged. It also has the benefit of making people nervous that they have done something wrong. The whiff of criminalization probably makes some voters antsy (especially those historically subjected to disenfranchisment efforts like poll taxes).
- Invoke the FL 2000 mess as the frame that the 'systems is broke." Where broke for them means that too many Americans who "don't think like us" are trying to vote.
-Systematically underfund poorer or more dense areas to create long lines.
-Fight a national work holiday for elections (I mean, good grief!).
Even if none of this yields them the election, it does allow them to sulk for 8 years and claim that the Obama and the Democrats "stole" the election for the "true" Americans. Yes, and with all the racist and nativist undertones that feeling carries.
We need a landslide not just to win, to reverse policies, to change course. We need a landslide to so utterly crush the conservative movement that it is forced to rethink itself and its ideas.
They are drowning. Throw them an anvil.
This very good piece from Huffington Post addresses the ACORN lies:
The facts about ACORN are worth getting out. ACORN is an organization that, among other things, registers low-income people to vote. One of the ways they do this is to hire door-to-door canvassers from the neighborhoods they are working in. This sort of work is tightly regulated. So, when one of the thousands of people they give jobs to doesn't do their work right and brings back bogus or phony voter registration cards, the law REQUIRES that ACORN turn the forms in to the voter registration office. The law, rightly, doesn't want anybody throwing out voter registration forms for any reason.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Voting Abstinence
Some more election humor, this one from Stephen Colbert. Hey, you know a sketch is good when it pulls off a good Michael Dukakis joke....
Friday, October 10, 2008
Treys commercial
Help Trey get to Harrisburg! http://www.trey4pa.com/
Donate through ActBlue: http://www.actblue.com/contribute/entity/20638
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Former Republican Praises Obama
At Huff post today, I read this piece by Frank Schaeffer.
Aside from his general optimism, he makes two points that I have not heard enough about. Maybe these will work in persuasion, in GOTV, in getting our own grandmothers and other fellow White Americans over their reluctance.
One, Obama is a really nice guy.
Two, he is very brave. He is calm and cool when every day he goes out knowing that he is in real physical danger.
As Schaeffer points out, the Presidency is dangerous to White presidents. Obama was appointed Secret Service protection earlier than anyone else running for president. Police arrested a man with a gun in his car near his home.
Now, as the election heats up, like steam escaping from a river rock in a bonfire, we are seeing cracks form and hearing loud ugly pops in the body politic. The McCain surrogates can not let go off vicious and inflammatory charges. People have been yelling threats at McCain-Palin rallies to the tune of "terrorist" and "kill him!"
The economic crisis, as it spreads into consumer confidence drops, reduced consumption, and possibly a deeper recession will exacerbate people's fears and invoke zero sum gain thinking.
Yes, McCain was resolute in his POW experience. But Obama shows his own courage in the face of threats of violence.
Aside from his general optimism, he makes two points that I have not heard enough about. Maybe these will work in persuasion, in GOTV, in getting our own grandmothers and other fellow White Americans over their reluctance.
One, Obama is a really nice guy.
Two, he is very brave. He is calm and cool when every day he goes out knowing that he is in real physical danger.
As Schaeffer points out, the Presidency is dangerous to White presidents. Obama was appointed Secret Service protection earlier than anyone else running for president. Police arrested a man with a gun in his car near his home.
Now, as the election heats up, like steam escaping from a river rock in a bonfire, we are seeing cracks form and hearing loud ugly pops in the body politic. The McCain surrogates can not let go off vicious and inflammatory charges. People have been yelling threats at McCain-Palin rallies to the tune of "terrorist" and "kill him!"
The economic crisis, as it spreads into consumer confidence drops, reduced consumption, and possibly a deeper recession will exacerbate people's fears and invoke zero sum gain thinking.
Yes, McCain was resolute in his POW experience. But Obama shows his own courage in the face of threats of violence.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
The Inestimable Earl Pickens
Lewisburg's very own Earl Pickens got some nice coverage from ABC News in Harrisburg. In Earl's words:
Which goes to show, grassroots can take many forms, including guitar-shaped.
