Ground Swell

The 99ers

2011-10-27T17:09:00.000-05:00

Whether the OWS movement will collapse or lead to real change for the country is up to you. What started in Sept as a populist march on Wall St in NY has now gone global. Mostly non-violent (except for NY & Oakland), other world citizens are now hitting the streets with many of the same thoughts in mind: the banksters have ruined global finances, gotten a bailout, given themselves bonuses--all on the backs of the average taxpayer (read: middleclass).

The main themes seem to be twofold:

1. Wall St represents the greed of the 1% (the small minority who owns 80% of the money and pay very little if any taxes) and

2. The wars (esp. in Iraq and Afghanistan) where we have wasted billions of dollars that could be used in the US to create jobs.

Americans are fed up with the corruption of Wall Street, who has not been made accountable for the collapse of finances globally. Americans are also fed up with a "Do Nothing" Congress, led by a Republican majority, who seem hell bent on passing anti-choice legislation (7 bills this year) while turning a blind eye on the economic crisis.

In the end, it will be up to you, the average reader who may or may not see this post. Join, get involved. That's democracy in action.

Our Country Run Amok by the Supreme Court and Big Business

2011-09-17T13:24:00.000-05:00

Contrary to what some think, this country is NOT controlled by big government; this country is (since the Citizens United case and the appointment of Justice Alito) run by an out-of-control Supreme Court with interests in Big Business. It's not government workers or regulations you should be worrying about--you should be worrying about the man behind the curtain--big corporations (esp. Wall St & Energy).

This is the respected Independent Senator from VT, Bernie Sanders, who talks about the collapsing Middle-class & those responsible: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njRQ7o_MTHs. Listen to at least the first 4.30 minutes.

Here he is again on the Thom Hartmann show explaining plans for change: http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/media/view/?id=471ff42c-0c5f-4e53-8ed7-9bf5040598f6.

Info you might have missed about the 2008 Oil Price scam:

What Wall Street doesn’t want us to know about oil prices

"The top six financial institutions in this country own assets equal to more than 60 percent of our gross domestic product and possess enormous economic and political power. One of the great questions of our time is whether the American people, through Congress, will control the greed, recklessness and illegal behavior on Wall Street, or whether Wall Street will continue to wreak havoc on our economy and the lives of working families....

...Why have oil prices spiked wildly? Some argue that the volatility is a result of supply-and-demand fundamentals. More and more observers, however, believe that excessive speculation in the oil futures market by investors is driving oil prices sky high... ExxonMobil Chairman Rex Tillerson, testifying before a Senate panel this year, said that excessive speculation may have increased oil prices by as much as 40 percent...

....in the summer of 2008 when gas prices spiked to more than $4 a gallon, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and other speculators on Wall Street dominated the crude oil futures market causing tremendous damage to the entire economy," Sanders said. "The CFTC has kept this information hidden from the American public for nearly three years. That is an outrage... (read rest of articles w/links at http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=cea380a3-9234-41b1-9f24-991eb4c9bc6c)."

Note that, to date, legislation has been introduced to eliminate this unethical speculation but has been blocked by..guess who???..committee members getting large financial contributions from the Banksters of Wall Street and the likes of the Koch Brothers.

We are past many of the things that might (or might not) have worked in the past. The economy & country are very different from where it was back then. Because it's now run by GLOBAL interests, mostly led again by BANKSTERS, change has to now happen in a different area. Some ideas I've heard:

1. Congress must rebuke the Supreme Court for its obvious influence-peddling from Big Business (for instance, Judge Alito failed to recuse himself from a case where he voted in favor of Vanguard, a company where he had $390,000 worth of mutual funds).

2. Congress must pass a Constitutional Amendment making it illegal for ANY company to contribute more than a certain amount (like $1,000 based on inflation) to any one candidate.

3. Justices with obvious interests in the outcome of cases who fail to recuse themselves should be impeached.

4. Deny tax-free status to organizations like the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). This group has provided pre-written legislation to governors & legislators of some states (WI, OH, FL are just a few) in an attempt to privatize such things as the "commons"--the PO, highways, fire departments, etc.This group has actively, behind the scenes, supported Big Business interests replacing all government programs.

5. Admit that the war in Iraq was illegal, our continued presence in Afghanistan is irrelevant (we got the bad guy) and move at a faster pace to get our troops out of both countries.

6. Because our economy will not support the return of 150,000 US troops (from Iraq & Afghanistan) into the unemployment lines (added to the current 17% unemployed), we must begin infrastructure jobs asap.

7. Any district where a US legislator refuses to support Federal Disaster Relief and other programs in lieu of deficit reductions will be bypassed so that welcoming states can rebuild. Tying deficits to disaster relief aid is unethical and only hurts those who desperately need the help.

8. Change the FICA program so that ALL Americans making above $106,000 must also pay into the program.

9. Prosecute the Banksters responsible for the global financial meltdown (they're mostly to blame for affairs in Greece, Italy, etc.); reinstate rules banning banks and financial institutions from merging and deny hedge fund managers & others special tax breaks.

10. Fully fund Medicare for all by placing control back into the hands of non-profits.

11. Stop the anti-voter discrimination laws and place a fine on all citizens who don't vote. Increase it for each failure to vote.

12. Ban ALL political declarations until 6 weeks prior to the elections. Offer free media air time, of a set duration, during that period.

It's past time to refocus our problems and take a different path. Afterall, it's "We the People" not "We the RICH People."

Flushing with Money

2011-04-25T21:07:00.001-05:00

According to the Center for American Progress, "Americans sent nearly $1 billion a day overseas to pay for oil in 2010. These purchases make up nearly half of our trade deficit. And every dollar that leaves the country to buy a barrel of oil leaves the domestic economy never to return as investment to create jobs or growth."1

Crude prices in the first quarter of 2011 are running around $100 a barrel, which is 20% higher than a year ago. In addition, American taxpayers are coughing up over $70 Billion a year in subsidies to the oil industry.2 Less than $12 Billion is available for alternative energy. And, of course, we see record profits by the Big 5 oil companies:3

The New York Times warned that in the United States:

"A sustained $10 increase in oil prices would shave about two-tenths of a percentage point off economic growth, according to Dean Maki, chief United States economist at Barclays Capital. [He] estimates [the] increase would offset nearly a quarter of the $120 billion payroll tax cut that Congress had intended to stimulate the economy this year."

What are we doing to address the energy problems in the US? Not much, unfortunately. Click here to watch Gas Hole, a documentary released last year. This provides some history of the oil industry, some potential technologies, and lots of frustration with where we are now.

Afterwards, go to Congress.org (handy link to the lower right), find your Congresspersons, and urge them to make big changes with the course of US progress on energy.

Citations:
1. http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/02/profits_v_prices.html
2. http://transitionvoice.com/2011/02/gop-cut-food-aid-but-keep-oil-subsidies/
3. http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/01/oil_lust.html

Of Parasites and Men

2011-04-19T14:41:00.005-05:00

Have you heard many Republicans and conservatives cite Ayn Rand and her books (Atlas Shrugged, etc.)? Do you wonder why? The title of this blog links to a Mike Wallace interview with her (1959). Her books point to the concept of a "rugged individualist" where the markets are a free-for-all and completely free of regulation. I'll bet many of them (and you) have never read her books, but picked up chunks of information, grabbed them on face value and ran with them.

Here's a link to a video with her and Phil Donahue, when he had the Phil Donahue Show. This reflects her thoughts on religion--she was an atheist who felt God did not exist because there was no proof. She felt that, when conservatives base their political decisions on faith, it shows a weakness to those who base theirs on science.

She also felt a democracy was good only if totally voluntary. a separation of state and economy, free of all regulations. Part 2 of the Mike Wallace interview reveals her opposition to labor and any sort of help by the state to those in need.

I heard Thom Hartmann today and he mentioned that one of Rand's idols was, William Hickman, a seriel killer, forger, and armed robber. This begs us to wonder how much to listen to someone who chooses their idols so poorly.

"At the time, she was planning a novel that was to be titled The Little
Street, the projected hero of which was named Danny Renahan. According to Rand
scholar Chris Matthew Sciabarra, she deliberately modeled Renahan - intended
to be her first sketch of her ideal man - after this same William Edward
Hickman. Renahan, she enthuses in another journal entry, "is born with a
wonderful, free, light consciousness -- [resulting from] the absolute lack of
social instinct or herd feeling. He does not understand, because he has no organ
for understanding, the necessity, meaning, or importance of other people ...
Other people do not exist for him and he does not understand why they should."
(Journals, pp. 27, 21-22; emphasis hers.)"1

Citations: 1. Michael Prescott, http://www.michaelprescott.net/hickman.htm.

Rich Man, Poor Man

2011-04-16T22:48:00.015-05:00

Who can name which administrations, starting in 1980, showed the highest deficits? Anyone, anyone?

Reagan increased the debt by 11.3% in his first term; he then increased it by 9.3% in his second. George HW Bush increased the debt by 15 %.

Bill Clinton decreased the debt by -0.7% in his first term; he then decreased it by -9.0% in his second.

George W. Bush increased the debt by 7.1% in his first term; he then increased it by 20.0% in his second. 1

Can you do the math? In the last 30 years, under Republican President's, the National Debt soared. Only when a Democrat came into office, did it drop. 2 During the 8 years of the Reagan administration, deficits went from almost $74 billion to $2.6 trillion. "In those eight years, the United States moved from being the world's largest international creditor to the largest debtor nation."3

During the eight years of George Bush II, how often did you hear any murmur about deficits? Once, maybe? Yet, within weeks of a Democrat moving into the White House, suddenly all we hear about is deficits. Now, I'm not suggesting running a huge deficit is a good thing. I'm merely pointing out that, as a critically thinking American, you should ask yourself why. What agenda is at hand that overshadows everything else in the news--let alone in the country? Who benefits when the corporate-owned media and conservatives scream "Lions, tigers, deficits! Oh, my!" The targets? Social and educational programs and social security. Back to who's screaming: corporate-owned media and conservatives.

The government currently spends 39.97% of the US GDP. 4 The number ONE biggest expenditure? Defense. 5 How many in the media or among conservatives are lamenting the fact that we are wasting over $7 billion a month in Iraq (more than $3 Trillion as of last Sept)? 6 You want to reduce the deficit? Get out of Iraq.

Now, let's look at wealth in America. Most Americans don't know or don't understand that the top 1% of Americans own 35% of net worth and 43% of financial worth. 7 In English, only 10% of Americans own the United States. 91. 9% of Americans do not receive any inheritance money. The rich are able to contain and enrich their assets in "dynasty trusts", where they avoid inheritance taxes forever. These rich babies are in the "lucky sperm bank." They did not work for their money, they were fed it with a silver spoon--make that a gold spoon, given today's situation.

Why don't they get to pay their fair share? Instead, they get a tax break under Bush which was just extended last December. If you read historical documents (I know you don't), you'd know that our founding fathers did NOT want a peerage--a country dominated by a rich gentry. That's why we don't have Lords and Ladies, remember? Yet, that's just where we are right now. Welcome to the "Have's"; the "Have Nots" can just look at the Statue of Liberty and turn back.

Here's an interesting chart that puts this all in perspective: http://www.good.is/post/must-see-chart-tax-breaks-for-the-rich-versus-budget-cuts/

Citations: 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms 2. http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html 3. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26402-2004Jun8?language=printer 4. http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_20th_century_chart.html 5. http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/united_states_total_spending_pie_chart 6. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15377059/ns/business-answer_desk/and http://american3p.org/establishment-news/budget-deficit-is-1-3-trillion-but-war-in-iraq-has-cost-more-than-3-trillion/ 7. http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

Keeping Connected

2011-01-06T00:08:00.003-06:00

Today ushers in a new House where, unfortunately, your rich Republican Congresspersons are trying to repeal any benefits created over the last 2 years. Do you really think this is in your best interests? Have you been paying any attention whatsoever? A few thoughts:

Healthcare reform--if you have a pre-existing condition or need to keep your child on your healthcare plan a little longer (like through college), you can kiss this puppy good-bye.
Wall Street Reform--they got us in this financial mess and guess what? The Republican appointed to a key committee in Congress to oversee this is in the pockets of Hedge Fund Managers. You voted for him--even if you didn't vote.
Energy Conservation--expect higher prices at the gas pump once again. Expect Exxon to continue to make record profits and NOT pay any US income taxes (wait, aren't corporations a person?!?).
Campaign Finance Reform--the Supreme Court says it's ok to contribute whatever amount you want to your elected officials. Republicans make more money, so they'll give more to candidates who reflect their Big Business mentality. Get ready for the One-Party system.
Continued Media Bias--Most of the media in this country is owned by fewer than 10 corporations. It is not always in their interests to report facts, especially where it reflects poorly on that corporation or their subsidiaries. These corporations are also, alas, often foreign owned. This media includes radio, tv, newspapers, and news magazines. Big Brother may not be watching you, but he sure is controlling you.

So, reflect on the results of how you voted or didn't vote--that's the only thing you can do to amend any problems in this country. Don't throw it away next time.

Mid-Term Election Fever

2010-10-22T20:07:00.001-05:00

Your Voting Place--just call or stop by the Clerk's Office at Wheeling Township Hall (1616 N. Arlington Heights Road Arlington Heights, Illinois 60004; (847) 259-7730). They'll tell you your polling location.
Early voting--yes, you can vote early up until Oct. 28th (from http://www.cookctyclerk.com/elections/earlyvoting/Pages/default.aspx). You need an official photo id to vote early.
The ballot--Go to http://www.cookctyclerk.com/elections/voterprofile/Pages/default.aspx, type in the required information, and you'll see a sample ballot & referendum info so you know what to expect before you walk into that booth. Like, did you know there's a "recall the governor" referendum?
Nuts & Bolts--A nice True Blue mailer went out recently that you can tear off & take to the polls with you to use as a guide to vote. Otherwise, you're screwed...just kidding. Go to http://www.tenthdems.org/, scroll down to the bottom of the home page, and voila. For judge information, try http://www.illinoisjudges.net/, though you'll need to dig a little more. Judges in IL need at least 60% of the vote to retain their position.
The dirt--what you probably AREN'T hearing on mainstream media news:
Dold is a far-right Tea Party Conservative (go to http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/10/15/us/politics/tea-party-graphic.html?ref=politics).
Mark Kirk is being financed by special interest money with ties to China (see http://www.thinkprogress.org/2010/10/21/mark-kirk-beijing-fundraiser/).
Kilbride and other retention judges are being targetted by special-interest groups: http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/buying_time_--_2010_illinois.
Who's Up, Who's Down depending on the polls, go to http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/direction_of_country-902.html.

Mid-Term Elections, IL 10th

2010-10-22T18:46:00.008-05:00

Inundated with election information, robocalls & tv commercials? Don't know what is fact & what is fiction? Sick of those "I'm the only candidate to hold job fair" commercials? Well, you've come to the right place! Here's what you need to know if you're voting from the IL 10th District:

1. Your polling place--just call or stop by the Clerk's Office at Wheeling Township Hall (1616 N. Arlington Heights Road Arlington Heights, Illinois 60004; (847) 259-7730). They'll tell you your polling location.
2. Early voting--yes, you can vote early up until Oct. 28th (from http://www.cookctyclerk.com/elections/earlyvoting/Pages/default.aspx). You need an official photo id to vote early.
3. The ballot--Go to http://www.cookctyclerk.com/elections/voterprofile/Pages/default.aspx, type in the required information, and you'll see a sample ballot & referendum info so you know what to expect before you walk into that booth. Like, did you know there's a "recall the governor" referendum?
4. Nuts & Bolts--A nice True Blue mailer went out recently that you can tear off & take to the polls with you to use as a guide to vote. Otherwise, you're screwed...just kidding. Go to http://www.tenthdems.org/, scroll down to the bottom of the home page, and voila. For judge information, try http://www.illinoisjudges.net/, though you'll need to dig a little more. Judges in IL need at least 60% of the vote to retain their position.
5. The dirt--what you probably AREN'T hearing on mainstream media news:

Dold is a far-right Tea Party Conservative (go to http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/10/15/us/politics/tea-party-graphic.html?ref=politics).
Mark Kirk is being financed by special interest money with ties to China (see http://www.thinkprogress.org/2010/10/21/mark-kirk-beijing-fundraiser/).
Kilbride and other retention judges are being targetted by special-interest groups: http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/buying_time_--_2010_illinois.

6. Who's Up, Who's Down depending on the polls, go to http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/direction_of_country-902.html.

Has Your Vote Been Bought?

2010-09-19T12:17:00.002-05:00

"Midterm ad spending could reach $3 billion" shout the headlines. This usually means the airwaves will be full of political ads until the elections in November. What does this mean? In a country where over one-quarter of the population does not know who America gained it's independence from (can you say England?) that means large numbers of the voting public are at risk. These are the same folks who, instead of spending 10 minutes to figure out which candidate truly matches their interests, listen to radio or tv ads to make a decision. Then they actually go and vote, very often against their own self-interests. And, don't forget the other "stories", the positions for judges and ballot initiatives. These judges are the ones who, in the future, could end up on the Supreme Court.

Being an American is an advantage but also requires certain responsibilities; please, do a little research before you hit that screen on voting day.

Check out these websites:
1. State & Federal Officeholders for 2010 (though it's a bit dated)
2. Project Vote Smart (type in your zip code; still missing voting record info)
3. Global Issues (how you vote will impact the world)
4. Influence Explorer (find out who's getting what money)
5. Judicial Elections (need for campaign reform on the state level)
6. IL State Bar Association (rates judicial candidates; look for your state bar if different)

How To Get Involved

2010-07-24T16:27:00.003-05:00

I am a true believer in making my voice heard (esp. when I have true facts & not Glenn Beck lies or Jean Dixon forecasts). The only way to effect change is to call for change, and that points to your state/federal legislators. There's a phrase "Who Watches the Watchmen"--if they know they're being watched, they have to pay more attention to an issue. I've heard some of these senators--the good ones who really try to listen to their constituents--and they really are affected by the actions of the folks who vote for them (esp those who actually vote--they can pull this information up from a database & see who voted, when, & for what party). So, instead of freaking out over some bit of tv/radio talk show host morsel , I contact my Congressional representatives. It's a quick email, phone call or note based on knowing the legislative agenda beforehand or how they voted afterward.

To get this info, go to: THOMAS (the Library of Congress) http://thomas.loc.gov/(You can sign up to receive an email on how your federal rep voted, so that you are a KNOWLEDGABLE citizen, not just an outraged one.) Your representatives are the ones who got us in the current economic mess by deregulating the banking industry, by not prosecuting monopolies, by inacting huge tax breaks for the top 2% and big multinational corporations, and for allowing our manufacturing base to move overseas. You and I are responsible for not being an informed citizen and not voicing our concerns when it was happening. We have a key weapon at our disposal--the right to vote. Until they take that away, we can still effect change.

Sources, Lies & Videotapes

2010-07-24T16:10:00.002-05:00

When media control was reduced in the early 2000's, fewer companies were allowed a larger share of the media market. This means that, in some cases, only one or 2 mulitnational companies or mega-rich men serve the media population in a given city in the USA. Just 30 years ago, the same population could count on a large number of sources to get their news. You must now look very carefully and critically at the information you are being fed. Today's topic--valid sources for research.

When doing research, be wary of the sources you believe. Web searches (via Google, Yahoo, etc.) are a BIG business--advertisers pay to position themselves at the beginning of a search, and these advertisers have one thing in mind--to make money. Many organizations with deep pockets have also created websites & bought for web positioning to promote their own agenda / propaganda. I just watched a movie yesterday (The International) and one of the actor's lines was something like "there's what we hear, what we want to believe, and then there's the truth." People find it hard to look for the truth. (Good movie, btw.)

So, do you really want to look for the truth? Or, do you believe what you want to believe and no website on the planet with a contradictory message will convince you otherwise? Assuming you are open-minded and open to the challenge, when you research, look carefully at the credentials of the website--the "who we are" or "about us" links usually at the bottom of the website's Home page. Look at the credentials of those listed. If the key players are talk show hosts, back out and search again (these folks make a living off entertainment, which is what a talk show is all about). What they talk about may or may not have any relevance to the truth (even where you find an exception to the rule, like Thom Hartmann, you still need to validate the sources).

If the key player is a religious organization, back out (they have an agenda too). If the site claims to be fair and unbiased, hmmm. Check the credentials even more carefully (& then chuck it as well). If it's a Blog, unless it includes valid citations, chuck it. Unfortunately, there's a lot of money pouring into biased sites for one reason or another--to sell a product, to sell an idea (whether true or false), to influence an election.

On the far lower right of this blog, I list many of my major sources. Given the recent economic climante, I've pulled together key Economic / Financial sites where you can sift for information. Yes, some of this is very dry reading; but it allows you to form your own opinion based on facts--not on some big mouthed fool with a pointer stick wearing a $5000 Armani suit. Feel free to send me others you think are valid and, after I research them, I'll add them to the list.

Economywatch.com
The Bureau of Economic Analysis, http://www.bea.gov/
Center on Budget & Policy Priorities, http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=711
The Financial Times, http://www.ft.com/home/uk

History, Healthcare & the Pursuit of Happiness

2010-03-23T16:37:00.002-05:00

"We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union...promote the general Welfare..establish this Constitution...." I celebrate the start of promoting our general welfare.

I'm shamelessly copying the below from moveon.org.