Sorry to distract from all the so called "important issues" and whatnot (BO-RING!), but everyone knows that this election will be decided not by the many complex problems facing America today, but by obscure Pennsylvania country singers and their insipid, lighthearted political sing-song ditties. Pat "She's A Moose Shootin' Mama" Garrett and I went head-to-head on ABC News out of Harrisburg this morning and I've got the URL to prove it.
Which goes to show, grassroots can take many forms, including guitar-shaped.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Pre-Debate Thread
About one hour to go until the 2nd Presidential Debate. Check back here afterwards to post your reactions.
For those of you with C-SPAN, they've been showing the 10/15/92 "town hall" debate with Bush, Clinton and Perot. Amazingly, it actually seems like a real town hall where they picked people out of the audience who were allowed to direct their questions to the whole group and who were allowed to pose follow-up questions. As I understand it, in tonight's debate, the questions will be asked by audience members, but the questions were all pre-selected, the audience members are not allowed to go off-script, and not allowed to pose follow-up questions. And the moderator isn't allowed to ask follow-up questions, either. And there will be no direct cross-questioning between the candidates.
How is this a town hall, again? And how is this a debate?
For those of you with C-SPAN, they've been showing the 10/15/92 "town hall" debate with Bush, Clinton and Perot. Amazingly, it actually seems like a real town hall where they picked people out of the audience who were allowed to direct their questions to the whole group and who were allowed to pose follow-up questions. As I understand it, in tonight's debate, the questions will be asked by audience members, but the questions were all pre-selected, the audience members are not allowed to go off-script, and not allowed to pose follow-up questions. And the moderator isn't allowed to ask follow-up questions, either. And there will be no direct cross-questioning between the candidates.
How is this a town hall, again? And how is this a debate?
Poll Numbers with Buzz
Lots of CSCC people have been reading and talking about Nate Silver's election polling website FiveThirtyEight.com. If you haven't seen it, it's worth a look. (538 is the total number of electoral votes.)
Nate Silver first got major attention on the night of the Indiana and North Carolina primaries when his projections managed to capture the movement toward Obama that all the other polling had missed. In recent weeks, Nate Silver has had a lot of exposure in the Main Stream Media, and he is, as he puts it, "enjoying his fifteen minutes." Silver is careful to note that he's an Obama supporter, but he also has a stake in making unbiased prediction, unlike many of the polls that he interprets based on their track records.
Nate Silver first got major attention on the night of the Indiana and North Carolina primaries when his projections managed to capture the movement toward Obama that all the other polling had missed. In recent weeks, Nate Silver has had a lot of exposure in the Main Stream Media, and he is, as he puts it, "enjoying his fifteen minutes." Silver is careful to note that he's an Obama supporter, but he also has a stake in making unbiased prediction, unlike many of the polls that he interprets based on their track records.
PA GOP gets a case of the nasties
The way the national parties let their state parties do the dirty work reminds me of conservative love of state’s rights. Right to suppress votes, right to limit choice, right to defund schools, right to pollute etc.
Right to smear too, apparently.
Pa. GOP hits rock bottom: Calls Obama "a terrorist's best friend"
“What does it say about the character of Barack Obama that he knowingly associates with terrorists? It tells me that Obama lacks the judgment and character to be our next Commander-in-Chief.”
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/attytood/GOP_hits_rock_bottom_Calls_Obama_in_an_official_release_terrorists_best_friend.html
Right to smear too, apparently.
Pa. GOP hits rock bottom: Calls Obama "a terrorist's best friend"
“What does it say about the character of Barack Obama that he knowingly associates with terrorists? It tells me that Obama lacks the judgment and character to be our next Commander-in-Chief.”
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/attytood/GOP_hits_rock_bottom_Calls_Obama_in_an_official_release_terrorists_best_friend.html
Monday, October 6, 2008
Biden and Palin debate on SNL
Saturday Night Live continues to have fun with the political season. Tina Fey continues to fly back to NY from California in the hopes that getting us to laugh on Saturday will make us want to watch 30 Rock on . . . what night is it on?
http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/blog/2008/10/love_or_hate_he.html
http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/blog/2008/10/love_or_hate_he.html
Friday, October 3, 2008
Friday Afternoon Entertainment
It's Friday, so kick back and relax with Earl Pickens:
And by “relax” I meant, of course, get up and volunteer!
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Countdown to Meetup & VP Debate Tonight
If you're reading this blog, you probably already know that CSCC has a meetup tonight. If not: hey, we have a meetup tonight! :) 7:30pm, see the website for details.
And then we're going to watch the VP debate together... it's 2 and 1/2 hours away now! Please check back here afterwards where we'll be posting reactions, and you can leave your comments and impressions of the debate.
While we're waiting, here's some links you may enjoy:
And then we're going to watch the VP debate together... it's 2 and 1/2 hours away now! Please check back here afterwards where we'll be posting reactions, and you can leave your comments and impressions of the debate.
While we're waiting, here's some links you may enjoy:
- Testimony from someone who has debated Sarah Palin (in the '06 Alaskan Governor race)
- Jon Stewart (from the Daily Show) and his take on the infamous Sarah Palin/Katie Couric interviews
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Local Issues Matter: Let's Craft a Message
One role that CSCC could play would be to promote the importance of local issues. For many voters in the Valley (and throughout the country), the idea that voting actually affects their lives has been lost. So many issues seem way beyond our control. Local issues are a way to help them reconnect, especially in voting for state and local offices.
What are some issues we could craft a message around? Here are some ideas:
Electricity deregulation--did you vote for that?
Thruway: talked about for 40 years. Let's move on that. Vote.
Health care in Pennsylvania: Critical.
What ideas do you have for using local issues to motivate voters?
What are some issues we could craft a message around? Here are some ideas:
Electricity deregulation--did you vote for that?
Thruway: talked about for 40 years. Let's move on that. Vote.
Health care in Pennsylvania: Critical.
What ideas do you have for using local issues to motivate voters?
Monday, September 29, 2008
Carney leads Hackett 46-36
Interesting result in the battle of the Chris's, also known as the PA-10 House election. According to an independent Lycoming College poll, Chris Carney is leading Chris Hackett 46-36.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Income Disparity and More on Tax Plans
[Another set of illustrative graphs and analysis from Lewisburg statistician Jason Roy. -JG]
Below is a graph that shows what percentage of the total income in the U.S. is earned by people in the top 0.1%, by year (source: Piketty & Saez, 2003). It shows that income inequality is now at the highest level since the late 1920s, with the richest 0.1% earning greater than 10% of all income.
Below is a graph that shows what percentage of the total income in the U.S. is earned by people in the top 0.1%, by year (source: Piketty & Saez, 2003). It shows that income inequality is now at the highest level since the late 1920s, with the richest 0.1% earning greater than 10% of all income.
The next graph below shows the expected percentage (%) change in after-tax income in 2009, adjusted for family size, if the McCain or Obama tax plans are implemented (source: Tax Policy Center). Values above the dotted line indicate an increase in income. For people in the first 4 quintiles of the income distribution (i.e., the poorest four-fifths of the population), they would have more income under the Obama proposal. On average, people in the highest quintile (i.e., the top one-fifth, or those making more than $111,000 a year) will have less income after taxes with the Obama proposal and do better under McCain. However, that is largely driven by the very wealthiest individuals, those making over $600,000 a year. 
This graph also displays (on the far right) the after-tax income for the richest 0.1% of Americans. Under McCain, those people would have about 5% more after-tax income, whereas under Obama, they would have about 11% less. (Keep in mind the richest 0.1% of americans make more than $2.87 million per year.)