10 THINGS EVERY AMERICAN SHOULD KNOW ABOUT HEALTH CARE REFORM
1. Once reform is fully implemented, over 95% of Americans will have health insurance coverage, including 32 million who are currently uninsured.2
2. Health insurance companies will no longer be allowed to deny people coverage because of preexisting conditions—or to drop coverage when people become sick.3
3. Just like members of Congress, individuals and small businesses who can't afford to purchase insurance on their own will be able to pool together and choose from a variety of competing plans with lower premiums.4
4. Reform will cut the federal budget deficit by $138 billion over the next ten years, and a whopping $1.2 trillion in the following ten years.5
5. Health care will be more affordable for families and small businesses thanks to new tax credits, subsidies, and other assistance—paid for largely by taxing insurance companies, drug companies, and the very wealthiest Americans.6
6. Seniors on Medicare will pay less for their prescription drugs because the legislation closes the "donut hole" gap in existing coverage.7
7. By reducing health care costs for employers, reform will create or save more than 2.5 million jobs over the next decade.8
8. Medicaid will be expanded to offer health insurance coverage to an additional 16 million low-income people.9
9. Instead of losing coverage after they leave home or graduate from college, young adults will be able to remain on their families' insurance plans until age 26.10
10. Community health centers would receive an additional $11 billion, doubling the number of patients who can be treated regardless of their insurance or ability to pay.11
--------------------------------------
Sources:
1. Final vote results on motion to concur in Senate amendments to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, March 21, 2010 http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2010/roll165.xml
2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11. "Affordable Health Care for America: Summary," House Energy and Commerce Committee, March 18, 2010 http://wwwd.house.gov/akamaidocs/energycommerce/SUMMARY.pdf
4. "Insurance Companies Prosper, Families Suffer: Our Broken Health Insurance System," U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Accessed March 22, 2010 http://healthreform.gov/reports/insuranceprospers/index.html
5. "Affordable Health Care for America: Health Insurance Reform at a Glance: Revenue Provisions," House Energy and Commerce Committee, March 18, 2010 http://wwwd.house.gov/akamaidocs/energycommerce/REVENUE.pdf
8. "New Jobs Through Better Health Care," Center for American Progress, January 8, 2010 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87402&id=19503-7967348-f1ikg2x&t=2
9, 10. "Proposed Changes in the Final Health Care Bill," The New York Times, March 22, 2010 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=87403&id=19503-7967348-f1ikg2x&t=3
11. "Affordable Health Care for America: Health Insurance Reform at a Glance: Addressing Health and Health Care Disparities," House Energy and Commerce Committee, March 20, 2010 http://docs.house.gov/energycommerce/DISPARITIES.pdf

What's the Deal with Tort Reform?

2010-02-09T17:07:00.005-06:00

Why would conservative talk show hosts and politicians talk about something like tort reform? The average American, I'm sure, is clueless on the definition. So, here's a simple definition: you go to a doctor for an emergency, the doctor removes your left leg by mistake, you can sue but due to tort reform in your state you'll only get $10,000 in compensation. Your left leg, after all, is only one leg; you have another one.

Conservatives are screaming because they want to put a cap on the amount you can get; some have tied it with the percent of lawyer reimbursement. They claim that millions of dollars are lost each year and this has added to the cost of health care. They claim malpractice insurance is the reason health care is so expensive and will get even more so. Is there a counterpoint to this issue? Is this a political blog? Do bears...

Last fall the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) ran the numbers. (Note: The CBO is generally considered non-partisan.) "...proposals to cap settlements in medical malpractice cases would only reduce health-care spending by 0.5 percent each year...."1

Medical malpractice carriers admit that caps on damages will do nothing to reduce malpractice premiums since it only accounts for a small percent of their underwriting. 2

Many states already have some form of tort reform and yet they have not lowered their insurance premiums. 3

So, let's do what all good detectives do--follow the money. $$$$ Who benefits from tort reform?

Injured Americans? Hmm, don't think so, since we don't have any other protections to incompetent doctors.
Lawyers? They don't benefit since they actually lose money.
Doctors? Since tort reform won't lower their insurance premiums, they don't benefit financially. Now incompetent doctors would benefit because they could continue to practice unchallenged.
Insurance companies? Bingo! Guess who no longer pays money for such claims? And, get this, many of these same companies aren't immediately shut down when they practice "bad faith"--they refuse to pay the settlement.

So, when you hear someone mention the need for tort reform, ask them if they work for an insurance company. And then ask yourself how much your left leg is really worth.

Special note: Why is TR (Teddy Roosevelt) on this blog post? Because he pushed for American health care in 1912--nearly 100 years ago.

Citations
1. The Daily Beast, http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheat-sheet/item/tort-reforms-tiny-savings/health-care/ and http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/106xx/doc10641/10-09-Tort_Reform.pdf.

2. http://www.sakr-law.com/CM/Articles/the-real-victims-of-tort-reform.asp

3. http://northern-newyork.injuryboard.com/automobile-accidents/tort-reform-the-real-story.aspx?googleid=217102

Distraction Politics

2010-02-04T15:03:00.010-06:00

Michael's doctor to turn himself in; Brittany Murphy died of an overdose; the "boss" is suing a NY bar. Aren't these the key "issues" of the day? Ignorance is bliss, true, and it's very easy to take each day as it comes, put in your 8-hour work/school day, eat dinner with the spouse & kids, and sit down for a few hours of Fringe, Desperate Housewives, and Lost. I call this "distraction politics." You're distracted from the real issues by silly bits of information posing as "news."

What's hard is keeping up with your American freedoms and responsibilities--the freedom we enjoy over most other countries and the responsibility to uphold those freedoms. We take US Govt class in high school and think we know what's going on. Maybe, if we're lucky, we take a poli sci or history class in college and learn a little more about tricky things like Brown vs Board of Education, Teapot Dome, and the New Deal. Then we think we're done...until the first time we step up to vote. If we vote.

And boy do we have some "doozies" to explain why we don't vote: "I don't have time, I don't know where to vote, my vote doesn't make a difference, the system is so corrupt I'm not going to support it with my vote...." And then a few months later we criticize some law that we don't like, or that hidden tax increase, or the loss of habeas corpus. While we sit back and do nothing, the Earth does not stop and those in power push the envelope to maintain and increase their power.

I'm not suggesting that all Americans know all the issues--that's a pretty hefty challenge (even Congress doesn't know the issues and they're voting on them!). But when you walk into that voting booth, do you have the latest political jingle in your head that you heard on the radio on the way to the polls or do you have one or 2 pieces of information on the candidates to help you make an intelligent choice?

I live in IL and just experienced a primary election. I was appalled by:

the lack of a line waiting to vote
the lack of information available on candidates (other than their official web pages which are mostly biased and unreliable) and
the lack of public interest.

So, we nearly lost the Democratic governor, one of the few fellows who seems to have integrity while getting a Lt. Gov. candidate who's pretty much a criminal and is being asked to step aside. Then, for the US Senate race, we get a fellow who's part of a banking family involved in the Rezko fiasco and other shenanigans. His Republican competitor, posing as a moderate, has huge coffers from which to pull so we can enjoy many more jingles! And this is Barack Obama's former Senate seat!

Now I know this is not news. Study after study has been done over the years about American voting, participation, and knowledge. A catalyst of some kind seems to be the key to getting attention and getting more voters to the polls. But, in the absence of such a key thing, studies also point out that, where fewer participate, a conservative minority takes control. If you're a conservative, I'm sure that's fine with you. However, if you want health care reform, Wall Street regulation, or a job, why didn't I see you in line at the polls this Tues?

Supremely Scary

2010-01-27T14:15:00.009-06:00

I have heard some voters comment that "I vote for the person" or "I vote on the issues" or "I'm an Independent, so I vote either way." We are far past the time for voters to get educated. Last I heard, less than 10% of Americans know the issues at a given time. Why does this matter? Because while you posture away and wrap yourself around ignorance, our government is swiftly devolving from a Republic to a Corporatocracy.

We knew our representatives--both state & federal--were pretty much bought off by Big Business (call them Lobbyists or special interests if you like). Now by the normal standard (since Bush Admin) of 5-4, the Supreme Court just decided on a case that affects this country to the very core. In Citizens United vs Federal Election Commission, your conservative-led Court just decided that corporations, since they are considered persons (bet you didn't know that), could not be limited in political campaign spending.

Wait, think about it now. Some examples to elucidate:
1. Exxon can now contribute those billions of excess dollars it reaped the last few years into pro-drilling and mining candidates.
2. Wall Street Banks can now contribute their extra cash into conservative coffers to stop any reform to force them to clean up their act.
3. WalMart can toss cash into conservative campaigns to keep from having to pay living wages or healthcare benefits to its workers.
4. Sony can put money into campaign election funds to stop any proposed tariffs on electronic imports.
5. China Life Insurance Company can donate money to any candidate who opposes insurance reform.

Wait. Stop. We're talking foreign companies here!?!? So the Supreme Court says it is okedoke for China to give money to American elected officials in order to prevent regulations, to allow inferior and often unhealthy products, to essentially take hold of our government? Note the title of this blog--scary stuff, huh?

Many conservatives are nodding about what a great thing this decision was; that it took the choke hold off the poor companies who simply wanted to be allowed to contribute just as you & I (real, warm bodies) can. Poor, poor companies who now have the 5-4 approval of the Supreme Court to set back democracy to pre Marbury vs Madison days. To the horror of our founding fathers, this case essentially made the Supreme Court more powerful than the other two branches of govt. It was not the original intention of the framers of our constitution.

So, how does all this tie into American voter knowledge? When you go to the polls and you're standing there scratching your head because you are clueless on the issues, think about one thing: the Supreme Court. Who picks the SC candidates? The President. So when you vote, do you want a President who will offer more equitable candidates or one who has a conservative, political agenda? Thank about that before you toss that vote away.

Jon Stewart does Glenn Beck

2009-11-06T12:13:00.008-06:00

This is truly hilarious, esp. if you've ever seen Glenn Beck. Enjoy.

Climate Change

2009-10-17T13:25:00.004-05:00

Yesterday was Blog Action Day--ok, I missed it by a few hours, so sue me. More than 13,000 blogs from 155 countries participated, reaching over 17 million readers. That's impressive. What will be even more impressive is if we actually do something. Lots of interesting articles and suggestions were posted, I just hope the "average Joe" can actually make the lifestyle changes that could truly help mitigate the problem. One blogger wrote that we can reduce carbon emissions 70% by doing 2 things: 1. Buy Green Power (click here for a map to see if your utility offers it) and 2. Stop eating meat (or at least reduce your meat consumption).

Another blogger (at the Nature Conservancy) suggested that a big change could be in energy conservation, something many of us recall from the 70's. Small changes can be: a) don't print; read everything online. b) If available, use public transportation instead of driving. c) recycle & buy recycled d) plant native trees, shrubs and fruits e) compost instead of trashing vegatable waste f) buy locally grown food whenever possible g) keep car tires fully inflated. Daily Blog Tips added: 1) recognize that we do have a problem & should do something about it 2) buy energy-efficient products whenever possible.

Big changes should be made, but small ones on our part can certainly have an affect--and show business & govt the intent of the people. The "world" is meeting in Copenhagen in Dec; go here and, in the upper right, tell 'em you're ready.

If the US Healthcare System is so Great...

2009-08-12T17:05:00.003-05:00

...why are 47 million people not covered?

Who comes between you and your doctor? Answer: Your Insurance Company.

Can the US Govt do a better job with healthcare? They didn't do too bad with Medicare.

We protested the Detroit auto executives flying corporate jets to ask for a loan; what protests do we hear about this obscene pay structure for insurance CEO's?

Just the Facts on Healthcare

2009-08-08T13:22:00.005-05:00

When you hear the folks on Fox News and others cite The Lewin Group as a source, realize that this is a subsidiary of UnitedHealthCare, one of the biggest healthcare companies in the world. It is not an unbiased source (as they falsely claim).

If you're against "socialized" medicine, then you're against Medicare & Medicaid and the VA system. Tell that to your retired parent or military vet. We have socialized education and police/fire departments. I guess we should eliminate those too. After all, the dumber the population, the more demogogues can run the country--and no police force to stop 'em.

If you're against the "public option", know what it means--you get to opt in if you want. It's simply one of many options, most of which are still private. This is the gist of the possible legislation being discussed in Congress. So, why don't we take the 20% overhead costs insurance companies now stick us with (besides telling us and our doctors how to care for us) and put those savings into the public option? And, btw, have this option run by a non-profit--the way insurance used to be.

Most countries on the planet have universal healthcare--and it works. So, if the US can't do it, doesn't that say the US a) isn't as good as other countries b) doesn't care about its workers c) doesn't care about businesses staying in the US.

Did you know that, according to Article VI of the US Constitution, treaties become the law of the land. In several US treaties, the right to healthcare has been among them. Go to http://www.righttohealthcare.org/index.htm for more info. So, in essence, it's already a right which we are being denied.

Physicians for Healthcare Change

2009-07-31T09:54:00.003-05:00

450,000 Doctors are signed on to improve healthcare; 6 senators may be derailing it. Click the header to see a video from healhealthcarenow. Then call and email the infamous six who are listed in this article. I'd much rather have a non-profit running my healthcare than any of the existing insurance companies.

Check out Bernie Sanders' healthcare comments at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZgERFqZglw.

10 Outrageous Claims About Climate Change

2009-07-02T09:57:00.003-05:00

10 Outrageous Claims (from Environmental Defense Fund):

10) "Wake up, America. There hasn't been any global warming, which is what we heard over and over and over again – there hasn't been any global warming for 10 years." – Rep. Dana Rohrabacker (R-CA)
No warming for 10 years? Well, not exactly true. 1998 was the 2nd hottest year on record while 2008 was only the 8th hottest. So, if you only look at those two years, you might assume there hasn't been any warming. But, 2005 was the hottest year on record and the warmest decade on record is 1998 through 2008. The trends are clear. The planet is warming. Period.
9) "You want to talk about a massive new welfare program for energy? It's in here too… It's a whole new welfare program for energy." – Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR)
If you want to talk welfare, what about the hundreds of billions the oil, gas and coal industries have received in subsidies and tax breaks over the years?
8) "God has put us on this Earth as responsible stewards of these resources, and we ought to use them responsibly. This bill does not do it. In fact, it does nothing good. The only meaningful thing that it might do is provide a relatively meaningless photo op for our President in December in Copenhagen as he stands to brag about what America has done while the leaders of India and China laugh at us behind his back." – Rep. Mike Conaway (R-TX)
We look forward to working with Rep. Conaway to strengthen this bill and to fight for the strongest possible international global warming treaty later this year.
7) "Energy producing states like Oklahoma will be economically punished and devastated." – Rep Tom Cole (R-OK)
Rep. Cole should have a look at climate models showing that Oklahoma could spend nearly the entire summer with 100+ temperatures by the end of the century. Talk about devastating.
6) "We should not be the first lemming to jump off the cliff." – Rep. Doc Hasting (R-WA)
That's an interesting point given that the U.S. is the only industrial country in the world that never ratified the Kyoto global warming treaty and that much of Europe is operating under a carbon cap right now.
5) "[For some, this bill is an] economic death sentence." – Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA)
As opposed to the current economy in which we are held hostage by our reliance on foreign oil and in which only last summer we saw gas prices exceed $4/gallon.
4) "The whole point of cap-and-trade is to make fossil fuels, or 85 percent of the energy we consume, more expensive." – Rep. Glenn Thompson (R-PA)
No, the point of this bill is to cap global warming pollution, put Americans back to work building out our clean energy future, and free us from our dangerous dependence on foreign oil.
3) "Do you want to throw away the economic prosperity for nothing, because that's what this bill does. And for what, to satisfy the twisted desires of radical environmentalists." – Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA)
With millions of Americans out of work and the economy in recession, it might not be the best time to talk about "throwing away our economic prosperity" or to support the status quo.
2) "[This will bring us back to] hunting and gathering." – Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI)
Yeah, when we look at solar panels, hybrids and windmills, that's exactly what comes to mind – hunting and gathering societies.
1) "The idea of human induced global climate change is one of the greatest hoaxes perpetrated out of the scientific community. It is a hoax… We need to be good stewards of our environment, but this is not it, it’s a hoax!" – Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA)
A global conspiracy involving thousands of scientists taking tens of thousands of measurements on everything ranging from ice core samples to the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere to sea level rise, hundreds of governments around the world working to address global warming pollution, dozens of science academies that have endorsed the reality of global warming and urged action, as well as hundreds of millions of people around the world who have joined the movement to promote global warming action.
And, we're all coordinating our activities to push this hoax because…?

Who Really Benefits from Tax Cuts?

2009-06-22T16:55:00.010-05:00

"While campaigning for Harry Truman in 1948, [Ronald] Reagan attacked corporate greed, defended the common man, and lambasted the Republican Congress for tax cuts that he charged were skewed toward the wealthy." 1

In Wealth and Democracy, Kevin Phillips discusses the inequality enjoyed by the uberwealthy. "As aggravating as Phillips finds this 'morphing of politics into a marketplace,' he is more concerned that the corporate elite makes most of its money off finance, tax avoidance and shifty speculation, adding little to the true wealth of the nation. 'Market theology and unelected leadership,' he concludes, 'have been displacing politics and elections. Either democracy must be renewed, with politics brought back to life, or wealth is likely to cement a new and less democratic regime -- plutocracy by some other name." 2

A little history lesson about US Taxation & Tax Rates: 3

1. During Colonial Times, most of the Federal Govt's tax revenue came from tarifs, excise taxes, and custom duties. States taxed using a variety of methods: import/export taxes, property taxes and "head" taxes.
2. In the Post Revolutionary Era, the new govt had few responsibilities & no nationwide tax. States could levy taxes as they pleased. By 1789, the Founding Fathers recognized that no govt could function if it relied solely on other governments for its resources. The Constitution included the power to "…lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises, pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States." The collection of taxes was the responsibility of the states. Thus, Congress levied excise taxes on liquor, tobacco, sugar, carriages, etc. to pay for the war.
3. From 1817 until the Civil War, Congress imposed no internal revenue, relying instead on high customs duties & the sale of public land.
4. When the Civil War erupted, Congress passed the Revenue Act of 1861. This was a combination excise tax and a tax on personal income (3% of all incomes higher than $800/yr.). A year later, due to high war costs, they added more items to the excise tax & set up a two-tiered tax rate: Incomes up to $10,000 were taxed at 3% and higher incomes at 5%. A $600 standard deduction as well as a few other deductions were also added. For the first time, taxes were deducted at the source--by employers. After the war, most taxes were repealed. From 1868-1913, nearly 90% of all revenue was collected from excise taxes.
5. 1913 & the 16th Amendment. Congress passed an excise tax on business income and 36 states ratified the Amendment to allow the Feds to impose taxes on individuals' income. Rates were progressive, from 1-7%, the highest being for incomes in excess of $500,000. (Note: less than 1% of the population paid income taxes at this time).
6. WWW1 & the 1920's caused a need for more money. The tax rate in 1918 went to 6-77%, the highest for taxpayers earning over $1.5 million (Note: 5% of the population paid income taxes). During the booming 20's, tax rates fell back down, with the highest income earners down to 25%.
7. The Great Depression saw federal revenue drop from $6.6 billion to $2.7 billion, so Congress passed the Tax Act of 1932, dramatically increasing tax rates again. Another tax increase in 1936 saw the lowest tax rate at 4% and the highest at 79%. The Social Security Act in 1935 was financed by a 2% tax (1/2 from a worker's paycheck, the other 1/2 from employers on behalf of their employees).
8. WWW2 saw the need for big defense spending & support of anti-axis programs; the bottom $500 income earners now faced a tax rate of 23% while incomes over $1 million paid 94% tax rates. (Note: 4 million paid taxes in 1939; 43 million did so in 1945).
9. Post WW2: the maximum tax rate in 1954 remained at 87% of taxable income. The economy remained subject to frequent boom and bust cycles, so policy makers continued a pattern of raising & lowering taxes and adjusting aggregate demand thru spending.
10. The Economic Recovery Act of 1981 offered a 25% reduction in individual tax brackets, with the top tax rate at 50%. Businesses also enjoyed a tax depreciation change as well as a 10% investment tax credit. The new theory was that by reducing marginal tax rates, businesses would put more money into new opportunities instead of pocketing the profits. The other change was that of shifting away from income taxation and toward taxing consumption. The Federal Reserve altered monetary policy and the economy fell into a deep recession in 1982 and produced high budget deficits. In 1984, some of the cuts were pared back, esp. on the business side.
11. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 tried to simplify the tax system but resulted in a downturn in the economy and played a significant role in the collapse of the Savings & Loan industry. The top individual tax rate was now 28% and taxes once again shifted back to income taxation. From 1986-1990, high levels of govt spending with their resulting deficits created higher pressures to increase taxes. In 1990, the top tax rate shifted up to 31%; in 1993 it rose to 36% w/a 10% surcharge (thus the real rate was 39.6%).
12. The Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 provided a modest tax cut by offering a tax cut for certain families with children. It was the first tax change that provided refundable credits. The system also shifted back to consumption taxes. Despite higher tax rates in the 90's, the economy performed strongly.
13. Economic Growth and Tax Relief and Reconciliation Act of 2001 halted the $281 billion budget surplus, with a tax rate drop back to 33%. The tax cut was almost devoid of business tax provisions and continued the move toward a consumption tax. In 2004, 60% of the tax cuts went to the top 20% of income earners and over 25% going to the top 1% of income earners. 4
14. The 2009 Economic Stimulus Bill introduced the biggest tax cut ever: $282 billion over 2 years. These are short term refunds paid to working and middle class families. Remember, in 2007, the average American household paid $22,100 in federal taxes; in 1965, after adjusting for inflation, the average was $10,800.

The current tax code contains over 5.6 million words--seven times as many words as the Bible. 5 Talk has occured for years that the code should be simplified by a flat tax rate, where, for instance, everyone pays 19%--everyone, rich, poor, middle class. A progressive flat tax might be more fair because I believe this simply isn't enough to cover the deficits which the last administration saddled us with. The rich can afford to pay taxes; the poor cannot.

Economist Paul Krugman wrote an article last month about the Reagan years. He points out that the rich got richer, working families saw meager gains, and for the first time during a non-war period, the govt went on a spending spree. The S&L crisis, fueled by deregulation, ended up costing taxpayers over $130 billion--that was when this was a lot of money. New Deal restrictions were eliminated, fueling increased debt by Americans. This explosion of debt made the US economy weak. Who benefits? I guess it must be the financial institutions. If you recall, George & Jeb Bush owned a Colorado S&L back in the 80's which we bailed out; Tim Geitner was president of the NY Federal Reserve, which probably means close ties to Wall Street, which we've bailed out. Go figure.

Sources:
1. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/6/5/8/0/p65800_index.html
2. SF Chronicle book review by Theodore Roszak, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/06/02/RV207386.DTL.
3. http://www.treasury.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.shtml
4. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_02/016863.php
5. http://www.hoover.org/research/focusonissues/focus/17442454.html
6. http://www.sodahead.com/blog/85527/reagan-did-it/

Healthcare Reform Brought to it's Knees--By Democrats?!?