With income inequality at historic levels, Obama is asking the wealthiest to pay a little more, and is giving bigger tax breaks to the poorest. McCain, on the other hand, is giving the biggest tax breaks to the wealthiest. The other thing to note is that our national debt is also at a record level (in real dollars, adjusting for size of GDP). As mentioned in a previous post, McCain's plan will increase the debt by $1.5 trillion more than the Obama plan.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Women's Movement and 'Hypocrisy'
We had two CSCC members write excellent, strongly-worded emails in response to this letter in last weekend's Daily Item accusing women of 'hypocrisy' for not supporting Sarah Palin; one got published yesterday, the other did not. But here we present both letters. The first (the one that was printed) is from Martha Holland:
The second one (unpublished) is from Jason Roy:
According to the letter in today's Daily Item (9/22), women should joyfully support Sarah Palin because she is a woman; one who, the writer claims, embodies all the values of the women's movement. That we don't support her makes us, in his eyes, liberal female elitists and full blown hypocrites. I would like to respond by saying that there are plenty of us who, despite our opposition to Sarah Palin, are hard-working moms who love God and country, respect the opinions of others and believe that we can have a rational conversation about our differences without resorting to hateful labels and name-calling.
The reason we do not support Sarah Palin is because she is running for vice-president on a Republican ticket that is no different from what we have had for the last eight years.For the last eight years, the Bush-Cheney administration has brought us an unending and destabilizing war based on lies (that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and that he was responsible for the terrible events of 9/11). For eight years, this administration has dismantled regulations that protect us from corporate greed and malfeasance. Now we have an economic crisis that is the worst since the great depression. This same administration wants to spend $700 billion to bail out the big companies whose questionable policies have caused this mess but does not want to include help for the millions of ordinary citizens who have lost their homes and livelihoods because of this crisis. We oppose the McCain-Palin ticket not because we are looking at ideologies but because we are looking at results. An examination of the McCain-Palin platform shows that they are sticking to the same basic policies of the last eight years, policies which can only bring us more bad results.
Sincerely,
Martha Holland
The second one (unpublished) is from Jason Roy:
In response to the letter writer who claimed that the "women's movement" has "shown their true colors" as hypocrites: I think there is a misunderstanding about what the women's movement was all about. The goal of the women's movement was not to get any and every woman into a position of power, regardless of their qualifications. The goal was to give women the same opportunities as men.
It is a sign of progress that Hillary Clinton came close to winning the Democratic nomination for President. It is a sign of progress that Sarah Palin has been nominated for Vice President on the Republican ticket. You are correct in saying that "they will support women, but not all women. Only women that fit into their ideology..." It would be quite discouraging if women felt obligated to vote for a candidate that they disagreed with on most issues, simply because the candidate was of the same gender. We have always had the opportunity to vote for or against male candidates who were running for office. We are beginning to have that opportunity with female candidates. If people make a decision on Sarah Palin based on her qualifications and beliefs, and not on her gender, it is a sign of progress, not hypocrisy.
Sincerely,
Jason Roy
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Reality Is Not Balanced
I had this letter published yesterday in the Daily Item, in response to this letter that was printed on Saturday:
To the letter writer who recently accused The Daily Item of spouting liberal "propaganda": have you conveniently failed to notice the syndicated columns from right-wing conservatives George Will, Jonah Goldberg and Maggie Gallagher? Or the right-leaning Associated Press articles? Or the front-page stories that frequently show our (Republican) state representatives in a positive light? Now perhaps you can sympathize with many of us who dislike the "conservative propaganda" that appears in this paper.As Stephen Colbert famously said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias...."
In particular, the writer complains about a lack of "balance." During the past eight years, too many of us have accepted the idea that "balance" means good journalism. For every story, news outlets feel the need to find someone—regardless of their qualifications or whether they’re right—to provide an opposing or "balanced" viewpoint. The 24-hour cable news networks have fostered this idea, since it’s much easier for them to find two talking heads to debate each other instead of doing real investigative reporting. But facts are not always balanced: sometimes, the facts support one idea and not the other. We should expect our newspapers to provide us with pertinent facts about the news of the day, not to bend over backwards subscribing to this false theory of balance. The last few weeks have not been good for John McCain: he has released untruthful ads and been chastised for them, scandals swirl around his vice presidential pick, and he has demonstrated a lack of understanding of the economy or how to fix it. Failing to report these stories, or "balancing" them with old, questionable conservative talking points about Obama’s past, would do nothing to honestly inform readers.