2009-06-22T15:34:00.005-05:00

In today's NYT, Paul Krugman berates "centrist" Democrats who are fighting healthcare reform, particularly the public option, despite the fact that public option has overwhelming support of the American public. 1

Examples:

Sen. Ben Nelson (NB) initially declared public option "dead". Why? Because then private insurers couldn't compete. Duh. Are we protecting American citizens or insurance companies?
Sen. Kent Conrad (ND) says we can't get a public option because no Republicans will go for it. Guess what? No Republicans went for Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid. They have a nearly perfect track record of voting against any sort of national healthcare since the 1930's. 2

Could it be that special interest lobbying (by healthcare companies) has been part of the problem? FiveThirtyEight.com 3 has some interesting statistics of which this graph is one:

Senate rankings and PAC money taken:

The Republican response to healthcare? From USA Today:

The GOP plan relies on...replacing the current unlimited exemption from taxes of
employer-provided insurance with a refundable tax credit of $5,700 for a family,
or $2,300 for an individual, that people get regardless of whether their health
coverage comes through an employer. The idea is to introduce market forces
into health care to hold down costs that are soaring unsustainably. Here's how
it would work: The government would essentially pay for the first $5,700 in
coverage for a family through the credit, and the family would pay the rest out
of pocket. With the average family plan costing $12,700 now, that is a major cost. An employer could contribute, but with workers having to pay tax on the benefit, the employer might as well convert it to pay. The upside is that having Americans pay for more of their medical needs with their own money would give people incentive to shop around when looking for insurance or having procedures done, putting
pressure on providers to control costs. The downside is that millions of people who are now covered through their employers could be left on their own. 4

I'll say. What a great deal for companies! They're the only ones who benefit. So, suddenly millions of American workers will no longer have health care, along with the 44+ million who currently don't have any. This is an improvement? What are they smoking?!?! And forget about pre-existing conditions; I could shop 'til I drop and still be unable to find any insurer who would cover me for breast cancer. And if I had had to pay for my previous care, I too would be in foreclosure and homeless....

Sources:

1. See NYT/CBS poll at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/21/health/policy/21poll.html?fta=y

2. NYT, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/22/opinion/22krugman.html

3. http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/special-interest-money-means-longer.html

4. http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/05/on-health-care-republicans-move-beyond-just-say-no.html

Thoreau's Legacy

2009-06-22T11:53:00.005-05:00

A new interactive book is available (http://www.ucsusa.org/americanstories/) containing real person accounts regarding climate change. The TOC includes Open Spaces, Tales from Urban America, Faith and Convictions, etc. It's a joint project by the UCS (Union of Concerned Scientists) & Penguin Books. The House of Representatives is voting this week on a bill that could start to set us on the right path, so be sure to call your rep today!

Healthcare Options

2009-06-11T16:29:00.007-05:00

Why do Americans think universal healthcare leads to socialism? Is universal health care part of the Communist Manifesto and, if so, is that a bad thing? Is healthcare a Right or a Privilege to the rich? Should healthcare be a profit-run industry or non-profit?

Have Americans been sold a bill of goods? During the last 50 years, Americans have been educated (re-educated?) to abhor socialism, marxism, liberalism--pretty much all "isms". We learned to crouch under our school desks in case of a nuclear attack, to "just say no", to learn the color-coded alert system for terrorism. In the meantime, we lost sight of the real issues surrounding our lives: the environment, energy, good-paying jobs, election finance reform, corporate monopolies, healthcare, education. We allowed companies & municipalities to pollute, did very little to change our use of fossil fuels, and did nothing about the last 5 in the above list. Americans have been "dumbed down." (For an interesting study on declining schooling, go to YourDictionary.com.)

According to Online Journal, "...people who read to begin with, newspapers in particular, are already higher on the intelligence chart, because they’re looking for information, i.e., the truth in print, a proactive not passive medium. As newspapers dumb down the truth, they may gain a transitory readership. In the long run, though, it’s the kiss of death. Many of those kinds of readers will abandon them at some point for something even dumber."

But I digress. I just read The Communist Manifesto and I didn't find any mention of national healthcare. This document talks about the abolition of private property and about free education for all children in public schools. But nothing about healthcare.

Is healthcare a Right or a Privilege? If you read the Constitution, you won't find anything about health care in it. Until you get to the 8th Amendment, where, as part of the "cruel and unusual punishment" clause, the Supreme Court affirmed that POWs were guaranteed a right to health care. Currently, prisoners are the only group specifically granted a right to health care. So, should it be a privilege to only those who can buy it? An interesting point on this was made by Laura Knoy of NHPR:

"Here at home, medical statistics have shown that degraded diet, water, and air quality are responsible for billions of dollars in AVOIDABLE health care costs. That degradation has happened largely without citizen involvement in the decisions that brought it about."

200 years ago, most Americans lived shorter lives, rarely saw a doctor, and, when they did, could often barter for the treatment. Fast-forward to today and you see that, were the Founding Fathers around, they'd be aghast. We have a government run highway system, a government run education system, but we can't keep our family healthy in order to get
to school? Now, universal healthcare doesn't have to be government run. It could be run by a non-profit organization, for example. Why should we pay insurance companies
over 30% admin costs while Medicare does the same on 3%? I believe it's France where
doctors are paid a bonus to keep their patients well. What an idea!

So, instead of thinking of this as a Right vs. a Privilege, how about looking at it from a cost analysis position?

1. The U.S. spends far more per capita on health care than any other nation (and health care costs continue to soar): $2.4 trillion dollars (18 percent of our GDP).
2. More than 18,000 Americans die every year from preventable illnesses
because they do not get to the doctor when they should. This impacts where they
work & their capacity for spending.
3. The average American spends about $7,900 per year on health care.
4. General Motors spends more on health care per automobile than on steel
5. Despite the fact that we spend almost twice as much per person on health care as any other country, our health care outcomes lag behind many other nations.
6. Over the last three decades, the number of administrative personnel has grown by 25 times the numbers of physicians.
7. From 2003 to 2007, the combined profits of the nation's major health insurance companies increased by 170 percent.
8. CEO compensation for the top seven health insurance companies now averages $14.2 million.
9. Our current private health insurance system is the most costly, wasteful, complicated and bureaucratic in the world.
10. In 2008, employer health insurance premiums increased by 5.0 percent – two times the rate of inflation. The annual premium for an employer health plan covering a family of four averaged nearly $12,700. The annual premium for single coverage averaged over $4,700.
11. Health care spending accounted for 10.9 percent of the GDP in Switzerland, 10.7 percent in Germany, 9.7 percent in Canada and 9.5 percent in France, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

I've heard all sorts of ideas, of which these are the latest:

1. The Single-payer option. According to Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP),"Single-payer national health insurance is a system in which a single public or quasi-public agency organizes health financing, but delivery of care remains
largely private."
2. The Public Option. A government run health care program. This could mean extending Medicare to the under-65 crowd. A new study by the Commonwealth Fund reports that Medicare recipients are more satisfied with their coverage, have better access, and fewer problems paying their bills than people covered by employer-sponsored plans.
3. Member-run Health Cooperatives. According to Bloomberg news, "It would allow non-profits to negotiate directly with health-care providers for low-cost rates. The plans they offer would be sold, like private plans, through Internet-based exchanges where consumers could buy insurance at lower-cost, group rates....the cooperatives could be chartered by either the federal government or the states, and that they could receive federal seed money."

Sources:
1. YDC, YourDictionary.com on grade level declines since 1858.
2. PNHP on Single-Payer Options.
3. Clark & Amiot, The impact of the Reagan Administration on Federal Education
Policy.
4. Online Journal, http://onlinejournal.com
5. Bernie Sanders at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-bernie-sanders/health-care-is-a-right-no_b_212770.html.
6. http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml
7. http://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/publications/US_healthcare/Executive_Summary.asp

8. http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/In-the-Literature/2009/May/Meeting-Enrollees-Needs.aspx

An Inconvenient House

2009-05-25T10:49:00.006-05:00

In March, 2007, the big news story was that Al Gore, famous for travelling the world preaching environmentalism and his movie An Inconvenient Truth, himself owned one of the least energy-efficient homes in Nashville. What was not reported was the fact that it was under renovations at the time and, by Dec. of the same year, had a LEED-rated Gold house (see US Green Building Rates). He installed solar panels, a rain-water collection system, and geothermal heating. His 80-year old home is now one of the nation's most environmentally friendly.

So what's YOUR environmental footprint?

Sure, you don't have Al's millions, but what have you done to try to reduce, reuse & recycle? Energy conservation is the fastest way to reduce waste. Some examples:

1. If every American reduced the amount of animal products eaten by half, we'd use 645 million fewer global acres.
2. If every American reduced their purchasing to products with less packaging or were made from 100% post consumer content, we'd use 521 million fewer global acres.
3. If every American took a local vacation instead of flying, we'd use 63 million fewer global acres.
4. If every American used less paper, it could reduce landfill waste by 30-40%.

"Making your ecological footprint smaller can also be greatly assisted by the three R's: reduce, reuse, and recycle. Try to reduce the amount of resources you use by purchasing items with minimal packaging, and avoiding products you do not use. Reuse empty containers, take advantage of thrift stores, and find creative ways to bring new life to old belongings. Finally, recycle unwanted items, either in curbside recycling or in the form of donations to thrift stores.

To reduce your ecological footprint even further, think about more extreme lifestyle changes. Live in a smaller house, or share the space in your house with more people. Change your diet: animal products are far less efficient than plant products and require far more energy to produce. Fly less; commercial airplanes are a huge source of carbon emissions damaging our environment. Start growing a garden, and encourage others to do the same."1

Food Suggestions:

Eat less beef, pork, and lamb
Eat out at restaurants less often
Eat fewer dairy products
Drink fewer soft drinks
Eat seasonal and local fruits and vegetables
Eat fewer packaged snacks and junk food
Upgrade to an energy efficient refrigerator
Eat wild fish that are not endangered
Drink less bottled water
Walk to your local farmers market or grocery store

2

Sources:
1. http://www.wisegeek.com/how-can-i-reduce-my-ecological-footprint.htm
2. http://eatdrinkbetter.com/2009/05/06/10-ways-to-reduce-your-environmental-footprint-through-food-choices/

Mistruth & Misinformation

2009-05-07T13:20:00.002-05:00

Can you really believe what you see with your own eyes? Apparently not.

And this:

Health Insurance & History

2009-04-06T15:56:00.013-05:00

We should learn from history, but do we? Do we listen to possible misinformation from a select number of sources, or do we actively seek knowledge? Do we really try to understand, or refuse to change once forming an opinion?

Take the issue of universal health care in America. Did you know:

American health insurance, until the last couple of decades, used to be non-profit?
Around 1920, the chief cost associated with illness was not the cost of medical care, but the loss of time from work
Compulsory, nationalized health insurance, first proposed in the 1920's, failed mostly because of opposition by commercial insurance companies, pharmacists, and physicians.
Medical costs in the US began to rise significantly due to stricter requirements, licensing, and medical education--proposed by the AMA and ACS. Stricter requirements caused fewer schools to meet those requirements and restricted physician supply.
Medical expenses from hospitalization increased dramatically, so that, by 1934 they had risen to nearly 40% of a family's medical bill.
Blue Cross was the first pre-paid insurance plan for hospital care, founded by a group of Dallas teachers and Baylor University Hospital.
Physicians, alarmed that Blue Cross would move into the area of physician services, created a series of plans that finally merged into Blue Shield; they could retain their power to price discriminate by charging different prices to different patients.
Commercial companies saw that the non-profits were working and jumped on the bandwagon; since they weren't non-profit, they could charge sicker people higher premiums and healthy people lower premiums. They undercut the non-profits and grew swiftly.
In 1942, Congress limited wage increases in the Stabilization Act, but permitted the adoption of employer-provided insurance plans. Two major rulings reinforced this type of system in 1945 & 1949.
In 1958, nearly 75% of Americans had some form of private health insurance coverage.
Between 2001 & 2003, the percent of employers offering health insurance fell from 67% to 63%.
The drop in retiree benefits has gone from 70% in 1985 to 36% in 2000.
In percentage of one-year-old children fully immunized against polio, we are number seventeen.
There are lower rates of low birth weight babies born in Egypt and Jordan than here at home.

The AMA has consistently opposed any form of national health care, suggesting that such proposals were socialistic, would interfere with physician income, and affect the doctor-patient relationship. It fought against proposals in 1935 (under the Social Security Act) & helped defeat the Murray-Wagner-Dingell Bill in 1949 (which would have provided health insurance to all Americans). To help defeat the latter, they charged every physician who was a member $25 for their lobbying efforts!

It would not be until 1965 that Medicare was passed, a program automatically enrolling anyone 65 and over (Part A) & subsidized insurance for physicians services (Part B). Medicaid was enacted to provide medical resources for the indigent. Until 1983, Medicare reimbursements were done by what was "usual and customary." This changed to a set fee schedule by the government. Medicaid expenditures remained fairly constant until eligibility requirements were changed in the 1990's.

The US spends 16% of its gross domestic product on health care, but more than 46 million people are without coverage (at a time when only two other countries, Switzerland and Germany, put out more than 10 percent). 1 in 4 Americans have trouble paying for medical care. The US healthcare system is the most expensive in the world, but is ranked 37th in a WHO report (France ranked #1).

Averaging over the first years of the new millennium, the United States spends circa $5,200 per person on healthcare. Canada $2,900; Germany $2,800; Switzerland $2,600; Britain $2,200. Yet, each of them boasts of a longer life expectancy, lower infant mortality, and better U5MRs than we. All have a national healthcare service that covers all their people.

The United States has 2.9 hospital beds per 1,000 residents compared with 3.7 beds/1,000 in the average OECD nation; 2.4 physicians per 1,000 people compared to 3.1/1,000; 7.9 nurses/1,000 compared to 8.9/1,000 among the others. The U.S. has 12.9 CT scanners per one million population compared with 13.3 elsewhere in the developed world. We do have more magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) machines than the other OECD nations listed, but ours are only in use ten hours daily, compared to fourteen in the others.

A common misconception among Americans is that European systems are similar to each other but vastly different from the US. They are all different. "In fact, the Americans and the French both distrust “socialized medicine.” Both peoples cherish patient choice, independent physicians, medical practice freedoms, and private insurers in a qualitatively different way than the Canadians, the British, and many others." 2

"The European countries' systems are actually all very different, and they're not all single-payer models," Stoll says. (Kathleen Stoll, director of health policy at Families USA)

"It isn't just European countries, however, that have employed diverse methods for financing universal healthcare. In addition to the U.K., Canada, Japan and Taiwan also have opted for single-payer systems. Australia joins Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland on a list of countries that have adopted a multipayer approach to funding universal healthcare.

"Under single-payer models, taxpayers and employers pay into a national healthcare fund, and money from that fund is used to pay for every citizen's primary care, hospitalization and, in most cases, prescriptions. The fund compensates medical providers and hospitals and pays for medical technology, including, typically, a shared electronic health-record database. Coverage may or may not require patient copayments.

Pluralistic or multipayer models use a mixture of private and public funds to create a system that guarantees coverage to all citizens. Employers have the option to provide free or subsidized coverage for their workers or pay into a government healthcare fund that will provide free or subsidized coverage. Tax dollars are also used to create or subsidize insurance plans for workers who are not covered by their employers. Those workers as well as self-employed citizens can select and buy into affordable plans, while low-income or unemployed residents receive subsidized or free coverage similar to the way Medicaid operates in the U.S.
Healthcare policy analysts interviewed by Modern Healthcare mostly agreed that a single-payer system would be a more challenging approach to universal healthcare in the U.S. given the entrenched nature of for-profit insurance companies and the existence of a well-established and complex multipayer system. What's more, the U.S.' population is more than 4.5 times the size of Germany, the next most-populated nation examined in the Commonwealth Fund's report, so system size alone will have a great bearing on the effectiveness of a financing approach. But experts say there are lessons to be gleaned about price controls, care coordination and quality-improvement mechanism from each approach." 6

Countries such as Switzerland & the Netherlands have established universal healthcare systems where 100% of citizens are covered by private insurance providers--debunking the idea that all healthcare must be government run. Citizens in these countries can choose between private & government-employed providers. In the Netherlands, employers pay 50% of monthly costs & employees 50%. Tax credits help citizens finance premiums & low-income citizens receive subsidies. Swiss citizens get tax & pension-fund subsidies; low-income citizens get additional subsidies.

Why does the US still not have universal health care? The one constant (besides antisocialist propaganda, a weak labor union, & racial politics) throughout all this is that powerful interest groups have used every weapon possible to fight it. For the first 1/2 of the 20th century it was physicians groups, allied with hospital administrators, large manufacturers, and insurers. By the 1970's, it was the insurance industry lobbying against national healthcare and controlling key Congressional committees.

The former chief executive of HCA Inc. unveiled a $20 million campaign to pressure Democrats to enact health-care legislation based on free-market principles 7
Health Care Industry Spent $445M on Federal Lobbying in 2007 8
Since 2006, the health sector has spent more money on lobbyingthan any other sector of the economy 9
Billy Tauzin, a Republican congressman from Louisiana and chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, played a key role in the passage of an industry-friendly Medicare prescription drug bill. His payoff was to trade his seat in Congress for the lucrative role of leadership of PhRMA, the lobbying arm of the pharmaceutical industry. 10
Finance Committee Chair, Sen. Max Baucus (D-Montana) was also key in brokering 2003 Medicare reform. Named "K Street's Favorite Democrat", perhaps it was a Freudian slip when Sen. Baucus explained, "Merck is not ready for single pay. I mean, America." (between 2003-2008 Baucus was the recipient of $588,185 from the insurance industry & $523,313 from the pharmaceutical/health product industry - in fact, the leading Democratic recipient of corporate largesse).11

Guess what healthcare benefits the 535 members of the U.S. Congress and the few hundred in the upper executive and judicial branches of government get?

unlimited doctor office visits of your choosing
covers all accidents, routine exams, physical therapy, labs and X-rays
unlimited hospital visits and stays
certain chronic care and rehab
full prescription coverage
unlimited specialty consultations.
There are no deductibles, no co-pays, and only a $35 monthly fee taken from an annual salary of $158,000.
For the employee and the entire family.
full pension and continued coverage until their deaths

And who retired with a $1.6 billion option package at a time when more than 40 million Americans lack health insurance? CEO William McGuire from UnitedHealth Group.
Or who received an $83 million pension plan in 2008? CEO Hank McKinnell, Pfizer.

Sources:
1. http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/thomasson.insurance.health.us
2. http://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/cup_detail.taf?ti_id=4724
3. One Nation, Uninsured, by Jill S. Quadagno, Oxford Univ Press, 2005, pg 202.
4. Practicing Medicine Without a License, Don Sloan, M.D., 2007.
5. http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=1481
6. Why over there isn't over here, Rhea, Shawn, Modern Healthcare; 3/31/2008, Vol. 38 Issue 13, p32-34.
7. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123561083268377547.html
8. http://www.healthfreedom.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=437&Itemid=
9. http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/359/13/1313
10. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michele-swenson/dems-repubs-on-health-car_b_179668.html

Is Nuclear the Bomb?

2009-03-30T16:20:00.011-05:00

Once the price of oil started to affect the economy, the nuclear energy folks started seeing light at the end of the tunnel. "Hey," they pointed out,"why don't we switch from oil to nuclear? It's cheaper, safer, and keeps jobs in the good ole US of A." So, let's look at the nuclear option as an alternative. The graphic to the left shows the location of plants today. I'm sure this post misses some issues, so don't hesitate to let me know. I was surprised by what I found in my research already!

1. Costs ($ varies since some references are a few years old; figure higher)

Stockpile of Potassium Iodide pills for the entire population (a drug capable of preventing radioactive iodine from lodging in the thyroid.)
Transport or reprocessing of spent fuel rods--costs unknown, since the US has never reprocessed spent fuel rods.
Building of nuclear plant itself--takes 7-12 years to build at a cost of $8 billion
Operating Costs of plant have decreased but profits risen; includes cost to hire, train & manage employees (couldn't find this online but assuming 1600 employees averaging $40k= $64 million (and that's not including bonuses, high-paid CEO's, lobbyists & advertising).
Decommissioning the plant--$300 million
Mining, processing & transport of uranium. The price of uranium has jumped and the world currently produces about 100 million pounds a year. In order to supply new plants alone, we'd need 135 million pounds a year.
Water usage--didn't think about this one, did you? All energy-generating stations require massive amounts of water; water is a valuable resource and costs money to pump in & out. Nuclear power currently uses the most.
Enrichment facilities--just one of these, in Paducah, KY, requires the electrical output of two 1000-megawatt coal-fired plants. These plants emit a ton of carbon dioxide which is the gas responsible for much of our problems regarding climate change.

2. Safety

The NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) doesn't know--even today--how much radiation was released at Three Mile Island.
At the time, the public was told there was no meltdown in the core; a large portion of the fuel did melt.
The government promised meticulous studies on the health impact after the accident at TMI; in fact, the state of PA did it's best to hide data & the feds failed to track the health histories of residents. Why would we think differently today?
Ongoing research by radiologist Dr. Ernest Sternglass & statistician Jay Gould indicates that releases of radiation far less than those at TMI would have catastrophic impacts on local populations
Transport accidents can and will happen.
Michigan's Fermi 2 just closed for a month because of vibrations

3. Job Creation

Construction workers to build the plant--~2300, depending on size. Though this is questionable given the new modular building techniques--they could be shipped from China.
Engineers to plan the project--and there's a shortage of these
Employees on the job= ~800-1600/plant

4. Security

A terrorist attack on any nuclear plant would be like the meltdown at Chernobyl.
Imagine a terrorist attack while nuclear materials are in transport in a major city.

5. Waste

Spent Fuel Rods--4 options for spent rods exist: transport, store, vitrify or reprocess. Chicago alone is sitting on 1000 tons of highly radioactive fuel from the scuttled Zion Nuclear Power Station. Spent fuel rods from a nuclear reactor are the most radioactive of all nuclear wastes. U-238 has a half-life of 4.6 billion years; the half-life of plutonium is about 24,000 years.
Industry waste--paper, gloves, equipment, etc. that needs to be disposed. One problem: they're radioactive.

6. Transport
Transporting of construction equipment, employees, radioactive materials, spent rods, etc., has a myriad of costs, environmental, and safety issues. Just to build Yucca Mountain is estimated by the DOE at about $96 billion. Under the current administration's budget cuts, Yucca may be all but killed. So that means the expense of local containment or reprocessing.

(Data at left from USA Today, 3/30/09)

Liberalism, Socialism, Communism and other 'isms'

2009-03-21T12:44:00.004-05:00

Over the past 8 years, if you paid any attention to the news and politics at all, you soon realized that the "response du jour" was "if anyone criticizes us, let's do a character assassination." Let's not show evidence of our actions, but attack the person who dares to question them. Some examples:

Joe Wilson (found no evidence of "yellowcake" from Niger which the admin. ignored)1
Valerie Plame (wife to Joe Wilson & a CIA operative, outed by Libby & Cheney) 2
Cindy Sheehan (populist protester villified by the right) 3
Dan Rather (for accusing bush of being a deserter) 4
Michael Moore (for going to Cuba even though journalists are allowed to) 5
Saddam Hussein (accused of WMD's & involvement in 9/11, none of which was true)6
Jimmy Carter (opposed to the Iraqi War) 7
Keith Olbermann (on just about any topic) 8

There are so many, the list seems endless. So now the tables are turned and the right-wing dominated media 9 is on the attack against liberals. Some examples:

Hannity falsely asserted Dems "voted for those bonuses" while GOP did not
Limbaugh defends AIG bonuses following attacks on "insane" UAW benefits
Beck says it is "absolutely wrong" that AIG bonuses are "wildly unpopular"
Limbaugh thinks it's "hilarious"that three "idiots" are about to die in the North Pole looking for evidence of climate change
Savage claims the "radical left" including Obama, dreams of a "Maoist revolution" with "death camps" 10

The conservative media is accusing Obama, his administration, and anyone else in support of the administration, of "McCarthyism, socialism, ponzi-scheming, political grand-standing, and class warfare" to name just a few. 11 And horror of horrors, when actual clips are replayed later from these "talking heads" in the media, they freak out and attack those who replay their clips! Like Media Matters' president Eric Burns. 12 Heaven forbid someone airs their lies and misinformation! Now that the White House no longer replies to its critics with personal attacks, the media has apparently taken up the gauntlet.

Sources:
1. http://www.nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2005/1122nj1.htm
2.http://www.nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2005/1122nj1.htm
3. http://www.democraticwings.com/democraticwings/archives/politics/002059.php
4. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/11/19-2
5. http://thinkprogress.org/2007/07/27/subpoena-moore/
6. http://www.nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2005/1122nj1.htm and http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3119676.stm
7. abcnews.go.com/GMA/Story?id=2513387&page=1
8. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15147009/
9. http://media.eriposte.com/2-8.htm
10. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPzQR2nfMSI
11. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPzQR2nfMSI
12. http://mediamatters.org/countyfair/200903190037?lid=951962&rid=24477954

What are we doing in Afghanistan?

2009-03-20T16:12:00.004-05:00

As we send additional troops into Afghanistan (55,000 total), what will they do? When the US first went into this country, it was for the purpose of finding Osama bin Laden (responsible for 9/11) and for eliminating the extremist Taliban. The population is over 70% illiterate, over 60% of its children are born malnourished, and they provide about 90% of the world's opium. The country is a poor country with a mix of clans where rival militias vie for influence.

In Sept of 1994, Pakistan appointed the Taliban (Sunnis) to protect trade convoys. Two years later, the Taliban is strong enough to take over the city of Kabul & order a strict interpretation of Islamic rule. They also offer shelter to Osama bin Laden. After 9/11, the Taliban are scattered, but not eliminated. Many reside along the Afghan-Pakistan border and, once the US is distracted by the illegal Iraqi invasion, began to expand its influence again.

Many in the Taliban are trained in religious schools in Pakistan. A large part of their support comes from the Pashtun community (where most hail from) and because of early successes stamping out corruption in the country. Their biggest goal, however, was to set up the world's purest Islamic state. This meant banning television & music, forbidding girls from going to school or working, eliminating women's access to healthcare (in a country where a large percentage of healthcare workers were women) and reinstating public executions & amputations for crime control.

Despite this, both Pakistan and Saudi Arabia continued to support the Taliban. After 9/11, they halted their official support. Additionally, Iran is suspected of helping the Taliban, though experts disagree on the amount of involvement.

You can check out a couple short videos about the situation in Afghanistan at YouTube. Frontline also did a series in 2006 (credit them with the photo on this post).

You can view Part 2 here:

Sources:
1. http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/organizations/t/taliban/index.html
2. http://www.infoplease.com/spot/taliban-time.html
3. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/144382.stm
4. http://www.cfr.org/publication/10551/
5. http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/17/obama.troops/

Did you know?

2009-03-13T17:09:00.009-05:00

It's Friday the 13th, one of my favorite days. Since Friday's are when politicians & certain news folks usually release the Big News of the day or week (so no one will see it because everyone has moved into weekend mode), let's do a recap.

Did you know...

1. That the US imported 339 million barrels of oil in Feb. '09, 62% of it from foreign countries, sending $13 billion overseas?
2. That the wealthiest Americans now have 35% tax rate (soon to be upped to 39.6%) while under Ronald Reagan they had 50%, under Nixon 70% and under Ike 91%?
3. That buildings in the US are responsible for 30% of the greenhouse gas emissions and 72% of all electricity use?
4. That Citigroup spent some of the $50 billion bailout money to organize big companies to defeat the Employee Free Choice Act (a bill that makes it easier for employees to form unions & bargain for higher wages)?
5. That the health care industry (insurance companies, etc.) has spent nearly $1 billion over the last 2 years just in lobbying?
6. That one in six homeowners will face foreclosure over the next 4 years?
7. That 1,4-dioxane, formaldehyde, or both were found in over 1/2 the samples tested for infant bubble bath & shampoo.
8. That coal plants are the single largest source of airborne mercury emissions in the world?
9. That US unemployment rose from 7.6 to 8.1% in February, with payrolls declining by 2.6 million in the past 4 months?
10. That over 1,180,207 hectares of arable land is lost due to soil erosion this year (the data keeps changing as the year progresses)?
11. That the US spent $2.4 trillion on health care (about $1928 per person) in 2006--that's 2.5 times more per person than any other developed country, yet the health of Americans lags behind those nations?

Sources:
1. The Pickens Plan at http://www.pickensplan.com/oilimports/.
2. The Washington Monthly, March 8, 2009.
3. Repower America, http://www.repoweramerica.org/plan/energy-efficiency/.
4. Credo Action via Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/12/citigroup-enters-union-fr_n_174106.html.
5. The Washington Post, March 8, 2009.
6. Credo Action, 3/10/09.
7. The Washington Post, 3/13/09.
8. Kansas Chapter Sierra Club, http://kansas.sierraclub.org/Wind/Coal-MercuryFactSheet.htm
9. Bureau of Labor Statistics, USDL, http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
10. Worldometers, world statistics updated in real time, http://www.worldometers.info/.
11. Reported by AP from Business Roundtable, 3/14/09 (ok I cheated a few hours on this one).

Key Features of the Jobs (Stimulus) Bill

2009-03-03T12:10:00.003-06:00

You can find information (including the actual bill) at recovery.gov. The above was posted (w/sources) by Daniel Mintz at moveon.org (click on the post title to go straight to the full article).

The Middle Class Task Force

2009-02-28T20:18:00.001-06:00

Go to http://www.whitehouse.gov/StrongMiddleClass/ to see what Joe Biden is doing on this task force. You can also submit ideas.

Two Santa Clauses and "Voodoo" Ecomomics

2009-02-10T11:59:00.004-06:00

Thom Hartmann wrote an excellent article detailing the economic maneuvers by Republicans over the last 30 years (click title link to see full article). He takes us from supply-side theorist Jude Wanniski thru George W. Bush, and how his theories propelled the Republicans into office for 30 years. Some facts that should make you stop & think:

1. To promise tax cuts in order to get elected (15% maximum on the rich under Bush)
2. To focus on the capital gains tax (rich folks plow their extra money in stocks, not jobs)
3. To ignore federal budget deficits (it was under a trillion dollars in 1980, but almost 3 trillion by 1988)
4. To cut the power of labor unions (represented 25% of the workplace in 1980 to about 8% today)

According to Hartmann, "In reality, his tax cuts did what they have always done over the past 100 years – they initiated a bubble economy that would let the very rich skim the cream off the top just before the ceiling crashed in on working people."

Sources:
Thom Hartmann,Two Santa Clauses or How the Republican Party Has Conned America for Thirty Years, http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/01/26-0

Who Watches the Watchmen?

2009-02-10T11:00:00.003-06:00

So, what does the Warner Bros movie, coming out next month, have to do with politics? If you have Rorschach or Ozymandias on your butt, who do you go for protection? These DC Comics comic books took the comic world by storm around the early 90's. 10 years later, we all fell asleep while our fearless leaders played havoc with the Constitution. Don't repeat history. Start watching the "watchmen."

Track your Senator and House Rep votes, so you're better informed.

Jobs and More Jobs

2009-02-08T12:19:00.004-06:00

The headlines have blared about it; the Senate and the White House phone lines have been jammed because of it. It's called a Stimulus Plan, but the common term should be a JOBS PLAN.

The way to improve the economy, as nearly every economist will tell you, is to sustain and create jobs. They'll also agree that "government spending is stimulative." 1 In January alone, over 1/2 million jobs were lost. That's 1/2 million folks now going on unemployment, facing foreclosure, and many without healthcare. This is not a bailout for big-salaried CEO's and, in fact, once the Jobs Bill is passed, you can go to a new Recovery website to see where your tax dollars are being spent.

The tax breaks (multi-millionaire Warren Buffett pays 18% while his receptionist pays 33% 2) over the last 8 years (and really, since the Reagan Administration) haven't worked for anyone except the rich.3 We're living proof of this. The rich have gotten richer, while the middle-class has eroded to a shadow of its former self. Trickle-down didn't work; it's time for trickle-up (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63Do7L1yh-I for Obama's video on a strong middle class). If you give a rich person $1000, he'll pocket it. If you give a poor person $1000, he'll pay his bills. Which one stimulates the economy?

Does job creation stimulate the economy? History has already shown that it does (witness the Great Depression, where 3 Republican administrations ran the country into debt and reduced oversight and regulation until Wall St. & banks collapsed). It took a Democrat (Roosevelt) to clean up the mess. 4

Sources:
1. Media Matters at http://by119w.bay119.mail.live.com/mail/InboxLight.aspx?FolderID=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000001&InboxSortAscending=False&InboxSortBy=Date&n=2062644410.
2. http://www.bestsyndication.com/?q=111507_warren_buffett_asks_government_for_tax_rate_increase_for_the_rich.htm
3.Citizens for Tax Justice, Year-by-Year Analysis of the Bush Tax Cuts, http://www.ctj.org/html/gwb0602.htm
4. Timelines of the Great Depression, http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/Timeline.htm

Inauguration Faces More Than History

2009-01-19T16:49:00.006-06:00

The swearing in of Barack Obama makes history as the first US black president. Winning the election with 53% of the vote and riding a hide tide of popularity (79%), he has already been working behind the scenes to make the transition as quickly as possible. 1

He faces a nightmare of problems: the continued and unpopular war in Iraq and Afghanistan, an economic depression, climate change, health care. He comes into office facing a record fiscal deficit--$455 billion for 2008, $1186 billion for 2009...in fact, the CBO's current report shows a continuing deficit through 2019. 2 In addition, the unemployment rate for December was the highest since before 1998. Payroll employment fell by over 1.9 million in the last 4 months of 2008. 3

Last year, 25 banks failed due to tumbling home prices, rising foreclosures, and tighter credit. That's more than in the previous 5 years combined. Two have failed this year already. 4

This year alone, more than $700 billion in corporate loans will come due. Many companies were hoping to borrow more money in order to move that debt further down the road. But the credit market has squeezed them out, just as they have consumers and homeowners. Even companies with strong credit ratings are paying about 5% more than the US govt to borrow money--double the premium they paid a year ago. 5

Where does this leave Obama? He'll have to work with a Congress that is upset with Wall Street for failing to show where the first $350 billion went (though most suspect it purchased other companies, shored up their own debt, and paid internal bonuses). If Wall Streeters fly their corporate jets to the next Congressional session, I hope he impounds them.

Sources:
1. Christian Science Monitor, http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/01/19/american-milestone-obama-inauguration-is-a-moment-of-celebration-reflection/.
2. Congressional Budget Office, http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=9957.
3. US Dept. of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?data_tool=latest_numbers&series_id=LNS14000000 and http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm.
4. http://www.13wmaz.com/article/20090117/NEWS04/90117003/1013
5. International Herald Tribune, http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/01/19/business/debt.1-410735.php.

The Power of Terror & Fear

2009-01-14T15:27:00.021-06:00

In 2005, the BBC created a documentary called The Power of Nightmares (available on the web & in about 17 ten-minute segments on YouTube). It discusses how specific individuals in the US felt liberalism led to selfishness and social decay; thus neoconservatism was born. The role of politicians, according to these neoconservatives, should be to create myths for the people--nations battling against evil, for instance--thus giving rise to the use of fear as a tool to control the attitudes of people and shape the future. This goal was to lead not only to the rise of neoconservatism, but also of radical Islamism. A synopsis follows, but this should be required viewing across the country (click on this blog title to get started).

According to the film, the neoconservatives had to defeat Henry Kissinger (Sec. of State at the time) and the results of detente in the Nixon Administration. So they allied themselves with members of the Ford Administration. One of them was Donald Rumsfeld, who became Secretary of Defense; the other was Dick Cheney, the President's Chief of Staff. Despite lack of proof, Rumsfeld used his position to set up an inquiry (called Team B) that Russia was arming itself against the US. They began examining all the available data, but couldn't find anything. So, the team insisted that, because they couldn't find anything, the Soviets had such a sophisticated system that we couldn't detect it! At the same time, the CIA saw evidence of a Soviet collapse. Who was right?

Far be it for Team B to give up. They set up a PR group called the Committee of Present Danger and began airing tv ads. One of their members was Ronald Reagan. The neoconservatives targeted conservative members and their religion. They urged the religious right to engage in politics and the result was neoconservatives found a position in the Reagan Administration.

The neoconservatives continued to push for proof that the Soviet Union was behind all terror in the world. When William Casey became head of the CIA, he asked for a document to give to the President proving this. The CIA responded that they didn't have any, that any information found in such books as The Terror Network, was made up--by the CIA. Casey had made up his mind, so he found a University professor, described as a terror expert, who created a dossier that such a terror network did, in fact, exist. Thus Reagan signed a secret document in 1983 that changed American foreign policy. America would fight covert wars to push back the Soviet threat.

So, can you wonder that the US helped the rebels in Afghanistan against the Soviets? CIA agents trained the Muhadeen in terror attacks, including car bombings. In addition, Arabs were called to join the fight, hence combining a disparate group of jihadists & extremists for the first time. This was in 1985 and included Osama bin Laden and Zuwahari (the radical implicated in the assassination of Anwar Sadat in 1979). These radicals started to believe that any politician or anyone participating in politics was setting themselves above the Koran and could legitimately be killed. Since America was the source of this corruption, it became the chief target.

In 1987, then Russian President Gorbachev decided to withdraw troops from Afghanistan and focus on the Soviet economy. Gorbachev asked the Americans for help negotiating a peace to create a stable Afghan govt, but hardliners in the US said "no." The future of that country would be with the "freedom fighters." Gorbachev warned the US that extremists would take over and not introduce democracy. His warning was ignored. Hence, both the US and the Muhadeen felt they were responsible for the downfall of the Soviet Union in 1989. The real reason the USSR collapsed was because it was a decrepit system.

Across the world, extreme Islamists rode to power. They believed the Koran was the absolute power; this could end democracy. In Algeria, elections were cancelled & the military stepped in to stop them. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood was banned from political power. To the extremists, this was proof of western corruption. Bin Laden and others decided it was time to start their own jihad, to establish Islamist states through bullets and violence.

In the US, the neoconservatives felt they had brought down the Soviet Union. They felt other regimes had to be conquered as well, that America should always fight tyrants because they're going to come after us anyway. Saddam Hussein was one of their targets. He invaded Kuwait in 1990 and the US coalition went in to liberate that country. The neoconservatives wanted to push on into Iraq, but Bush senior, who didn't share their goals, felt the goal should be regional stability. Even Brent Snowcroft, the National Security advisor under Bush Sr, insisted that Hussein was not a threat. The neoconservatives were outraged.

The neocons dusted off their propaganda machine again, using religion for political uses. They called it the Culture Wars. The religious right were led to believe they were renewing and expanding their faith. The new campaign took over the Republican Party's policy making machine in 1992. Traditional conservatives were booed off the stage. Their tactics backfired: many voters were scared into voting for Bill Clinton, a moderate Democrat. The neocons would do to Clinton what they'd done to the Soviets--transform him into a fantasy evil. They accused him of corruption (Whitewater), murder (Vince Foster's White House suicide), drug smuggling and alleged sexual harassment. None of them was true. It took an affair to bring an impeachment attempt (despite polls that most Americans didn't care).

During this time, the jihadists, who had thought the people would rise up and join them, were dismayed. Governments remained in power, so they decided that the people were also corrupt. By 1997, the Islamist revolution had failed because people were shocked by all the brutal attacks. At that point, the jihadists started to kill each other. In May 1998, the jihadist called a press conference and announced they would support anyone who fought Americans all over the world. If they struck the Americans, it would impress their own people. The neocons grabbed on this group and decided to influence Americans into believing they were a large and wide-spread threat.

The jihadists set up training camps in Afghanistan, though most of those who joined did so in order to fight their own governments. Meanwhile, in America, testimony by an alleged associate of Bin Laden, painted a picture of a group he called al-Qaeda as responsible for bombings around the world--a new myth. Then 19 hijackers attacked America.

The neocons immediately blamed al-Qaeda, led by Bin Laden. The attack brought the neocons back into power: Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz (mentioned earlier in the film) and others. Just as they'd done with the Soviet Union, they did with the network of evil--terrorism. Rumsfeld claimed Bin Laden was in Tora Bora (northern Afghanistan) in a sophisticated network of caves. Such caves were never found. The truth was that the small group of radical Islamists had already died or been captured. There was no organization of cells, sleeper cells, etc. The idea was what posed a threat.

The neocons continued to believe the myth and decided to look in America for terrorists. Local officials arrested many around the country in what was described as "sleeper cells." However, in all the cases they've brought since 9/11, the government has failed to prove any of them. This includes alleged threats in Britain. They failed to prove the fantasy that a network of terrorists existed all over the world. The next fantasy was the so called "dirty bomb." The government claimed terrorists had the capability to build one, an explosive that would spread radiation. However, experts (and even our own government) had already proved the effectiveness of "dirty bombs' was negligible.

Now that the neocons saw that the fear of terrorism was working with the American people, they then targeted Saddam Hussein. Despite the fact that Hussein banned al-Qaeda from Iraq and had no weapons of mass destruction, the government insisted otherwise and attacked.

The war on terror allowed governments to play on people's fear of the future. They embraced the "precautionary principle," the idea that governments should imagine what could happen in the worst case scenario and should plan accordingly. They could jail anyone for what they might do in the future. This went against human and legal rights. The affects are still being felt today.

Update: A Jan. 19, 2009 article, RussiaToday documents the 8 years of Bush.

Made in the US of A

2008-12-31T10:47:00.006-06:00

For nearly 30 years, American jobs have been shifted overseas. This includes textiles, appliances, electronics, etc. With US tariffs at an all-time low, imported goods have been relatively cheap. Big business could move jobs overseas, where the labor is cheaper, and import them back. Many Americans haven't complained because they continued to get cheap goods. The overlooked result has been fewer well-paying jobs for the middle class.

Manufacturing offers some of the best-paying jobs in the country. These jobs also affect others that are part of the chain--distributors, transportation, suppliers, etc. When you lose a manufacturer, you lose more than just a local plant.

I've linked the title head to this article to a website called Made in USA; please check it out. They post this on their sidebar:

"There are 293 million people living in the United States. If each one would shift $20 a month in spending from foreign made products to American made products, that would create 5 million new jobs."

What sets this site apart from others is you can do a Search and find American companies based on a Flag system--one flag means the item was manufactured in the US, 2 flags means the content of the product was manufactured in the US, and 3 flags means the company is incorporated in the US. Often they'll include a website or phone number so you can order online or request a catalog.

Video, audio and news links are also posted at in the library.

A series on You Tube talks about the decline of America's economy and some of its causes, from immigrants (legal and illegal) to outsourcing, over-regulation (perhasp mis-regulation is a better term), etc. While we can dispute some of the causes, the end result has been a loss of at least 3 million manufacturing jobs since 2000.

Go to You Tube for the rest of the segments.

Holiday Bunk

2008-12-28T11:11:00.002-06:00

No, this isn't about a bunk bed; this is about debunking all the end-of-year bogus claims circulating through the Internet and elsewhere. Go to factcheck.org for more details; they're also adding to the list daily in a spot they're calling "Ask Factcheck". Here are a few "urban myths" they've reported:

It's not true that unionized auto workers at Detroit's Big Three make more than $70 an hour, as claimed by some opponents of federal aid.
And no, 3 million workers won't be tossed out of work if aid is not forthcoming, as claimed by those favoring a taxpayer bailout.
President-elect Obama never promised to seek a ban on all semi-automatic weapons, as claimed by some fearful gun owners.
And no, Obama did not propose a Gestapo-like civilian security force as claimed by a Republican member of Congress from Georgia and any number of overwrought bloggers.
Democrats in Congress are not discussing any plan to confiscate the assets in 401(k) retirement accounts, another falsehood spread about by chain e-mails and Internet postings.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not demand a 757-size personal jet, a false claim resurrected when Democrats criticized Big Three executives for flying to D.C. on their own private jets to beg for aid.
And Pelosi's husband doesn't own a $17 million stake in a food company that she may (or may not) have tried to help with an exemption from a new minimum wage law.