Jove
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Whose life?
This thoughtful letter by our own John Cooper appeared in Sunday's Daily Item, partially in response to this letter from earlier in the week:
To the good folk (13 Sept. 08) who are planning their votes this year on the basis of their ‘Pro Life’ position, I’d like a bit of clarification:
For whose or what’s life are you ‘pro’?
All life? What about the plants that you destroy for food, construction or clear-cutting? What about the weeds you poison or pull up?
Oh, only animal life? What about the animals you eat or whose bodies you use for shoes or clothing? What of the insects you poison, the spiders you kill, the teeming myriad of critters whose lives you indifferently extinguish daily just by your very living and breathing?
Ah, you say, just human life? Which humans’ lives? The millions of children born each year into disease-infested squalor and poverty with no prospect whatsoever of healthy or happy lives? The hundreds of thousands of premature deaths due to the practice of punishing foreign governments by imposing ‘sanctions’ on their people? Or the hundreds of thousands of victims of America’s wars of military subjugation against those we don't agree with? Had those no right to life?
Mmm, I see, you are only ‘pro’ American lives? What about those squandered lives lost or abused in our military’s wars based on lies and distortions? Don’t they count? What about the lives of our own, ordinary citizens condemned by poor health-care, poverty and malnutrition to premature deaths by an economic and social system that enriches the rich and impoverishes the poor?
I could go on but you see my point? Sloganeering with vapid clichés whose practice belies their slogan does little to enhance the credibility of either the slogan or the sloganeer.
John Cooper
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Faith and Facts
This excellent letter by our own Joe Manzi was printed in Saturday's Daily Item:
On Saturday, November 8th, your paper printed a letter to the editor entitled "Pro-life politics." I take issue with the writer’s simplistic responses to complex issues. First he stated that John McCain "knows that life begins at conception." He also refers to the Iraq invasion and occupation as a "good Samaritan mission to release the innocent people of Iraq from tyranny, bondage and servitude." These statements illustrate two trends in our nation that are disturbing and often lead us to wrong conclusions and to disastrous actions.
First is the trend by many, especially of the Religious Right, to equate belief with fact. In this instance one could argue that if life begins at conception, what is the nature of that life, is it a human life, and if not when does it become a human life? The answers to these questions are often based on faith, our religious beliefs, and as such we should preface our answers with I believe, not I know. Belief is based on faith and opinion, not fact and should not be presented as or confused with fact.
The second is the trend, again especially by people to the right of the political spectrum, to confuse myth with reality. Too many of us subscribe to the myth that America always acts with good intentions and takes the morally right course. Thus we get statements claiming that our invasion of Iraq is a "good Samaritan mission." Let’s recognize that the United States, for all its amazing achievements and its outstanding two hundred year experiment with democracy, is after all a nation of citizens and leaders who are fallible and capable of wrong decisions and, yes, even immoral behavior. One only has to look to our inhumane history of slavery and our equally cruel and barbaric treatment of Native Americans to know that we as a nation do not always take the moral high ground.
Until we stop confusing faith with fact and myth with reality we cannot have an intelligent logical debate process and we cannot hope to solve the many problems confronting our nation here and abroad. Sadly, the writer of "Pro-life politics," like all too many voters, relies on faith and mythical perceptions in deciding who to vote for, rather than on a thought process based on factual information, and that is why we get Presidents like Bush and dangerous policies like his "preventive strike" theory that led us to invade Iraq--a nation that posed no threat to us, and to which we have inflicted unimaginable suffering and hardships--at tremendous human and financial cost to our own nation.