As the folks at Annenberg note, what is sad is the number of Americans who believe this misinformation. They have an interesting post-election poll that includes percentages on how many of the electorate believed the falsehoods they were hearing. The authors of this article (Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Brooks Jackson) point out the reasons why voters believe these lies:

political ads run many times on the air (if you hear it enough you start to believe it)
we have a basic need to "embrace our side's arguments and reject or ignore those offered by an opponent"
Partisan preconceptions (Democrats raise taxes; Republicans cut Social Security)
Voters aren't knowledgeable about government
People find it hard to change once they've formed an opinion

Keep checking back. I'm sure the new year will bring many more tidbits of misinformation.

Visions of Sugar Plums

2008-12-19T10:53:00.003-06:00

While the country is embroiled in economic issues, from Wall Street to Main Street, the Bush Administration is diligently working behind the scenes to pass new regulations before their time is up. My title head includes a link to Propublica.org, a site I just found that lists and updates all the Midnight Regulations as they come out. It should come as little surprise that these last-minute regulations cater to Big Business and affect everything from the food you eat, the environment, even to more police surveillance. So, as you ponder those sugar plums and mulled wine, check the list--check it twice, see who's naughty....

Crooks in Government

2008-12-10T12:38:00.004-06:00

For Illinoisans, it came as little surprise that the Gov. Blagojevich (pron. "bla-goy-ya-vich") was arrested for trying to sell Obama's vacant Congressional seat. The surprise was how stupid he was, knowing he's been under suspicion for corruption for years, to have been so blatant. And this man came into office right after Ryan, who went to jail for corruption. Unfortunately, they waited to arrest Ryan until he was out of office.

Blagojevich could still appoint Obama's senate replacement, though state lawmakers are calling for special elections to do this. IMHO, Blagojevich should step down & lets run special elections. Now, who will run?

At the same time, we have the FCC Chairman has abused his power. And don't forget Bush's abuse of power, the Pentagon abuse of power....They all seem to be doing it. I wonder if this is a membership club or just politics as usual?

Corruption is not a recent thing or just an Illinoisan thing. It's not just a Democratic thing either. Examples:

Connecticut Gov. John Rowland was threatened with the worst corruption in the state's history.
Louisiana's last 3 insurance commissioners were sent to prison.`1
Republican Bill Frist, a doctor, resigned from the Senate pending investigation into charges of "insider trading."
Sen. Ted Stevens (Rep. Alaska) was convicted on 7 counts of falsifying official Senate reports
The most corrupt state in the US is Mississippi (IL comes in #5).
Teapot Dome oil leasing corruption of 1922
Over 21 people were indicted for corruption in San Francisco in 1909.
Credit Mobilier corruption in 1872 involving Mass. reps. 2
The Whiskey Ring scandal where Dept. of Treasury officials were bribed. 3

You don't have to look hard to find corruption. We just need more Patrick Fitzgeralds to take care of 'em.

Sources:
1. Public Corruption in the United States, National Press Club, Jan. 16, 2004
2. http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h234.html
3. Ibid

An economic recovery plan

2008-12-06T10:56:00.005-06:00

This week's Obama-Chat to the nation includes economic proposals to pull out of this depression. Some features:

1. Make government buildings more energy efficient
2. Invest in national infrastructure
3. Modernize school buildings
4. Improve Internet access for all
5. Improve & modernize healthcare

This assumes a creation of over 2 million jobs, especially important since the nation just lost 1/2 million! The above items all seem to me, IMHO, to be good ones because:

1. It creates jobs in this country
2. An improved infrastructure results in better transportation, cost reductions, etc.
3. Our schools are where we teach the future workers of America
4. The use of the Internet is key to education and access to world views
5. Healthcare costs are a main reason for companies locating outside the US
6. Reducing our energy needs allows us to spend money in other, more crucial, areas

I also don't think this is enough, but it's a start. After all, he's not in office yet.

A Bird in the Hand is Worth More in the Bush

2008-12-04T12:09:00.003-06:00

Not content with two Bushes in political office, the reigning Republican political dynasty is once again pushing favorite son, Jeb, back in the spotlight with a bid to replace Sen. Mel Martinez in FL (click blog header to read Miami Herald article). Could this be the first step to something bigger? Like a bid for yet another Bush in the White House? Well, with a name like Jeb, how can you go wrong in the South? And, since a couple southern states carried the tide for Obama, don't be surprised if the GOP is targetting to bring them back into the fold.

Early Warning Systems

2008-12-01T15:36:00.007-06:00

According to many sources (blog title linked to msnbc), banking industry lobbyists protested regulatory changes that would have helped prevent the current financial crisis. And, the Bush Administration ignored all the warnings. Sound familiar? Think about the other ignored warnings in this administration:

Sept. 11--they ignored CIA & FBI alarms going off all over the place
Iraq--no WMD's, no Al-Kaida and we'd walk into a mess
Mine Safety--mine safety suggestions were ignored (in fact, standards were reduced) and more miners died in cave ins
Hurricane Katrina--the levees could not withstand a 4 or 5 cat storm
Climate Change--the administration not only ignores all scientific studies (including from the Pentagon), but declares CO2 is not a harmful pollutant
Torture--senior military lawyers dissented with the administration's conclusion that the President could order harsh interrogations
Security firms in Iraq--the administration ignored repeated warnings about using private security frims
Border Fences--the administration ignores warnings about the environmental impact of the border fence with Mexico
Pakistani drone attacks--the American intelligence community warned it would benefit the Taliban & destabilize the Pakistani army

When it disregards experts & career professionals, the Bush Administration responds with denial. They attack dissension, instead of learning from it.

The White House has issued a list of times (17) where they allege to have urged Congress to do something about the banking industry. Several right-leaning blogs are using it to blame the Democrats, failing to point out that Congress was Republican-controlled until just over a year ago (and have kept threatening to filibuster since). I wonder what other warnings have been ignored.

The Obama Transition

2008-11-22T13:28:00.003-06:00

Obama's appointments for the White House transition in January caused many in the media to report concern over these experienced veterans. Now why would this be a handicap, when some of the same people criticized Bill Clinton with his inexperienced picks back in '92? Do we really want inexperienced folks coming in to fix the myriad problems the current administration is leaving behind?

Media Matters' writer Foser asks, "When did experience become a flaw?" He complains that, back in the 90's, the media complained about the inexperience of the appointees. Now that Obama is appointing high-powered, experienced folks, they complain about a lack of change. You just can't please some of the folks some of the time! Of course, the biggest complaint is about Hillary, the epitome of satan (along with Bill) to many right-wingers.

So, if you have better suggestions, check out Obama's transition website. You can leave suggestions or share a story. Heck, maybe they'll take your resume!

Media & Yellow Journalism

2008-11-16T11:23:00.006-06:00

MediaMatters.org writer Jamison Foser has written an excellent article that refutes mainstream media reports on the Minnesota Senate race. MediaMatters serves as an excellent source for those intent upon finding information without network bias.

As a college student, I took an intro mass communications course (with fantasies of becoming either a sports caster or writer for National Geographic) and learned you could sway your audience through your words. When reporting, you could force the reader to form an opinion one way or another. Reporters were taught to use "who, what, how, when, where" (the 5 things to always include in the first paragraph) and to use active voice. With blogs, additional writing tips are a must.

That said, Foser discusses the recount in Minnesota (required by law when an election represents 1/2 of 1% or less). Unfortunately, many media outlets, apparently including the New York Times, NBC's Today, the Minneapolis Star Tribune & media host Sean Hannity, allege sensational problems by using words like "shenanigans, chaos, mess in Minnesota" and "fishy business."

Why didn't they use "voter recount required by law" or "recount in Minnesota?" Yellow journalism (biased opinion masquerading as objective fact) popularized by Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolf Hearst in the late 19th century is alive and well in the 21st. Newspaper circulation keeps shrinking and more Americans get their news either from The Daily Show or the internet. Sensationalism sells papers and brings viewers.

Bailouts & Corporate Accountability

2008-11-13T19:17:00.005-06:00

So, the US taxpayer (that's you & me, folks) has sent billions into Wall Street with very few strings attached (you did know that you were sending this money, right?) The result? Up until this week, banks sat on the money. Now, automakers are asking for the same fringe benefit & Congress is trying to slice a piece out of that $700 billion pie to give to them. Despite the fact that, in Sept, Congress passed a bill giving them $25 billion in loans. In the meantime, check out these staggering statistics:

A quarter-trillion-dollar budget deficit for a single month
Projections of up to $1 trillion for a year in the deficit
A half-million new applications for unemployment benefits
Unemployment jumped to a 14-year high of 6.5 percent in October
Tax revenues were down 7.5 percent in October from a year ago
Foreclosure rates for October increases 25%

The deficit with China bucked the trend and rose to an all-time high as U.S. retailers kept stocking their shelves with Chinese-made televisions, toys and games. Just what we need; more cheap products created in sweatshops with no environmental standards and shipped here to poison our people. But I digress.

So, what does the taxpayer get for her money? Stock in the largest banks, to take ownership shares in hundreds or thousands of banks by New Years. We've also got mortgage-backed securities from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. 1

Now, I'm not a financial wiz or anything, but if I was financially rescuing someone, I'd like a little more for my money.

Fire all the CEO's at the financial companies getting bailout money & replace them with salaried govt workers with industry expertise.
Eliminate golden parachutes or set a cap
Return to the regulations in place in the 30's
Make the Federal Reserve a govt entity
Replace members of the SEC & give 'em more muscle
Close securities & derivatives loopholes
Install a govt trade fee (the rest of the world has this) with the revenue going to the deficit
Require "credit card" interest rates (28%) on the payback

Now, about those automakers, who fought Clinton tooth & nail in the 90's to avoid doing anything. 2 If you wanna play ball, here's what we get in return:

Make sure it's a loan, not a bailout (we did it for Chrysler back in the '80s) 3
Mandates for hybrid/duel-fuel plugin cars by a certain time (say 2-3 years)
Money for research on retrofit technology for existing cars and trucks
Increase CAFE standards to 45mpg by 2010, 60mpg by 2014; 80mpg by 2020
Ban oil/gas/auto lobbyists from Congress (oh, heck, go ahead & ban all lobbyists!)
Find out why they haven't filed Chapter 11? 4
Oversee executive compensation & ban any retroactive payments
Award innovation at the consumer level by offering govt rebates for hybrid cars

Ok, I'm a little over the top on some of the above suggestions, but it doesn't seem right to me that we give 'em money for nothing. That tax bill is gonna hit soon and none of us will be laughing on the way to the bank.

Sources
1. http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081113/budget_deficit.html
2. Who Killed the Electric Car, PBS, http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/223/#here
3. http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/PA00Aes.html
4. http://www.heritage.org/Research/Economy/wm2134.cfm

Joblessness in America

2008-11-07T13:33:00.006-06:00

According to today's Business Week & ReportonBusiness.com:

Nonfarm payrolls plunged 240,000 for the month of October
Unemployment jumped to 6.5% in October (highest reading in 14 yrs)
Businesses are making much bigger cuts in capital spending & hiring 1
Advanced economies (US, Germany, UK, etc.) will shrink 0.3% in 2009 (first time since WW2) 2

These are just a few of the economic woes occurring now. The G20 meeting next week in Washington will no doubt be one of attempting to better coordinate responses to the global economy. A search of the web came up with these as possible responses:

1. More shareholder influence on executive pay 3
2. Increased powers for the SEC (Securities & Exchange Commission) 4
3. A stronger IMF (International Monetary Fund) 5
4. Additional policy measures to stop the downward spiral of US housing prices 6
5. Insuring financial institutions don't circumvent regulation 7
6. A Green Public Investment Stimulus program 8

Meanwhile, our bailed-out banks continue to hoard funds, exasperating the situation. 9 The fate of us all during this recession could well depend on the results of this meeting.

Sources:
1. http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/nov2008/pi2008116_877573.htm?campaign_id=investing_related
2. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20081107.RECONOMY07/TPStory/Business
3.http://www.reuters.com/article/americasRegulatoryNews/idUSN06267520081107
4. Ibid
5. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20081107.RECONOMY07/TPStory/Business
6. http://www.rgemonitor.com/euro-monitor/254289/europe_catches_pneumonia
7. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601100&sid=a7dnE2LYHOVE&refer=germany
8. http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081124/pollin
9. http://www.progressiveinvolvement.com/progressive_involvement/2008/10/bailout-working-precisely-as-intended-gucci-wearin-champagne-sippin-plutocrats-make-out-fine-main-street-stuck-with-the.html

An Historic Day in America

2008-11-05T15:36:00.004-06:00

So we can stand proud as Americans showing democracy does indeed work. We elected the first African-American, Barack Obama, to the Oval Office. Over 131 million people voted in this election, which means about 64% of eligible voters went to the polls. That's the best turn out in 44 years, according to a report by AP (click on blog head). That's gratifying in that, for some time now, many Americans didn't vote. Part of your responsibility in a democracy is to vote, so I hope we continue in the future.

Watch the Election on your Computer

2008-11-03T20:22:00.003-06:00

Go here (or on the name of this post) to see all the action on your computer. Swing states include Virginia, NC, MN, FL, OH, IN, etc. My bet is the Ohio voting machines will glitch again.

SNL's Political Videos

2008-11-02T11:59:00.002-06:00

Instead of the dire "Only 2 days left to Vote!" message, I bring you a link to hulu.com, so you can catch up on all the SNL (Sat. Night Live) Tina Fey, et al videos. Hilarious.

Media Bias

2008-11-02T11:32:00.004-06:00

Media Matters' columnist Jamison Foser has posted an interesting article called "Media Matters: The Right's "bias" charade." He covers the last 15 years of media coverage on Presidential Candidates, as well as comments on PEJ's (Project for Excellence in Journalism) recent study. Foser's article can be found at MM, while PEJ's at PEJ.

Foser's article points to database searches of negative media reports, proving otherwise, as well as concern over some of PEJ's methodology. For instance, they ignored Radio talk shows, which are highly conservative. They also rated as negative reporting any report of negative poll numbers, despite the fact that this is simple reporting. Anyway, an interesting article worth reading.

The Economy, the Candidates, & You

2008-10-30T19:17:00.006-05:00

In The Economist yesterday (header links to this article), it reads:

Even if the Fed did target zero, it might encourage banks just to leave their money at the Fed rather than lend it to each other, causing the federal funds market to dry up. It would also make it hard for money market mutual funds to pay a competitive yield and cover their operating expenses. Money would flow out of them and into government-guaranteed bank deposits, straining bank capital ratios.1

The article deals with the current federal interest rate drop (down to 1%). The article also notes:

Bold as its actions have been, the Fed cannot battle the recession alone. It needs fiscal policy as well, both to recapitalise lenders through the Troubled Asset Relief Programme–both banks and nonbanks, such as insurers—and to stimulate spending directly through increased public spending or tax cuts.2

John McCain's Plan 3
According to his website (just the key items), McCain promises the following to help the economic crisis:
1. Balance the budget by 2013 by cutting Social Security, Medicare, & Medicaid
2. Lower business tax rates & reduce capital gains taxes
3. Minimizing health insurance & pro-union initiatives
4. A one-year spending pause
5. Stop earmarks
6. He'll tell oil producing countries that our foreign-oil dependence will come to an end
7. Summer gas tax holiday (nothing about winter on his site)
8. Repeal the imported sugar tax
9. Will roll back corn-based ethanol mandates
10. Assistance for borrowers focused on homeowners
11. Reforms like greater transparency & accountability with financial assistance

Barack Obama's Plan 4
According to Barack Obama's website (again, just the highlights):
1. A tax cut to 95% of working families
2. Tax relief for small businesses
3. Fight for fair trade to open markets; amend NAFTA
4. A windfall profits tax on oil companies, given to families as $1000 energy rebate
5. Provide $50 billion to jump-start the economy, saving 1 million jobs
6. Eliminate income taxes for seniors making less than $50,000 per year
7. End tax breaks for companies that send jobs overseas; reward companies that support American workers
8. Invest in next generation technologies, clean energy, infrastructure
9. Invest in a clean energy economy, creating new jobs
10. More accountability in subprime mortgage industry, reform bankruptcy laws, credit card bill of rights

Both sites have more details, but Obama's seems especially extensive. You be the judge. Will either plan do what needs to be done to combat the current recession and financial irresponsibility? See a side-by-side comparison done on the Obama site at http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/sidebyside.php. 5

Sources
1. Approaching Zero, The Economist, Oct. 29, 2008, http://www.economist.com/finance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12500565&source=features_box3.
2. Ibid.
3. http://www.johnmccain.com/Issues/JobsforAmerica/reform.htm
4. http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/index.php
5. http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/sidebyside.php

Climate Change & Humanity

2008-10-22T11:27:00.002-05:00

Frontline just released a new documentary called Heat (click the title of this blog to go to it). Learn more about the issue, then contact your Congressional representatives and urge them to do something.

Fear, Negative Ads and RoboCalls

2008-10-21T13:14:00.004-05:00

If you live in a "swing state", are you getting "robocalls"? These are computer-generated calls that question Obama's relationships and economic platform (even Palin has criticized them); click on the header to view more on robocalls. Why is this tactic so useful? My guesses include:

1. It's cheap "marketing"
2. It keeps misconceptions in the minds of those called
3. It distracts Americans, especially those with less political knowledge
4. Though it's negative campaigning, polls show Americans are influenced by it 1

BTW: A Minnesota company owned by the CEO of the 2008 Republican National Convention is responsible. 2

I suggest that these calls are another form of fear-mongering. According to an article in Newsweek, it "reveals the power of fear to sway voters. Half a century of research has shown that fear is one of the most politically powerful emotions a candidate can tap, especially when the fears have a basis in reality...." 3 Apparently, anger comes in a close second. According to the same article, fear makes people more likely to go to the polls and vote. Interestingly, other political scientists argue that negative campaigns keep voters at home.4

One of the most renowned examples of this is Lyndon Johnson's "daisy" ad. According to David Mark, in his book, Going Dirty, "Negative campaigning works, which is why candidates regularly employ it...it is particularly effective when ads focus the electorate on a specific issue."5 According to the Journal of Marketing, this negativity effect works mainly on voters who already dislike the candidate.

"Millions of dollars are spent marketing political candidates during each election year. An increasing percentage of these dollars is spent on negative campaigning (Ansolabhere and Iyengar 1995; Devlin 1993; Lau and Sigelman 1998) because of the belief that negative information about political candidates is more influential than positive information in swaying voter preferences (Aragones 1997; Bunker 1996; Johnson-Cartee and Copeland 1991; Klein 1991, 1996; Lau 1985; Pinkleton 1997). Consistent with this belief, media gurus often give negative news quadruple weight compared with positive news (as specified by the Merriam formula used to compute media impact; Kroloff 1988). It is because of this firm belief in the weight of negative information that political pundits continue to advocate its use, despite recent data that demonstrate that negativity in political campaigning disenfranchises voters and could lead to low voter turnout and involvement (Ansolabhere and Iyengar 1995)." 6

So, the conclusion is that, no matter how popular the candidate, his or her negatives matter more than positives to the American public; we don't vote for candidates, but against. This is why more & more advertising dollars are spent on such ads.

Sources
1. Newsweek; 8/11/2008, Vol. 152 Issue 6, p34-36, 2p, 4 color
2. REsearch Minnesota
3. Newsweek (Atlantic Edition); 12/24/2007, Vol. 150 Issue 26, p24-28, 5p
4. Reason; Nov2006, Vol. 38 Issue 6, p2-2, 1p
5. Going Dirty: The Art of Negative Campaigning by David Mark. Lanham,
MD, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2006. 280pp.
6. Journal of Marketing; Jan2005, Vol. 69 Issue 1, p131-142, 12p.

Why This Election Matters

2008-10-19T14:07:00.001-05:00

This is a video of UVA's Poli-sci prof, Larry Sabato, on why the 2008 election is so important.

McCain, Letterman & Liddy

2008-10-18T14:01:00.002-05:00

John McCain finally made his Late Night with Dave Letterman appointment and admitted to his friendship with Watergate co-conspirator G. Gordon Liddy. Click on this blog title to view the video. Note that Letterman is the first "journalist" to ask McCain about Liddy.

Who is Liddy? He was convicted of helping mastermind the Watergate break-in, for conspiracy in the Daniel Ellsberg case and for contempt of court.1 They wiretapped DNC headquarters in the Watergate Hotel and then broke in to repair it.

Daniel Ellsberg is the State Department whistleblower who released the Pentagon Papers in 1971. These documents proved that Eisenhower, Kennedy & Johnson had secret plans to go to war in Vietnam. Richard Nixon attempted to prevent further publication of these papers, was overruled by the Supreme Court, and several White House aides were dismissed due to misconduct. This trial figured in the impeachment of Nixon. 2

In 1994, Liddy advised his listeners to shoot any ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms official) with "head shots, head shots ... Kill the sons of bitches ... Shoot twice to the belly and if the does not work, shoot to the groin area. Arm yourself. Get instructed in how to shoot straight. And don't register [your weapons] either." His caller replied, "And I'm aiming between their eyes." Liddy replied, "There you go. That way their flak jackets won't protect them."3

In 2004, Liddy spoke about how Adolf Hitler inspired his youth.4 Liddy has funded McCain's campaign and, as recently as May 2007, McCain was a guest on ex-convict/terrorist Liddy's radio show.5

Perhaps this is beyond the kettle calling the pot "black."

Sources:
1. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/watergate/liddy.html
2. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKellsberg.htm
3. http://mediamatters.org/items/200411230004
4. Ibid
5. http://www.radioamerica.org/PRG_ggordonliddy.htm

Get to know Obama

2008-10-12T14:29:00.007-05:00

I've heard many spurious and scary comments regarding Barack Obama. I'd like to share a few things to help get to know him better. I won't try to debunk all the crazy stuff I've heard because studies show that, even when people know it's misinformation, some folks continue to think the original lie was accurate.1

First, here's a video giving a little behind-the-scenes look at him & his family.