Sincerely,
Joe Manzi
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Oil Production and Consumption
As a new "featured column" on the blog, I've asked Jason Roy, a statistician who lives in downtown Lewisburg, to provide us with a simple graph or chart each week that illustrates or sheds light on some important issue. This week, Jason has sent us the following item regarding oil consumption and the notion of "drill, baby, drill":
A key issue on the minds of a lot of voters is oil production and consumption. Gas prices have had an impact on many families and businesses. A difference between Obama and McCain is their views on offshore drilling. During his convention speech John McCain said "We will drill new wells off-shore, and we'll drill them now. We'll drill them now." Offshore drilling would come with some environmental risks. So, a reasonable question is whether the benefits outweigh these risks.
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman noted that "the U.S. government's own Energy Information Administration says that removing restrictions on offshore drilling wouldn't lead to any additional domestic oil production until 2017, and that even at its peak the extra production would have an 'insignificant' impact on oil prices." That same report predicted that new offshore drilling could eventually produce as much as 200,000 barrels per day. While that sounds like a lot, it is extremely small relative to current foreign and domestic oil production, as seen in the graph below:
This is a key part of the argument against offshore drilling: it's not just that it will take 10 years or so to produce results. (Most people have heard that part by now.) It's that it would produce such a tiny, tiny amount of oil compared to total U.S. consumption.
Lower Taxes, Less Debt
I submitted this letter to the Daily Item over the weekend. I don't know if it will get printed or not, but interestingly enough, I was glad to see that today's editorial page reprinted this column from the St. Petersburg Times which is remarkably similar in both tone and content. I wonder if it's just a coincidence, or if the editors actually consider the letters they receive when choosing what syndicated columns to print? If so, that would be very encouraging.
Lower Taxes, Less Debt
As a father, I worry about how much I pay in taxes now, and how much debt we are leaving to our children. John McCain's ads say that Barack Obama wants "higher taxes," but many sources last week—ranging from a letter in Sunday's paper ("Misleading ads") to the ladies on The View—pointed out several falsehoods in McCain's other TV ads. This
made me wonder: who will really lower my taxes more?Factcheck.org and the Tax Policy Center, two nonpartisan groups, both agree: not only will Obama's plan make my taxes lower than McCain's will (because our family makes under $250,000 a year), but it's also expected to leave behind a smaller national debt—$1.5 trillion smaller! At "www.factcheck.org," they give a specific example that an average family making between $37,000 and $66,000 a year would save $1,118 on their taxes under Obama's plan, and only $325 under McCain's, while families making less than that will see even larger percentage tax cuts with Obama. This sounds like a "no-brainer" to me! I know I'll be voting for Barack Obama.
[Update:] I forgot, I wanted to post this link to the Washington Post graphic comparing the two tax plans, McCain's and Obama's. This really says it all, and we need to convince the 80-95% of voters whom Obama's plan favors that it's in their best interest.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Lead not follow
Here's my letter to the Daily Item from 9/11/08, which is based on comments I made at the CSCC meeting on 9/4/08. My suggested headline was more understated: "Community College a good idea." They also removed my paragraph break.
Lead not follow
I am happy to see that Rep. Russ Fairchild has joined the call for creation of a community college in Sunbury (“Community college seen as boon for region”). Why haven’t we heard more ideas about how to be proactive in thinking about economic development? Here’s an example of an idea that could truly be a win/win proposition.
There seems to be a pattern of reactive leadership rather than visionary leadership in the Central Susquehanna Valley. It’s one thing to join a parade already in motion, quite another to put one together and get it in motion. Now that the community college proposal is underway, let’s hope we don’t have to wait as long for it as we have for the Central Susquehanna Valley Thruway.
Loren Gustafson
East Buffalo Township
I should have added that the Thruway idea has been around since 1968!
As chance (or editorial manipulation, not sure which) would have it, at the bottom of page 1A was a story about Russ Fairchild reacting to Gov. Rendell's proposal to delay taking off the electric rate caps. (His concern is that it would be unfair to us in Union County who are already having to pay huge increases. Fairness requires that we all suffer together.)
I thought I might be the only one who had noticed this tendency toward "reactive leadership." Then I got a phone call last night from a guy who said he'd seen my letter and wanted me to know that Mr. Fairchild was the reason he hadn't voted a straight ticket for 12 years. I thought he meant he voted for Democrats and crossed party lines to vote for Russ Fairchild. On the contrary, he meant he voted for Republicans but voted against Rep. Fairchild.
I told him that many people seem to appreciate Rep. Fairchild's efforts to respond to the public will about the burner (15 years ago??) or more recently the sale of the Laurelton Center (something I've heard from Democrats in this area), but that I agreed with him that Rep. Fairchild could be doing more. His comment was that Russ Fairchild seems to walk behind Merle Phillips saying "Me too." He then said, and I have to admit it made my day, if you want to run against him, I'll support you. At that point I explained that I was supporting Steve Connelly, who's been in the middle of the effort to get the community college idea going. I'm not sure if I convinced him to do the same, but it made me suspect that others in this area notice that our elected officials spend a lot of time reacting (sometimes slowly), not actively planning for how to create a better future. (I should also credit the Union County Commissioners, who, I think, have tried to get people interested in being proactive through the planning process now underway.
Lead not follow
I am happy to see that Rep. Russ Fairchild has joined the call for creation of a community college in Sunbury (“Community college seen as boon for region”). Why haven’t we heard more ideas about how to be proactive in thinking about economic development? Here’s an example of an idea that could truly be a win/win proposition.
There seems to be a pattern of reactive leadership rather than visionary leadership in the Central Susquehanna Valley. It’s one thing to join a parade already in motion, quite another to put one together and get it in motion. Now that the community college proposal is underway, let’s hope we don’t have to wait as long for it as we have for the Central Susquehanna Valley Thruway.
Loren Gustafson
East Buffalo Township
I should have added that the Thruway idea has been around since 1968!
As chance (or editorial manipulation, not sure which) would have it, at the bottom of page 1A was a story about Russ Fairchild reacting to Gov. Rendell's proposal to delay taking off the electric rate caps. (His concern is that it would be unfair to us in Union County who are already having to pay huge increases. Fairness requires that we all suffer together.)
I thought I might be the only one who had noticed this tendency toward "reactive leadership." Then I got a phone call last night from a guy who said he'd seen my letter and wanted me to know that Mr. Fairchild was the reason he hadn't voted a straight ticket for 12 years. I thought he meant he voted for Democrats and crossed party lines to vote for Russ Fairchild. On the contrary, he meant he voted for Republicans but voted against Rep. Fairchild.
I told him that many people seem to appreciate Rep. Fairchild's efforts to respond to the public will about the burner (15 years ago??) or more recently the sale of the Laurelton Center (something I've heard from Democrats in this area), but that I agreed with him that Rep. Fairchild could be doing more. His comment was that Russ Fairchild seems to walk behind Merle Phillips saying "Me too." He then said, and I have to admit it made my day, if you want to run against him, I'll support you. At that point I explained that I was supporting Steve Connelly, who's been in the middle of the effort to get the community college idea going. I'm not sure if I convinced him to do the same, but it made me suspect that others in this area notice that our elected officials spend a lot of time reacting (sometimes slowly), not actively planning for how to create a better future. (I should also credit the Union County Commissioners, who, I think, have tried to get people interested in being proactive through the planning process now underway.
Putting America First
This letter appeared in yesterday's Daily Item. It was written by Steva Stowell-Hardcastle, who is the volunteer team leader for the Obama campaign in Union County. Here is the (unabridged) text:
We will be making more of an effort from now on to publish Letters to the Editor (even those not published in the paper) here on the CSCC blog to encourage discussion. Have you written a letter recently? Or are about to? Send a copy to us, too!
Our presidential candidates recently announced their Vice Presidential running mates. What vetting processes do these potential candidates go through in order to be second in line to lead one of the most powerful countries in the world? Are our presidential candidates putting America first in deciding who best will protect and lead us?Congratulations, Steva!