Next, take a look at the Ayers vs G.Gordon Liddy factor at mediamatters.org. Who's the worst "terrorist?" I'll bet every American has heard Ayers mentioned recently; but who among you realized Liddy's influence on McCain & radical background?

Now, what about religion? Again, go to mediamatters.org for further info on this one. I'll bet you all have heard of Wright; how about Hagee?

Then there's this: McCain vs Obama's health on the Daily Show.2

And, an affirmation of the Keating 5 facts from CNN at Keating5 and McCain story is true.

Sources
1. http://mediamatters.org/countyfair/200809150005?lid=669953&rid=16061148
2. BraveNewFilms.org

What's the matter with the Media?

2008-10-11T13:39:00.003-05:00

Folks are asking me why the national media isn't reporting many of the things mentioned in this blog. Here are my guesses (there could be more):

The majority of the major media outlets in this country are owned by a few corporations or wealthy individuals (it's in their interest to run what best supports their business model)
Many news outlets have been eliminated or seriously reduced
Many "journalists" today were never trained in journalism or trained in the field (hence fail in digging for answers)

Media Ownership

In 1983, newspapers, television & radio were less centralized, with 50 corporations controlling the majority of all news media in the US. There were more "mom & pops" if you will. After deregulation of the media by the FCC, the big boys started buying even more markets. Here's a list of the current 6 Big Boys:

David Westin, President, ABC News
Mark Hoffman, President, CNBC
Jonathan Klein, President, CNN
Bill Galvin, Vice President, CNN Headline News
Roger Ailes, Chairman and CEO, FOX News Channel
Steve Capus, President, NBC News, MSNBC

"Nine giant companies now dominate the US media landscape, providing most television programs, films, videos and DVDs, radio shows, CDs, books and other leisure-time products and activities. They are Disney (ABC), AOL-Time Warner (CNN), Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation (Fox TV), Viacom (CBS), General Electric (NBC), Sony (the former CBS records and Columbia Pictures), Seagram (Universal film and television studios), AT&T (cable television systems, including former MediaOne), and Bertelsmann (a German firm that controls the publication of one out of ten adult trade books in the world). (Some analysts put the number at six in the mass media field, excluding Sony, Seagram and AT&T.) Their media revenues range from $8 to $30 billion a year. According to Robert McChesney and John Nichols, the authors of It's the Media, Stupid, “Another twelve to fifteen firms, which do from $2 or $3 billion to $8 billion per year in business, round out the system.” (p. 28) These include Comcast, Hearst, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Cox, Advance, Tribune Company and Gannett."1

The above was in 2000. By 2004, "only 5 huge corporations -- Time Warner, Disney, Murdoch's News Corporation, Bertelsmann of Germany, and Viacom (formerly CBS) -- now control most of the media industry in the U.S. General Electric's NBC is a close sixth."2

What does this mean? It means fewer news organizations provide fewer differing viewpoints from which the American public can make good decisions. In addition, these for-profit organizations are obligated by law to put the profits of their investors ahead of all other considerations.

Reduced News Bureaus

"In a striking effort to cut costs, NBC said yesterday that it was closing its New York bureau, which has a news staff of 11. That announcement comes a day after NBC said it planned to close its Miami news bureau, which has a total staff of 13. The closings in New York and Miami will reduce the number of NBC news bureaus in the United States to seven. In addition, the Frankfurt news bureau will be closed and the staff of the London bureau has been reduced. NBC has also reduced its employees in Boston and Pittsburgh. NBC is owned by the General Electric Company, and a number of NBC employees said they felt that G.E. had been particularly aggressive in its cost-cutting efforts."3 According to the August 15 issue of The Colorado Independent, "A decade ago more than a dozen newspapers and wire services embedded reporters in the state Capitol during the legislative session. Today only seven do."4

What does this mean? Fewer reporters are available to track down & uncover news stories. It means more news is slipping through the cracks due to lack of oversight.

Journalism or Field Training

Many working journalists actually urge their students not to get a degree in that field. Most, however, want their reporters to have a liberal arts degree and experience in the field. They also need to be fast writers. US journalists are not required to take any continuing ed courses 0r career training. "Fully half the journalists questioned in a recent survey by the Council of Presidents of National Journalism Organizations said they get no training at all...The lack of ongoing training was most evident for journalists in local TV stations...More than half (54 percent) of TV journalists said they needed training in content or specific coverage areas, but just 13 percent said they were getting that training."5

If you listen to talk radio, watch out. According to Project for Excellence in Journalism,"

"Talk radio is running America," complained Mississippi Republican Senator Trent Lott. "We have to deal with that problem." On June 28—more than 40 days after the introduction of a compromise immigration bill backed by President Bush and some senators—the year's most ambitious domestic legislative initiative was defeated in the Senate. Lott was not alone in attributing the bill's defeat to talk radio. Some Democrats even talked of reviving the long-repealed Fairness Doctrine as a way of potentially balancing the politics on conservative-dominated talk radio. In talk circles, this became known as the "Hush Rush" bill, a reference to conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, who was a vocal critic of the immigration bill.6

What does this mean? Talk Radio is commercial, and many "radio heads" are not trained journalists. They selectively feature those "facts" that best make the case for a specific ideology.

Sources
1. http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/dec2000/med5-d27.shtml
2. http://www.corporations.org/media/
3. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE6D9113DF931A25754C0A967958260
4. http://staging.coloradoindependent.mypublicsquare.com/view/loss-of-the-capitol
5. http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itgic/0203/ijge/gj07.htm
6. http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/09122008/profile.html

Just the Facts, ma'm

2008-10-08T11:09:00.003-05:00

I have been accused of using only liberal or biased sources in this blog. I obviously take exception to that & try to find "valid" sources. Perhaps there's a difference in what one considers "liberal" and "valid"? Occasionally, I admit, I do veer off course--usually because I find the item humorous or that particular "liberal" source had the most well-written article and I didn't think I could do better. If you dig down, you'll note that I use government sources, non-partisan or at least bipartisan sources, Scientific American, Pew, The Economist, etc. Sometimes I read a research paper & note that it contains info similar to another source that is easier to read (if you've ever wafted through research & scientific journals, you'll understand!). I have found that many "conservative" sources are biased as well--so it's a struggle to sift through the flack.

Enough said. Last night's 2nd Prez Debate appears to have been a snoozer (I can't say, since I worked right through it). The header above links directly to http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/debate_fact_check, so don't slam the receiver. I'm just passing it on. I think it's pulled from FactCheck.org, which I think is extremely non-partisan.

Energy, Global Warming & Globalization

2008-10-05T10:35:00.013-05:00

Recent Headlines

President Hugo Chavez offers to swap a natural gas vehicle for his citizens "dirty" cars--including a year's supply of free fuel. 1
"First Hydrogen-powered plane takes to the skies in Germany."2
"Twice as nice: Combining a Wind Farm and Solar Energy in Italy."3
"Sweden Aims to be World's First Oil-free Nation."4
"46% of Brazil's energy comes from renewable sources."5
"In the face of rising energy costs," the US DOE (Dept. of Energy) offers a new website called Energy Savers with low cost tips (and more) to help homeowners save energy & stay warm this winter. 6

As the rest of the world moves forward on alternative energy, the US govt. sits back and offers website help to its citizens. Yes, there are US companies working to create energy changes (such as a plant-into-jet fuel development in N. Dakota, 7), but can we deny that government sponsorship helps to push the technology & implementation much further? (this program at NDU was through a govt grant).

Why is developing and implementing alternative energy important to the future of the US?

It reduces the need for fossil fuel imports from other countries (i.e., Saudi Arabia)
It positions us better on the world market because that energy money can be used elsewhere
It reduces the need to borrow from other countries whose actions can seriously undermine the American economy (i.e., China)
It reduces the amount of pollutants the US pours into the environment
It creates new jobs in the energy sector in this country

Why can't we just drill, baby, drill?

No matter how some politicians insist, drilling is hazardous to the environment, affecting local animal populations, and air & water quality. 8
Other sources, such as geothermal, are less hazardous to the environment & can produce massive gigawatts of power. 9
To start any new program, whether drilling or alternatives, takes time. Most sources agree on about 10 years before anything is actually pumped out of the system. 10

Why should I care about all this?

"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was established in 1988 to evaluate the risk of human-caused climate change." Since then, 4 reports have been released and "become the de facto conservative standard for accuracy about the scientific facts of global climate change." 11 IPCC reports reflect the work of over 2500 scientists from more than 130 countries, who have insisted that human activity has "very likely" been the primary cause of global warming since 1950. ("Very Likely, in science, indicates more than 90% certainty & is considered virtual confirmation.). No natural source for a CO2 buildup has been revealed, but utilization rates of CO2 from fossil fuels are well-known. 12 "Independent surface data from the atmosphere, the ground, and the ocean sub-surface, combined with evidence such as melting snow, ice, and permafrost, rising sea levels, and observed changes in plant and animal behavior make it clear the Earth's surface is warming noticeably."13 This translates into increased drought in the western US, more extreme weather patterns (heatwave in Europe, more violent hurricanes, etc.), melting ice & rising sea levels. Question: What kind of planet are we leaving our children?
According to TBoone Pickens, the US imports 70% of our oil today. That's $700 billion dollars being sent to other countries each year. World oil production peaked in 2005, with current oil facilities producing less oil and fewer new oil reserves, large enough to produce what we need for any appreciable time, to be found. 14 Question: Do we want to continue to send our dollars abroad, often to countries who have reason to hate us?
Oil supplies about 40% of the world's energy and 96% if its transportation energy. Consumption is expected to rise to 60% by 2020; transportation will be the largest growing sector. The 2 countries with the highest growth in consumption are China & India. These countries are fighting for control of the market to feed their economies. 15 In the US, the average piece of food travels almost 1500 miles before it gets to your plate. 16 Question: Since our food supply heavily relies on transportation, doesn't it make sense to reduce this cost?
Where are the reserves? 66% are in the hands of Middle Eastern regimes. Russia increased its output so that it became the #2 exporter behind Saudi Arabia; however, it's reserves peaked in 1999 and accounts for only 5%. In Africa, total reserves account for only 7%. Because they've increased production, their reserves are expected to be depleted faster, hence making the Middle-east an even larger exporter of crude. 17 Question: If supplies are diminishing and we invest in alternatives Right Now, doesn't it make sense to create jobs for Americans at home?

Today, Colorado is considered the global leader in the industry of renewable energy. 18 Europe has an energy standard called the Renewable Energy Standard, requiring certain standards in building. Wind creates 2.4 times more jobs than coal or natural gas during plant construction & 1.5 times more jobs for long-term maintenance & operation. 19 It seems logical to me that it is in the interests of our country to explore and develop safe, alternative energy. The end result will be a cleaner environment. Isn't that a risk worth taking?

Sources:
1. (Go to http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081005/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_venezuela_free_cars;_ylt=Agr.HCK0vtr4XobOKKc1kpNvaA8F for full story).
2. http://www.sciam.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=first-hydrogen-powered-plane-takes-2008-10-02
3. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=wind-and-solar-in-sicily
4. http://environment.about.com/od/renewableenergy/a/oilfreesweden.htm
5. http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0513-brazil.html
6. http://www.energysavers.gov/
7. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=using-plants-instead-of-petroleum-to-make-jet-fuel
8. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=to-drill-or-not-to-drill
9. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=google-invests-in-geothermal
10. http://www.nrdc.org/land/wilderness/arctic.asp
11. Mann & Kump, Dire Predictions, Understanding Global Warming, DK Books, 2009, p. 6.
12. Mann & Kump, pp. 34-35.
13. Ibid, p. 37.
14. http://www.pickensplan.com/theplan/
15. http://www.iags.org/futureofoil.html
16. http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/
17. http://www.iags.org/futureofoil.html
18. http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=5951041&page=1
19. http://www.alternativeenergy.com/profiles/blog/show?id=1066929%3ABlogPost%3A30653

Are the Fundamentals Still Strong?

2008-09-30T18:20:00.006-05:00

Here's a movie to watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4egXbhSOhk. Most economists avow that US deregulation helped the economy to grow; they also seem to think it went too far & helped cause the current economic problems.1 Even John McCain admits it now, despite the fact he was anti-regulation up until this month.2 Go to www.therealmccain.com for more, in case you weren't convinced.

The first vote on the bailout ended in defeat, despite the fact that Bush & leaders from both parties supported it. Could it be re-election season has reared its ugly head? Isn't it funny how some of the legislators cried foul, while the past 20 years has seen them support bill after bill that reduced banking & other controls established in the 1930's. So we had a Great Depression and we don't learn from it? Will Sept '08 be called GD2 (or Black Monday) by future historians?

I wonder. The richest 400 families in the US in 2000, had a wealth of about $1 trillion. In the last 8 years, that grew to $1.6 trillion.3 If you take away the $1 trillion loss Bush claims happened on Wall Street yesterday, that only leaves $.6 trillion. Oh, too bad. I don't know how those folks will survive. There can't possibly be any connection between deregulation and greed, can there?4

A fix has to be in the works and passed; doing nothing will only exacerbate the problem--at least that's what all the economists seem to be saying.5 Interest rates have been too low, the housing market has collapsed, and all those bad mortgages (created after deregulation) have ballooned. I wonder who gets penalized? The moneylender or the ignorant homeowner? So far, the mortgage side of things is winning.6

Sources:
1. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26774653/
2. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/23/mccain.bailout/index.html
3. http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/invest/forbes/P129955.asp
4. Greider, William, The Nation, "Waiting for the Big One", Sept. 10, 2007.
5. http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/9/19/analysis-washingtons-trillion-dollar-wall-street-bailout.html.
6. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26837854

The S&L Crisis, Part Deux

2008-09-27T18:27:00.002-05:00

For those who don't remember, I offer a history lesson (as well as a political one). Up until the last year & 1/2, Congress has been controlled by the Republican Party--for 16 years! For the last 4 or so years, all THREE branches of government were Republican controlled. Right now, the Dems have a 1 vote lead in Congress--and you can't count Lieberman, because he's really a Republican in a blue coat. In order to override presidential vetos, you need 2/3 of Congress to agree--well, we ain't there yet folks. Bush likes to veto and he likes to do signing statements, changing many of the laws in favor of deregulation.

Now for the history lesson. If you were cognizant during the 80's, you might recall the S&L Crisis under Reagan. If not, go to http://www.uwsa.com/issues/cfr/quicksandl.html (or do a Google search on the S&L Crisis). Lending requirements were loosened, enforcement & oversight were reduced, etc. Foreclosed homes were placed under the RTC (Resolution Trust Corp) for auctioning instead of handled by local real estate offices. The result was things like $200,000 homes selling for $1200. In some cases, those winning the auctions had ties to the current administration (George Bush senior was one of them). One of the failed Colorado S&L's was run by, can you guess who? Jeb & George Jr. John McCain was one of the notorious Keating 5 that led to the crisis in the first place--and it cost the taxpayers over $124 Billion!

Fast forward to 1999 & we see history repeating itself. The Republicans once again began easing regulations such as Glass-Seagull (passed in the 30's to stop this sort of thing). Republicans had been chipping away at it in 1983 & 1987. Gramm-Leach-Bliley eliminated the rest of the New Deal regulations, leading to a massive amount of consolidation within financial markets. The result was risky investments designed to maximize profits.

So, here we are all over again. Another Bush in office, a series of deregulations by the Republican-led Congress
Look at Enron & Worldcom & ask yourself, "What regulations were passed to avoid this from happening again?" None. Did I mention Gramm is one of John McCain's advisors?

Sources:
1. http://www.progressivehistorians.com/2008/02/how-s-crisis-is-repeating-today.html
2. http://www.uwsa.com/issues/cfr/quicksandl.html
3. http://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/s&l/slbib9.html
4. http://www.wmsa.net/People/john_mccain/ariz-republic_chap_V_1999.htm

The Real McCain

2008-09-19T17:07:00.002-05:00

Here's a website, with videos, in case you want to find out more about John McCain. Such as:

1. His stand on oil drilling & Big Oil

2. His health records

3. His houses (at last count, 9)

4. His stand on veteran benefits

5. His position on Iraq

The website is http://therealmccain.com/ (or click the header to this blog).

Wringing our hands over Oil

2008-09-13T12:36:00.011-05:00

When Hurricane Ike made landfall yesterday, I noticed the price of gas at the local Citgo rose from $4.09 to $4.19. Now, perhaps gas rigs came in yesterday and dropped off their latest load which, coincidentally, increased in price .10/gallon. Maybe Citgo watches the market and prices accordingly? I don't blame the gas station; they're a retailer operating on slim margins.1 Maybe investors are at it again; Ike's 'a comin' and refineries in LA & TX could reduce availability. Economics goes into action: supply is reduced, demand stays the same--price goes up. The only problem is, the supply hasn't been reduced yet. I guess I don't get economics.

Even oil company execs agree that the US is a "declining oil province and have been for 25 years." 2 What seems to be the common denominator among anyone with any energy knowledge (according to all the sources I've found) is, gasp, conservation. As Nelson Schwartz, Fortune's Europe editor, noted in 2006, "a serious push for conservation would get the attention of the energy markets and drive prices lower."3

Oil-producing nations are wary. On the one hand, prices are higher than ever, but production is stable or, in some cases, down. G. Bush has met with the Saudis to try to get a release of more oil, while Congress is pushing for sanctions.4 The mantra is "why are we buying oil from the terrorists." That in turn makes the Saudi's worry. Mike Schaefer of Energy & Capital gives us this history lesson: In 1985, the Reagan administration made a pact with Saudi-Arabia to reduce the price of oil. This would hit the Soviets hard, making it more difficult for them to influence other countries in the area. The prices dropped from $26.46 to $10.25 in about 3 months. The Soviets couldn't keep up because their oil prices were much higher; their economy began to collapse. However, the Saudis (and then the rest of OPEC) now had a trick from our playbook.5

According to Schaefer (The Truth About Oil, Part 2, Energy & Capital, Jan.12, 2007), the lesson OPEC learned was how to "cook the books." Somehow, between 1989 and 1990, Saudi officials claimed oil reserves increased by 87 billion barrels--without finding any major new fields. Five other OPEC countries magically added more reserves as well (see images above). What does this mean? There's even less world oil than we think. Add to that the fact that countries are increasing their demand, and I think you get the picture (if not, go to http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/oil-reserves-decline/340). Schaefer later points to Canada and extracting crude from oil sands. He also reminds us that the strength of the dollar is directly tied to oil supply and cost. This is proven by the countries who've already shifted their currency from US dollars to the euro, resulting in the huge devaluation of the greenback.6

While Schaefer fails to expound on the conservation issue, others pick up the mantra. You can find video discussions on all energy-related topics at http://video.energypolicytv.com/displaypage.php?vkey=3a8d6aa2308357a268a7&channel=Conservation. I'm sure you can search the web and find writers who insist there isn't an oil shortage, that the reserves are actually much higher or that it's all just politics. But, what if they're wrong? How can you tell? Shell Oil officials are worried that demand for oil and gas will outstrip supply within seven years. 7 (Of course, they want the price to stay high, so there's an ulterior motive). OPEC insisted, a few days ago, that there's no shortage on the oil market. 8 Did you know you have to ask "what type of oil?" Light, sweet crude, which is easier to refine, is in short supply. Heavy, sour crude, with a higher sulfur content, is harder to process, but is more available.9

According to an article by Ismael Hossein-Zadeh, supply is probably at parity with demand, perhaps even a little higher. 10 So, why is the price of oil and gas still outrageously high? Hossein-Zadeh believes it's because of war and geopolitical instability. "...the current oil price shocks are caused largely by the destabilizing wars and political turbulences in the Middle East. These include not only the raging wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also the danger of a looming war against Iran that would threaten the flow of oil out of Persian Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz."

"To sum up, manipulative speculation and dollar depreciation account for most of the recent increases in the price of oil—speculation accounts for nearly 60 percent, dollar depreciation for almost 40 percent. This is no longer a secret. What remains largely a secret, and needs to be exposed, however, is the relationship between speculation and dollar depreciation, on the one hand, and war and geopolitical instability, on the other."11

Wow. When I started writing this article, I really had no idea that it would result in the following solution: if we get out of Iraq, oil prices will go down!

Sources:
1. http://www.energybulletin.net/node/8994
2. http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/08/news/international/pluggedin_fortune/index.htm
3. Ibid
4. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/money/2008/05/15/bcnoil115.xml
5. http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/oil-consumption-world/337
6. http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/oil-saudi-ghawar/343
7. http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/wef/article3248484.ece
8. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2008-05/09/content_6673565.htm
9. http://www.energybulletin.net/node/2341
10. http://www.counterpunch.org/zadeh07122008.html
11. Ibid

1984, History, and Government

2008-09-12T16:16:00.004-05:00

Like watching movies? Try one of these movies & other media, posted in chronological order.

1. George Orwell, 1984, the classic book on government-speak (war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength and it's not an "escalation", it's a "surge"). If you enjoy reading online, go to http://www.mirrors.wiretapped.net/security/info/books/george-orwell--1984.txt. Written in 1948.
2. The Secret Government: The Constitution in Crisis (Bill Moyers, 1987, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3505348655137118430). 90-minute documentary covering Reagan & the Iran-Contra Affair.
3. Haynes Johnson, Sleep-Walking Through History: America in the Reagan Years, 1991, Doubleday. Discusses how America became a debtor nation and ethical misconduct resulted from deregulation and ideology.
4. Capitol Crimes, an expose on corruption in the Bush Administration, in 4 parts, so plan on 90+ minutes. (Moyers, 2006, http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08012008/watch.html. Get an August '08 update at http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08012008/profile.html.)
5. Inside the War on Terror (http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07252008/watch2.html, July 2008). ~10 minute interview of journalist Jane Mayer on torture. Includes a transcript.
6. Scott McClellan's book, What Happened, blows the lid on the Bush Administration's use of falsehoods to get America involved in war in Iraq. (see 20 minute video at http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-33104). Also see Mike Green's book, The Whole Truth about the US War on Terror.
7. The Brookings Institution, Political Corruption in the US and Around the Globe (short read, looks to campaign finance reform, April. 08 (see http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2004/0428corruption.aspx). Want to see who pays for what in this country? Go to http://www.opensecrets.org/index.php.
8. Corruption at Fox News & Rupert Murdoch, see http://www.disclose.tv/viewvideo/8556/fox_news___CORRUPTION/. The story itself is unsettling; about 11 minutes.