The President-Vice President team is similar to a married couple, or to business partners in a small locally owned business. Before anyone of us would jump into marriage or a business partnership we would want to get to know our prospective partners. What are his or her values, personality, track record, ethics, and capabilities? How would this spouse or business partner take care of our children or employees if I suddenly became incapacitated? I would be looking for someone who would be able to carry on, putting our family or employees before themselves.
When I look at the two vice-presidential nominees, I wonder which was picked for purely political reasons, and which was picked because the candidate put America first. Which one was picked for mere political gain, and which was picked for an ability to protect and lead America should the President become incapacitated? John McCain met Sarah Palin just once—once— before selecting her for his ticket. She has no foreign policy experience, though our country faces an international terrorist threat, two wars, growing tensions with Russia, and potential nuclear arms production in Iran. She has no experience in the federal government, although our economy is in recession, our healthcare costs are rising, and every year our children are less able to compete in the global economy because their schools simply don’t have enough money. John McCain has been campaigning for the presidency longer then Sarah Palin has been governor of Alaska.
Barack Obama has known Joe Biden, a native of Scranton, for years. He and his staff spent months studying twenty years worth of speeches and records from potential Vice Presidential candidates. Obama wanted to leave no doubt that his running mate—the person who would help him lead and protect our great country—would be experienced, strong, and dependable, and have the track record to prove it. And did Obama make the right choice? Biden chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He’s spent decades building personal relationships with heads of state around the world. His career is a record of commitment to fairness for the middle and working class citizen. He has protected the rights of women in our country, by defending equal pay for equal work and by writing and passing the Violence Against Women Act, a piece of legislation that has protected thousands of women and children who are victims of domestic violence and sexual assault.
Sarah Palin is surely an up-and-coming public servant and fine person. But there can be no doubt that her selection reflects McCain’s mere political game-playing, in particular an attempt to attract the vote of disappointed women and conservative Christians. This is nothing but a blatant disregard for our country’s security, should McCain become incapacitated. Palin was picked because, for McCain, the Republican Party comes first. Joe Biden can and will protect and lead America, should the task fall to him. It’s the Biden pick that puts America first.
We will be making more of an effort from now on to publish Letters to the Editor (even those not published in the paper) here on the CSCC blog to encourage discussion. Have you written a letter recently? Or are about to? Send a copy to us, too!
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
A few notes on The Daily Item
David A. Young had a strong letter about the Thruway published in The Daily Item on Monday. He suggested that the Susquehanna Valley needs the Thruway more than the Wal-Mart HQ in Arkansas needs a wider driveway paid for with federal money ($35 million was appropriated but not yet spent). He also proposes a new idea for making up the funding gap: toll the new bridge or the completed Thruway. I've had the same thought, since it seems there won't be enough money to go around in the current budget climate.
While we're talking about the Daily Item: I've noticed in the last week that The Daily Item has buried the important world news. The pending impeachment of Pres. Musharraf in Pakistan was on D8 last Saturday (that's the back of the classifieds section)--no note on page 1 about the story. The resignation of Pres. Musharraf is on A8 today--again no note on page 1. (Stories about bombings in Iraq have been similarly relegated to the anonymous back pages--but that might be understandable given how many of those stories have had to be written in the last five years.)
In contrast, a story about two guys who claim to have bigfoot in their freezer appeared on A3 last Saturday. (DNA tests have indicated it's really and oppossum, but more tests are pending.)
While we're talking about the Daily Item: I've noticed in the last week that The Daily Item has buried the important world news. The pending impeachment of Pres. Musharraf in Pakistan was on D8 last Saturday (that's the back of the classifieds section)--no note on page 1 about the story. The resignation of Pres. Musharraf is on A8 today--again no note on page 1. (Stories about bombings in Iraq have been similarly relegated to the anonymous back pages--but that might be understandable given how many of those stories have had to be written in the last five years.)
In contrast, a story about two guys who claim to have bigfoot in their freezer appeared on A3 last Saturday. (DNA tests have indicated it's really and oppossum, but more tests are pending.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