More Reasons Not to Vote for McCain

2008-09-11T16:52:00.003-05:00

As if you needed more, here are my picks to date. If you click on the name of this blog, it'll take you to Bill Press' website where you can see even more.

1. He voted against raising the minimum wage 19 times.
2. He voted against veterans benefits and the GI Bill.
3. He was part of the Keating Five (dirty dealing with Charles Keating)
4. What "maverick" votes with George Bush ~90% of the time?
5. He's in favor of off-shore drilling (after being opposed to it).
6. He graduated 894 out of 899 from the Naval Academy. During his military flying career, he lost five Navy aircraft. He doesn't support POW rights. That makes him a natural for Commander in Chief?
7. He agrees with Bush's illegal wiretapping.
8. He doesn't know anything about the economy & we're a nation of whiners. Remember, you're not rich unless you make over $5 million.
9. He's in the pocket of big oil, taking over $2 million in campaign contributions. He also has a pro-big oil running mate whose husband works for BP.
10. He wants to continue the war in Iraq for 100 years. Oh, and let's bomb, bomb, bomb Iran while we're at it.

Sources:
1. http://thinkprogress.org/2008/08/31/mccain-minimum-wage/
2. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a9ZsiYWjIyxc&refer=home#
3. http://www.azcentral.com/news/specials/mccain/articles/0301mccainbio-chapter7.html
4. http://www.aflcio.org/issues/politics/mccain_bush.cfm
5. http://usnews.feedroom.com/?fr_story=FRdamp291545&rf=sitemap
6. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/deadlineusa/2008/jun/12/falloutfromthegitmoruling
7. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-kleiman/one-interview-two-gaffes_b_105968.html
8. http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2008-07/2008-07-14-voa27.cfm?CFID=37941943&CFTOKEN=10795194 and http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-rich18-2008aug18,0,1063695.story
9. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJPo5IGTd0A
10. http://thinkprogress.org/2008/01/04/mccain-100-years/

Where Art Thou, American Economy?

2008-08-30T12:23:00.003-05:00

In case you've been too busy trying to make ends meet to notice, the American Economy is in the tank. For a sobering look at

The Current US Trade Deficit (continually ticking up),
Wage Stagnation statistics
An economic slideshow of the American Economy (called Charting the Economy)

go to American Economic Alert (this blog title links to it). The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think-tank, reports data showing American workers today have increasing job security (see http://www.heritage.org/), what they don't say is how valuable that job is in today's market. In a June report in USA Today (go to http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2008-06-08-dream_N.htm) :
"Today's economic malaise caps a prolonged period during which the typical American lost ground.

From the end of the 2001 recession through last year, median household income fell almost every year even as the economy expanded and individual workers became more productive. The most recent official data indicate that in 2006, half of all families made more than $58,407 and half made less. That compares with an inflation-adjusted peak of $59,398 in 2000.

This financial stall marked the first time since World War II that the typical family was worse off at the end of an economic expansion than at the start, according to the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), a left-of-center think tank in Washington, D.C.

"This is the first business cycle on record where the median family income failed to recover its previous peak," EPI economist Jared Bernstein says. "It's been a uniquely disappointing cycle from the perspective of the median-income family."

As the report goes on to remind us, this data was before the financial crisis and huge increase in oil prices. It should be no surprise that expensive health care premiums, college tuition rising twice the rate of inflation, and increased food & energy costs add to the mess. The middle class is being squeezed out--some say purposefully, a literal "war on the middle class" (i.e., Lou Dobbs, Thom Hartmann, http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=PR&pubid=27).

This attack seems to have been going on since Reagan took office, from the firing of air traffic controllers (reducing union impact), to reduced regulation on banking (resulting in the S&L crisis), to NAFTA/CAFTA, and even more during the Bush Administration (see http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?articleId=7638). Reduced taxes to the top 1%, deregulation on banking (again), reduced environmental controls--they're all part of the current admininstration. So, within 3 years of Bush getting into office, the economy reportedly lost 2 million jobs (http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?articleId=7639). He revised agreements so that foreign nations did not have to follow US labor protections, he cut worker-training programs, he proposes using "guest workers" (importing workers who get paid lower wages & can also be kicked out of the country at any time), he has harassed labor unions, he also repealed the federal ergonomics standards (as well as other health & safety regulations). This war on labor, when the largest population of workers is the middle class, can hence be construed as a war on the middle class.

What will it take for Middle America to wake up and insist on change?

Palin is not a'biden

2008-08-29T15:45:00.005-05:00

McCain has chosen a former beauty queen from Alaska with ties to BIG OIL. Oh boy, just what we need--another Oil person in the White House to give the energy industry (who has spent over $400 million this first 1/2 of the year in advertising & lobbying) more tax breaks! She's anti-choice, pro-drilling in ANWR, pro-death penalty, wants to reduce government regulations, is anti-gay (from http://www.ontheissues.org/Sarah_Palin.htm) and was probably selected to target Hilary supporters. Those supporters don't know the issues if they think the two women have anything in common. I do like the fact that she has cracked down on corruption during her term as Gov. of Alaska. However, she's under investigation for trying to interfere with the firing of an ex-family member (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/08/palin-mccain-vp.html). You can catch video & other Palin info at http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video_log/2008/08/mccain_introduces_palin_at_day.html; they seem to have picked her back in June. It seems Alaska is also suing the federal government for listing the polar bear as an endangered species. I wonder if that has anything to do with the fact that her husband works for BP on Alaska's North Slope? (see http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/sarah_palin/).

From moveon.org (http://pol.moveon.org/emails/palin_announcement.html?rc=homepage):

Who is Sarah Palin? Here's some basic background:

She was elected Alaska's governor a little over a year and a half ago. Her previous office was mayor of Wasilla, a small town outside Anchorage. She has no foreign policy experience.¹

Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.²

She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000. ³

Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.⁴

She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.⁵

She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species—she was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.⁶

How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.⁷

Sources:

1. "Sarah Palin," Wikipedia, Accessed August 29, 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin

2. "McCain Selects Anti-Choice Sarah Palin as Running Mate," NARAL Pro-Choice America, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17515&id=13661-7967348-C6OF55x&t=1

3. "Sarah Palin, Buchananite," The Nation, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17736&id=13661-7967348-C6OF55x&t=2

4. "'Creation science' enters the race," Anchorage Daily News, October 27, 2006
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17737&id=13661-7967348-C6OF55x&t=3

5. "Palin buys climate denial PR spin—ignores science," Huffington Post, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17517&id=13661-7967348-C6OF55x&t=4

6. "McCain VP Pick Completes Shift to Bush Energy Policy," Sierra Club, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17518&id=13661-7967348-C6OF55x&t=5

"Choice of Palin Promises Failed Energy Policies of the Past," League of Conservation Voters, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17519&id=13661-7967348-C6OF55x&t=6

"Protecting polar bears gets in way of drilling for oil, says governor," The Times of London, May 23, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17520&id=13661-7967348-C6OF55x&t=7

7 "McCain met Palin once before yesterday," MSNBC, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=21119&id=13661-7967348-C6OF55x&t=8

The Best of the DNC

2008-08-27T19:30:00.006-05:00

Ok, I have picked my favorite speech makers at the DNC (if you missed them, go to their videos at http://gallery1.demconvention.com/ (you might need to install a couple plugins). Click on the Full Schedule & then look for the speaker).
1. Michelle Obama's--such a heartwarming speech and a great speaker.
2. Brian Schweitzer, Gov of Montana--the best Humor of the show & you gotta love that tie.
3. Hillary Clinton--wow. What a great speech for unity.
4. Dennis Kucinich--for a study on American finances & economy (if you weren't scared before, you will be now; I bet he lost 5 pounds giving that speech!).
5. Barack Obama's--a pointed attack at McCain, the current administration, and the Right Wing Talk show hosts.
Now let's take all that energy and get the job done!

Biden's the Bomb

2008-08-23T12:10:00.002-05:00

It was pretty amazing that the Obama Camp was able to keep Joe Biden's selection a secret for as long as they did! I knew the Big O was coming to Springfield to make the announcement; so nice, since he's the IL senator--until Jan. So what does Mr. Biden bring to the ticket? (Go here for more http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/23/AR2008082300890.html?hpid=topnews). During the Presidential debates, I was quite impressed with his oratory and international knowledge, both of which our nation is in desperate need. He's been in the Senate since '72 and is Chair of the Foreign Relations Committee. He's not afraid to speak out & challenge misconceptions with cold, hard facts--MSNBC has an exerpt from a June 22nd Meet the Press discussion at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26010055/?GT1=43001. (You can also check out key issues at http://biden.senate.gov/issues/).

Political Fact Checking

2008-08-14T19:22:00.005-05:00

So, be sure to check out my favorite websites to the far right (you might need to scroll down). I refer to these often when checking for sources of information. I've just added Factcheck.org (click on the title of this blog to go to it), which is a non-partisan site created by the Univ. of PA Annenberg Public Policy Center. They're currently running info on the latest political ads coming from both Obama & McCain.

On another note, watch out for new laws or attempted new laws on voter registration fraud. Despite the fact that there has been very little individual voter fraud in the US, Republicans are latching on to the idea of requiring a valid driver's license before you can vote. No biggee, you think, right? Well, did you know that there may be as many as 21 million voting-age Americans who don't have a driver's license? In Indiana alone, 13% of registered voters "lack the documents needed to obtain state identification." (see http://thinkprogress.org/2008/05/24/toobin-voter-id/). Students trying to vote near campus will be unable to do so because their college ID cards aren't eligible. A study done 2 years ago by John Lott Jr (see http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=925611) seems to suggest otherwise. When I did a Google search, it seems most fraud was done by groups (ACORN, county clerks, Republican staffers, etc.). It seems ironic that, up until the last election, no one really bothered that much about it because a large percentage of Americans weren't voting. (see http://www.electionstudies.org/nesguide/toptable/tab6a_2.htm). For instance, in '04, 23% failed to vote; in '02 38%. In 1990, 1994 & 1998, over 40% of Americans didn't bother to vote. For more interested details on American's and their voting habits, go to http://www.electionstudies.org/nesguide/gd-index.htm#6. (ANES is the American National Election Studies research database of election tools.). You can review some interesting tables at the Census Bureau, too (http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/voting/cps2006.html). Anyway, it seems to me that, with more registered voters (and more Americans vote Democratic than Republican), the goal should be to help, not hinder, the election. After all, politics has become such a dirty word you'd think our "fearless leaders" would try to do something to clean it up.

Fact or Fiction: Lies & Exaggerations in Books

2008-08-13T12:50:00.003-05:00

When I attended school & college, I learned that when writing, "facts" were substantiated with real proof and "fiction" was hearsay or made up. It seems authors and editors are having a hard time recognizing the difference, and the public is being misled. Remember James Frey and Oprah? (go to http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0104061jamesfrey1.html if you've forgotten). Or the woman claiming to be a holocaust victim who lived with wolves? (see it at http://forums.buddytv.com/lost-off-topic/65709-author-lies-about-being-holocaust-survivor-living-wolves.html) So here comes a "non-fiction" (defined at http://www.allwords.com/word-non-fiction.html, among other places on the web) book that, due to bulk ordering, will automatically be placed on the NYTimes #1 bestseller list. Ok, you didn't know that the bestseller list is based on the number of books ordered, not the number of books sold to consumers? Yet, even before it hits the stacks, it's already been vetted to be inaccurate (http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/search_results?qstring=corsi). On top of that, the author contradicts his own book. I'm referring to Jerome Corsi, also infamous for his attacks on Kerry in '04. In his own words, “‘The goal is to defeat Obama,’ Mr. Corsi said in a telephone interview. ‘I don’t want Obama to be in office.’” I hope Borders & B&N place the book firmly in the Fiction Section and consumers, instead of buying the book, read what they need in their in-store cafes. It apparently isn't worth the paper it's written on.

Share your Energy Ideas w/EDF

2008-08-11T16:12:00.003-05:00

The Environmental Defense Fund is running a blog for folks to share their ideas on saving energy. Check it out & add your ideas at http://environmentaldefenseblogs.org/greenroom/2008/08/08/oil-change-share-your-ideas/. And, don't forget to check out The Story of Stuff at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9153550196656656736. It might open your eyes.

Energized

2008-08-09T20:28:00.013-05:00

Some energy stats:
a. 96% of the world's transportation energy currently supplied by oil.

Take Action

Tell a Friend

b. $75= Cost of barrel of oil on July 18th, 2007.
c. $131= Cost of barrel of oil on July 18th, 2008.
d. 9.6 billion= Number of fewer miles Americans drove in May 2008 compared to May 2007.
e. 10.3 billion= Number of trips taken via the U.S. public transportation system in 2007, the highest in 50 years.
f. 44%= Percent increase in price of diesel fuel paid by public transit agencies.
g. 20% of America's public transit agencies that are cutting services due to budget constraints.
h. $6251= Amount the average two-worker household saves annually by taking public transportation instead of driving a car.
i. 2030= Year by which lifting the ban on offshore drilling may start to impact the price of gas.

Sources:

Let's take a look at what we have:
1. According to the DOE, one of the nation's biggest oil & gas producing areas is what they call the Appalachian & Illinois Basins. (http://fossil.energy.gov/programs/oilgas/publications/Basin_Analyses/AIBasin_061906.pdf)
This includes 10 states (KY, PA, MD, NY, OH, VA,WV, TN,IL & IN). They estimate 4.8 BBbl of oil & 79-96 Tcf (Trillion cubic feet) of natural gas. American currently uses about almost 20 MBl of oil per day. Assuming it could all be extracted in one day (& their own estimates put it at 2030), that would be about a year's supply.
2. The DOE shows (http://www.spr.doe.gov/dir/dir.html) 283.5 MBls of sweet crude in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. It's the world's largest emergency reserve & can only be released during a national emergency by the President. At our current national usage, this reserve is about 14 days of supply.
3. Go to http://www1.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/pdfs/41869.pdf for an exhaustive report on Wind Energy. Using 2006 prices, it looks like it costs about .01/kWh (I think the average electricity rate is .10/kWh. However, the report notes that wind energy prices have gone up due to the following: shortages of wind turbines & components due to high demand, a weak US dollar vs the Euro (many major components are imported from Europe) and a big rise in material costs (steel, copper & transport fuels).

4. Three types of Solar energies can be found at http://www1.eere.energy.gov/solar/: Concentrating solar power, Photovoltaics, & solar heating. Solar energy currently accounts for less than 0.1 percent of the electricity generated in the US (go to http://www.motherearthnews.com/Renewable-Energy/Solar-Power-Potential.aspx ). It could grow to 10% by 2025. Of course, electric companies need to take advantage of this technology. The creation of PV's has a toxic waste byproduct called silicon tetrachloride, though this waste can be recycled (see http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9889848-54.html). It's interesting that the BLM (Bureau of Land Management) has put a moratorium on solar projects (see http://www.enn.com/energy/article/37536) but not on fossil fuels.
5. For a report on Hydrogen Fuel Cells, go to http://www.doe.gov/energysources/hydrogen.htm. Taxpayers are already fronting a $1.2 billion commitment to hydrogen. Lots of stumbling blocks remain & full commercialization isn't planned until 2020 & mainly for the transportation sector. Even the DOE recommends, in the short run, purchasing a hybrid.
6. The DOE discusses nuclear energy at http://www.doe.gov/energysources/nuclear.htm. The big stumbling block continues to be safety--immediate on-site and long term regarding spent fuel rods. The government is currently trying to reduce "regulatory & institutional barriers" to building new nuclear plants for one reason--to not rely solely on natural gas. Go to http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/3mile-isle.html to learn about Three Mile Island and to http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/chernobyl/inf07.html for info on Chernobyl.
7. Alternatives include Geothermal, Hydropower, Bioenergy & Coal. More on these next time.

A Disappointment of Character

2008-08-09T19:58:00.002-05:00

It is so disappointing to hear about John Edwards, that he lied about having an affair, however brief. Lying to everyone about it is simply out of character, from all that I've read. Elizabeth Edwards had to fight this disappointment as well as cancer; what a trooper. He can, of course, kiss his political career goodbye. It's also appalling to think they both thought they could keep it hidden & run for President. Is this worse than John McCain divorcing his first wife because she became disfigured after an auto accident? I'm chewing on that one.

McCain Attacks!

2008-08-08T19:06:00.009-05:00

So McCain goes on the attack--again. This latest salvo ("Why doesn't Congress get back to Washington to work on an answer to the energy problem?") is political grandstanding once again. What he doesn't tell you is that the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, filibustered three energy bills & is holding out for off-shore drilling (go to http://www.kentucky.com/591/story/481454.html for more on this). Then go to https://pol.moveon.org/donate/gettowork.html?r=4015&id=13424-7967348-YLNK56x to see just how hard McCain has worked on energy policies.
In the meantime, it has just been discovered that McCain has received suspicious & potentially illegal campaign contributions, many of which stem from oil executives. Go to http://pol.moveon.org/mccain_oil_donors/?r_by=13441-7967348-RVqd8dx&rc=paste for more on this.
Now, face it. I think every Congressperson has, at some time or another, taken BIG OIL money. So, here's a website where you can see who, how much, etc. http://prezoilmoney.oilchangeusa.org/index.php. I'm sure that, given the amount of money the oil companies have now, we'll see much more pour into election coffers. (You know they're not trying to invest in refineries or alternate fuel--most of their profits are going into buying back their own stock to help keep the value up). Now, if you go to http://opensecrets.org/pres08/select.php?cycle=2008, you'll see that Hillary Clinton actually is slightly ahead of McCain. Of the 12 or so Presidential Candidates (both sides of the fence), Hillary & McCain together pulled in more oil money than the other 10 combined.
And, because I enjoy a good laugh, I just had to add Paris Hilton's Campaign Ad (go to http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/64ad536a6d).

Political Rhetoric & Senior Moments

2008-08-05T11:54:00.009-05:00

If you are politically aware, you realize that campaign ads are nothing more than political rhetoric. Sometimes, however, what you don't know is that the producers of them also stretch the truth or outright lie. And those lies are never forced to be retracted. In many instances, corporate media won't cover it either. So how do you know what's going on?
1. Realize that politcal ads are just that--a marketing tool to sell you something.
2. Find viable sources to help you decide a candidates position (start with the party platform, then the candidate's own websites). BTW: Wikipedia is not a viable source.
3. Ignore the polls. Remember, 32% of statistics are wrong (according to Marty Triola). Polls can be easily misdirected, from only using specific area codes to the wording of the questions.
4. Realize that most of today's "mainstream media" is corporately owned. (Go to http://cjrarchives.org/issues/2005/5/editorial.asp, http://cjrarchives.org/issues/2003/6/comment.asp, http://www.thenation.com/special/bigten.html and http://www.mediachannel.org/news/indepth/fcc/. It's thus in the interest of about 10 media companies to stifle stories not in its best interest. These media giants also send big, fat campaign checks to Pro Big Business candidates.

So, especially if you live in a "key state"--those considered a battleground (http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/whos-ahead/key-states/map.html)--you'll see dozens of misleading ads or political statements that are nothing more than rhetoric. My fave right now is McCain's remark asking Obama to urge Congress back into session over the Energy issue. He makes it sound like something BO can do & that it's unusual for Congress to be out of session. However, doesn't everyone know that Congress always takes a summer break? Also, since McCain has been in the Senate for about 20 odd years, why didn't they do it before? Come on, gimme a break.

Also, if you didn't know it before, maybe you will now. McCain definitely has his "senior moments." Now, I don't mean to be ageist (after all, I'm moving in that direction myself!), but check out the 3 different camera angles--esp. the 3rd one--showing McCain's befuddled face this week. Go to Brave New Films (the title of this blog links directly to them) and watch this short video:http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/39179-mccain-s-youtube-problem-just-became-a-nightmare (cut/paste this link if the main link doesn't work). You can see, in John McCain's own words, his confused & often opposite stand on various issues over the last few years. We need a clear head in the White House, not someone verging on Alzheimer's!

The News You Can Trust

2008-07-28T20:52:00.005-05:00

So, who can you trust to get unbiased political info? Unfortunately, the days of fairness in news coverage dissolved during the Reagan Administration. Unbiased journalists are pretty much a thing of the past. In fact, it seems many of the "talking heads" on tv & radio are in fact not journalists--no journalism or mass communication degrees. The news ranks have also diminished in the last decade, so that fewer reporters are available to dig for facts. Add to this the fact that a few corporations own the majority of the news outlets (& thus control what we hear). In recent years, I've had to go to the Internet to find the real story. Though you have to beware on the 'net because not everything you read is correct. Check it out, verify it with other sources, then it might have a touch of truth to it. That's why I try to include citations or links to sources on each post--you know where I get my info. I also have a list of Favorite sites to the lower right on this blog. A brief recap:

1. Looking for your representative? Want to check on the latest federal legislation? Go to the Library of Congress--Thomas, they like to call it.
2. Want to know an excellent group for scientifically supported information on the environment? Go to the Union of Concerned Scientists.
3. Want an exhaustive site with mega-sources from both sides of the political stream? Go to realclearpolitics.com.

Keep checking back for updated Favorites.

The Fickle Fist of FISA

2008-07-12T16:14:00.003-05:00

FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which Bush proudly acknowledges he ignored (thus breaking the law), was just amended by Congress & signed off by the Prez. Why should you care about Foreign Intelligence? Because it just gave the government even more power to tap your phone calls & read your emails (and blogs). It also retroactively excludes Telecom companies from lawsuits based on warrantless spying. Why do you care, since you've done nothing wrong? Because it allows them to spy w/out a paper trail. No paper trail means that, if someone makes a mistake, and you are falsely accused of something, there's no paper trail that can track the events & help you prove your innocence. It also reduces your 4th Amendment Rights. In case you don't remember the 4th, here it is:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." (see the whole list at http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html).

The ACLU is going to fight this one in court. They also have a petition going that you can sign at http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/115033355. How many more rights are we going to lose? Is anyone paying attention out there?

Flippin & Floppin

2008-07-12T16:00:00.002-05:00

Check out the article at Huffington Post (just click on the title) for the latest McCainisms in detail. Here's the list for this week:
1. McCain unambiguously called Social Security "an absolute disgrace."
2. McCain's top economic policy adviser calls Americans a bunch of "whiners" for being worried about the slumping economy.
3. Iraqi leaders call for a timetable for U.S. withdrawal, McCain gets caught in a bizarre denial and flip flop.
4. McCain's economic plan to cut the deficit has no details and is simply not believable.
5. McCain's deficit plan includes bringing the troops home represents a major Iraq flip-flop.
6. McCain campaign misled about economists support.
7. McCain makes a joke about killing Iranians.
8. McCain denies, flatly, that he ever said that he is not an expert in economics.
9). McCain distorts his record on veterans benefits in response to a question from Vietnam Veteran, who then proceeds to call McCain out on it.
10.) McCain demonstrates he knows nothing about Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Pickin' & Grinnin'

2008-07-12T12:43:00.005-05:00

T. Boone Pickens, an oil man from an oil family in Oklahoma (read his bio at http://www.boonepickens.com/early-days.asp) just released this message to the media:

"America is in a hole and it's getting deeper every day. We import 70 percent of our oil at a cost of $700 billion a year - four times the annual cost of the Iraq war. I've been an oil man all my life, but this is one emergency we can't drill our way out of. But if we create a new renewable energy network, we can break our addiction to foreign oil. On January 20, 2009, a new President gets sworn in. If we're organized, we can convince Congress to make major changes toward cleaner, cheaper and domestic energy resources.To get this done, I need your help. Check out the plan. If you think it's worth fighting for, please join our effort, and encourage everyone you know to do the same." (see his plan at http://www.pickensplan.com/).

View his short video, read the plan, respond to it. He supports moving Natural Gas into transportation & Wind Power to replace 38% of our current oil imports.
Contact your local, state & federal representatives, if you haven't already. (Go to http://thomas.loc.gov/to search for your representative. This link--Library of Congress--is also posted under My Favorite Links on the main blog page). Remember, the bigger the noise, the more likely they'll listen.

An Oil Slick

2008-07-05T12:23:00.003-05:00

First, apologies for missing weblinks in previous posts. For some reason, they disappeared. So, let's see how it goes w/this entry. Go to http://by119w.bay119.mail.live.com/mail/mail.aspx?rru=inbox&n=1849308191. Many Americans are now favoring oil drilling in order to reduce prices & dependence. What many don't know are the following facts:

Fast Facts on Drilling and Gas Prices

Drilling will not lower gas prices today or solve our energy crisis.

1. Even the U.S. Energy Information Administration has said that massive exploitation of new oil deposits will not produce oil for nearly a decade -- and then will not lower gasoline prices by more than a few cents per gallon.
2. Under the Bush Administration, drilling permits have risen from 3,802 to 7,561 between 2002 and 2007. Eight years of increased oil leasing and production on America’s public lands has left us with nothing but high gas prices for consumers and record profits for Big Oil companies.
3. More drilling would not affect world oil prices. The US has less than 3% of the world's oil reserves, yet we consume almost 25% of the world's oil.

Expanded drilling threatens permanent damage to wildlife.

1. Offshore drilling threatens dolphins, whales, sea turtles and other imperiled wildlife. Drilling discharges mercury and other toxins into our fragile ecosystems. Such pollution can destroy beaches, and poison and kill the marine wildlife that we all care about. The noise from drilling is also incredibly disruptive to marine mammals. So while oil companies like ExxonMobil would continue to swim in record profits, dolphins and whales could become fatally disoriented, beach themselves and die.
2. Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge threatens polar bears and other Arctic wildlife. The noise and disturbance caused by drilling in the Arctic Refuge -- the most important onshore denning habitat for America’s struggling polar bears -- could cause polar bear mothers to abandon their cubs to die.
3. Expanded drilling perpetuates global warming. Such drilling would further extend America’s dependence on climate-changing fuel sources that are threatening the very survival of polar bears and other animals.

We need real solutions that will end our dependence on oil once and for all.

1. It’s time to take back the giveaways to Big Oil and secure our energy independence by investing that money in clean, renewable energy, energy efficiency, increased public transportation and the technologies needed to get our cars going further on a gallon of gas.
2. A bold national commitment to renewable energy will put our economy back on the right path by bringing energy costs under control, creating over 820,000 new jobs, and making us more energy independent.
3. Congress should stop giving tax breaks to Big Oil and start funding constructive alternatives that can make a difference in people’s lives NOW!
(in case my credits above get lost, the above is quoted from Rodger Schlickeisen at Defenders of Wildlife. The title should link to their website.)

The Candidates on Oil

2008-06-28T11:25:00.013-05:00

Since oil & gas prices are still at ridiculously high levels (and note how oilman Bush has done nothing about it; see article at )), let's see where Obama & McCain stand on the issue.

McCain
As of this writing, McCain supports opening up off-shore (coastal) sites to oil drilling (see .) He opposes drilling in ANWR (Artic National Wildlife Reserve). That could change, though, because he frequently flip-flops on issues (go to ). From his own website () you can see a list of items (click on Issues, then on American Energy) that he supports. He calls it the Lexington Project & #1 is more offshore drilling. He also includes a "clean car challenge" for automakers, a $300 million prize for a "battery challenge", & supports Flex-Fuel autos, cellulosic alcohol, & eliminating US tariffs & subsidies on ethanol. He supports "clean-coal" initiatives and building 45-100 new nuclear power plants. The very last item on his list is to encourage renewable energy (no dollars or numbers mentioned,just some sort of tax credit). In the meantime, check out his campaign aides & lobby money (go to and to for a video on the topic. And, from my read on his site, none of these would address the immediate issue.

Obama
From his website ()
He supports raising the CAFE (corporate average fuel economy), has sponsored or authorized legislation on the use of renewable fuels, a "healthcare for hybrids" act, a low carbon fuel standard act and he introduced the Oil Sense Act to eliminate oil tax breaks. He helped introduce the American Fuels Act to increase production, distribution & end uses of biofuels. So, his website supports that he has actively been trying to do something about the energy crisis. However, like McCain, many of his responses are also long term.

What both seem to be missing is the role of the futures market, speculation, and the Enron-loophole that allows speculation at ridiculously low initial investment. Americans, math anxiety in full mode, start to glaze over when you talk about this. So, here's the quick & dirty. When Bush Jr came into office, one of the first things he did was ease market restrictions (anyone know about the S&L Crisis of the '80's & how the Bush Family was involved?). Ergo Enron & all that entailed. These restrictions have never been rescinded. If we reduce the ability to speculate worldwide, I believe we'd see an immediate drop in prices.

We went into Iraq for oil, right? What if we took all those 150,000 US troops, offered oil jobs to Iraqis, & trained 'em to a) guard the pipeline from terrorists b) learn a new job skill in whatever area of oil production seems best c)provide housing & infrastructure on location and d) work with the Iraqi govt to ensure safety off all concerned. If oil starts pumping out of Iraq, supply will be up & prices will drop.

The reason there's so much uncertainty in oil is because data is so scarce. Go to . So, we're relying on incomplete data or possibilities to begin with--at least in terms of what oil exists and how much remains. This data is necessary, so perhaps we need to put a few more dollars into it for an earlier release.

A Crude Story

2008-06-12T15:42:00.005-05:00

Crude Impact is a film currently playing on Sundance Channel. I recommend it, esp. for those who know very little about oil & how it affects everything. I've picked up a few other "crude snippets" over the last few months. Enjoy.

1. According to Congressman Robert Wexler (FL), the oil industry is sitting on hundreds of oil leases that have yet to be developed. Leases with proven energy deposits. In the meantime, the Republicans keep pushing for drilling in ANWAR & other protected areas (with no proof of energy deposits). Do we smell delay tactics in Big Oil? They're making tons of money now; why bother developing further? And Exxon is one of the biggest contributors to Republican coffers. (http://www.wexler.house.gov/).
2. What US company has the most oil interests? Nope, not Exxon. It's Morgan Stanley, a financial/investment services corporation. They own 60% of Olco Petroleum Group. . They also run an oil tanker business (see http://www.marinelink.com/Story/Morgan-Stanley-May-Run-Larger-Tankers-for-Oil-Trades-206124.html). They are the world's biggest trader in oil derivatives (see preceding article). So, what happens every time Morgan Stanley issues oil forecasts? They predict higher prices & lo & behold, the price spikes. Cha-ching. Right into the MS coffers.
3. Big Oil subsidies (reduced corporate income taxes for the oil industry, lower than average sales taxes on gas, government funded programs for big oil, etc.). These subsidies provide no incentive for anything to change. (see http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/fuel_economy/subsidizing-big-oil.html). Also see . Let's reduce or eliminate these subsidies & instead help solar, hydrothermal & wind companies.
This is pretty crude stuff, alright.

The Obama Express

2008-06-03T19:44:00.006-05:00

Ok, the link will take you to a funny You Tube video (as long as that link remains), but that's the point. We need more humor in politics--just ask Stephanie Miller at http://www.stephaniemiller.com/home.php?PageId=85&PageSubId=. Stream her show or listen "live" if you live in Chicagoland.
So the Obama Express is heading for the Big Showdown, with Clinton conceding shortly (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24944453/?GT1=43001). The question everyone is asking, "Will Clinton be his running mate?" Does it make sense? What states can she bring to the ticket that Obama doesn't already have. Face it: politics IS politics. The Huffington Post has a list of Top 10 (): Jim Webb, Hilary, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, Brian Schweitzer,Janet Napolitano, Sherrod Brown, Chuck Hagel, Wesley Clark, Kathleen Sebelius, Tom Daschle & Mike Bloomberg. Ok, for the non-serious, go to 23/6-- it's a hoot. Oh, I think the real question right now is: Who will replace Obama in the Senate? Gov. Rod gets to pick the replacement until the next congressional election year. Would he chose Lisa Madigan? Jan Schakowsky? Rahm Emanuel? Jesse Jackson Jr? This is getting really interesting....

Progressive Political Places

2008-05-23T10:28:00.008-05:00

Looking for political information that the mainstream media isn't reporting? Wondering what the "other side of the story" might be? Wanting more than this single blog can track? Here's just a few sources that I regularly check:

1. WCPT 820AM, wcpt820.com. Listen in the car or stream into your computer at home. My 3 faves: Stephanie Miller for a humorous look at politics; Ed Schultz for downhome appeal; Tom Hartmann for an insightful perspective.
2. THOMAS, http://thomas.loc.gov/. The Library of Congress has a great site for searching for legislation, info on Congressional sessions & other political info.
3. Real Clear Politics, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/. Keep track of the delegates, the race, and various articles from valid sources.
4. Move On. http://www.moveon.org/. Go here for the latest political issues and activism.
5. The Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/. The latest political info you may not hear on tv (or it started here & tv picked it up).
6. Center for Responsive Politics, http://www.opensecrets.org/index.php. Find out where the money is going--and coming from.
7. TruthDig. http://www.truthdig.com/. Find the story beneath the story.
I also check the Washington Post & NY Times.

Budget Busting Bronco

2008-05-13T18:23:00.004-05:00

Joe Miller at Newsweek has posted an interesting article on John McCain's balance-budget promises. On the stump, he has promised to not only balance the budget, but keep Bush's tax cuts and add a few of his own. Go here for part 1, http://www.newsweek.com/id/136779/page/1. For a condensed version:
1. McCain says he'll cut spending by cutting out $100 billion in earmarks. Since most earmarks are essentially just saying what programs will get the money already in the works, this is silly.
2. McCain says he'll cut the budget to get to $100 billion. He also says defense might increase. That means an 18.5% cut across everything else--student loans, vet benefits, highway construction, etc.
3. He overstates the size at which the government has grown. On April 20, "My friend, we have increased the size of government by some 40% just in the last few years. By some 40%, by trillions. By trillions, we have increased the size of government." It took a decade, adjusting for inflation. The last time budgets were trillions smaller was 1951.

Of course, McCain did admit he knows nothing about economics. Maybe he thinks finance is the same.

Wright or Wrong?

2008-05-10T12:50:00.010-05:00

So now we're voting on the person who has the fewest non-PC friends and associates? Not on policy or anything that really matters, but on who you know or knew--even when you were 8 years old. Gimme a break. The media (and remember that over 80% is controlled by corporations and conservatives like Rupert Murdoch) had a field day with Obama vs Rev. Wright. Let's shift over to the other side.

What you probably don't know about McCain:
1. He intervened in the investigation of a savings & loan run by his friend & benefactor, Charles Keating (see http://www.newsweek.com/id/135400?tid=relatedcl). This was in 1987 & involved the S&L Crisis that cost taxpayers $500 million cool ones. McCain was one of the infamous Keating 5. Keating was convicted & spent time in jail for it.
2. Doug Goodyear was selected to manage the Republican convention this summer. McCain has protrayed himself as anti-special interest, yet here you have the CEO of DCI Group that lobbied for ExxonMobil, GM, etc. (http://www.newsweek.com/id/136321). Update: May 12, Goodyear resigns today.
3. He has been endorsed by Pastor John Hagee, a San Antonio televangelist who told NPR, after Hurrican Katrina, that New Orleans had suffered "the judgment of God" because of its "level of sin." He called the Catholic Church "the great whore" and a "false cult system." (http://www.newsweek.com/related.aspx?subject=John+Hagee&tid=relatedcl). "On women, Hagee makes St. Paul, notorious for treating women like second-class citizens, look like a feminist. ``Do you know the difference between a woman with PMS and a snarling Doberman pinscher?'' asks Hagee. ``The answer is lipstick.'' As if that's not insulting enough, he continues: ``Do you know the difference between a terrorist and a woman with PMS? ... You can negotiate with a terrorist.'' Real cut-up, that John Hagee." . Despite this, McCain personally wooed Hagee for more than a year to get his endorsement.
4. He hired Richard Quinn as a political advisor in 2000. Quinn has headed the racist Southern Partisan Quarterly Review for many years, has ties with David Duke, and, along with McCain, opposed a Martin Luther King holiday. (see http://www.liberaloasis.com/2008/04/mccain_guiltbyassociation_for.php).
5. One of McCain's top campaign fundraisers is Donald Diamond, an Arizona real estate mogel. Diamond wanted to buy land at a military base & McCain intervened to help speed up the sale. (see http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_04/013572.php).
6. McCain's "spiritual guide" is Rev. Rod Parsley, an Ohio televangelist who has called on Christians to wage war against Islam, which he calls a "false religion." He has railed against the separation of church & state, homosexuals, & abortion rights. See this for yourself at http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/38133-mccain-s-spiritual-guide-wants-america-to-destroy-islam. Update: June 3, 2008. After the above info hit the mainstream media, McCain rejected both Parsley & Hagee. Just remember he courted them in the first place.

The big question is: Why haven't we heard this from the "main-stream media?"

McCain on Healthcare

2008-04-30T12:15:00.004-05:00

So, we get more of the same and then some with McCain (perhaps that should be his real campaign slogan). McCain's position:
1. Tax Incentives for coverage ($5000)
2. No new regulations on insurers
3. Individual approach vs employer-based
4. Tax breaks to businesses would go to individuals
5. Create a GAP plan as a last resort operated by non-profits
6. Incentives to doctors & hospitals to use cutting-edge technology to reduce medical costs
7. Health savings accounts

This plan is similar to one proposed by Bush in his 07 State of the Union address. That plan flopped in Congress. What it fails to address:
1. Preexisting conditions wouldn't be covered, affecting millions of Americans.
2. Older Americans & the poor would be forced into the "Gap" program, which doesn't even exist & would take years to implement.
3. Insurers would love it because they can charge what they want--as usual.
4. Doctors & hospitals already charge patients for the new technology they purchase (it's built into the cost of care); so we'll see an increase in costs.
5. Only those earning enough can afford to put money into a health savings account. We're talking upper middle class and the rich.

I have a suggestion: why don't Americans share the health care program used by members of Congress? Why does Congress get a gold-plated, single-payer system while the folks who elected them have to make decisions like "what presciption can I go off of so I can pay for groceries?" or "my healthcare costs just went up again this year, including out of pocket--I guess I'll have to delay that mammogram again this year."

Environmental Politics

2008-04-26T14:18:00.005-05:00

Bobby Kennedy Jr published a compelling manifesto to the next President (click the link to go to Vanity Fair's May '08 article). The gist is the US Govt needs to go to war--on carbon, not the Middle-east. Specifically:
1. End oil & coal subsidies
2. Retool our power transmission infrastructure
3. Create a carbon cap and trade system
4. Open the electric grid to markets
5. Establish a streamlined & sensible energy efficiency program

Wouldn't it be nice if, in any future Presidential debates, candidates are asked meaningful questions and not garbage? Go here for some editorials on the debate (or lack thereof), http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-g-brant/the-abc-news-debate-as-ba_b_97261.html & http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2008/04/abc_news_debate_focuses_on_news/. Americans have to go to the web to find the important information--and not everything on the web is valid.

McCain Would Educate Women

2008-04-25T14:46:00.002-05:00

"On Wednesday, Senate Republicans filibustered the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, a law that would have overturned an appalling Supreme Court decision that practically abolished remedies for gender-based compensation discrimination in the workplace. In opposing this legislation, Senator John McCain said that if women want better-paying jobs, they just need more "education and training." Then, he didn't even show up for the vote. (see http://action.credomobile.com/)."

You know, I didn't pay attention to the criticism about McCain's age--not all old folks have dymentia. However, after hearing this, his statements on the economy, and on Iraq, I'm beginning to wonder if he hasn't reverted to his childhood.

Oil in South Dakota

2008-04-25T11:15:00.002-05:00

When an oil-producing country has trouble--unrest, refinery problems, etc.--the price of gas at the pump immediately jumps. Here's news that just hit this week. Why hasn't the price of oil dropped? Unlike the Alaskan Wildlife Refuge, this one seems to be in an area less environmentally sensitive and NOT in Texas. Of course, this is only 1/2 what the US uses in a year. So, more sustainable options are necessary before we can be independent of Middle-east oil--or our own.

--------------------------------------------------------------
April 25th, 2008
The U.S. Geological Survey just published its official results of a groundbreaking study.

Its report confirmed a massive oil reserve in an area the locals have nicknamed the "Bakken," which stretches across North Dakota, Montana and southeastern Saskatchewan.

The new USGS study estimates a whopping 3.65 billion barrels of oil in the Bakken... but here's what they didn't mention:

The reported 3.65 billion barrels of oil mean estimate is for 'undiscovered' oil only, and doesn't include known oil, such as reserves.

In fact, the study reports a 25-fold increase in the amount of oil that can be recovered... compared to the agency's estimate back in 1995.

Discovered over 50 years ago, the Bakken deposit--once impossible to extract--is now being hailed as the single largest oil find in US history.

That's because, today, thanks to breakthrough drilling techniques like horizontal drilling, the Bakken's oil shales can be extracted relatively cheaply.

When that happens, this light, sweet oil will cost Americans just $16 per barrel!

YoYo McCain

2008-04-25T10:39:00.004-05:00

As recently as a year ago, I respected & agreed with John McCain on one issue--torture. He now has lost even that plus by agreeing that waterboarding is not torture--ignoring the Geneva Convention & Nuremburg trials. In the past, McCain seemed to not always follow the party line. However, this just in from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24305534:

"Now that he is the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, however, McCain is marching straight down the party line. The economic package he has laid out embraces many of the tax policies he once decried: extending Bush's tax cuts he voted against, offering investment tax breaks he once believed would have little economic benefit and granting the long-held wishes of tax lobbyists he has often mocked."

In the past, be bucked Bush & many other Republicans by voting against tax breaks for the wealthy. However, "in Pittsburgh last week, in the face of a projected budget deficit of $400 billion and a sixth year of war, McCain proposed extending Bush's tax cuts, including the dividends and capital gains tax cuts, lowering the corporate income tax, allowing businesses to write off the cost of new equipment and technology, banning Internet and new cellphone taxes, and permanently extending the business tax credit for research and development. By McCain's accounting, his tax proposals would cost the Treasury $200 billion a year."

And remember this: as of mid-2005, the Chinese have accumulated over a trillion dollars of US Treasuries. As of Feb. '08, China Investment Corp was close to a deal w/JC Flowers, to put $4 billion into a new fund to invest in ailing US financial institutions. (See Financial Times, Feb. 8)

"The move follows blockbuster transactions in which sovereign wealth funds from Asia and the Middle East have invested directly in beleaguered banks such as UBS, Merrill Lynch, Citigroup and Morgan Stanley.

"The tie-up under discussion would differ from those deals because CIC would be investing indirectly, reflecting the growing worry among sovereign wealth funds of a political backlash as they put more money into well-known foreign companies.

"The CIC would be also less vulnerable to domestic criticism if its investments went sour."

So, who do we believe? The McCain of the past or the present? What will the future McCain look like? Will he find a new residence in Beijing?

Don't buy the Healthcare Lie

2008-04-17T17:05:00.002-05:00

Frontline at pbs.org, has done an excellent job of reporting how other countries offer national health care & how it compares to the US. If you missed the movie Sicko, this is less amusing, but as relevant--if not more so. Don't miss it, especially since many in the media don't want to cover the issues. The government can educate our children but can't see that they stay healthy? For shame.

Are we Stupid, or does the Press just think we are?

2008-04-17T16:06:00.002-05:00

"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."
-Martin Luther King, Jr.

First off, I admit to only seeing/hearing part of last night's Democratic debate. What I heard makes me glad I didn't bother. The first 52 minutes, from what I hear, covered nothing more earth-shattering than lapel pins & friends who say stupid things. Not one word on real issues: gas prices, global warming, health care, Iraq, labor & jobs, the economy. No wonder the American people are frustrated and (dare I say it?) bitter. The issues of the day continue to be overshadowed by inane topics, many of which the average voter hasn't a clue. It's time Hillary & Barack say, "Forget this question on Bosnia lies; who's health care is it going to pay?"

Send a message to ABC by signing a petition: http://pol.moveon.org/enoughdistractions/?id=12457-7967348-yyHWCr&t=5.