Puget Sound Liberals Weekly Newsletter #204
Enhancing Freedom, Opportunity and Cooperation in
Through informing and networking Liberals and Liberal Organizations.
Our vision is hundreds of thousands of well-informed
Our Website Our Editor To Unsubscribe Table of
Contents * Featured Articles Calendars of Events Communication with Our Members Commercial
Media Pundits Don’t Clarify Policy Issues.
We Do. Opportunities Petitions Commentaries from Our Members Beverly Isenson: LD 28 for 1 year Afghan Withdrawal* Linda
Boyd: Stop Funding for Afghanistan Escalation* John de
Graaf: Gross National Happiness Conference** Dean
Baker: We Need Foreign Primary Care Doctors Liberals and Democrats Links to the Beef State and Local Links
to the Beef Washington State Republican Farm Team Is Weak David Spring: Our Budget Shortfall May be $4-5 Billion Let’s Replace Brian Baird with a Consistent Liberal Nation and World Links to the Beef Unused and Repaid TARP Money Should Be Used for Stimulating Jobs We Can Each Invest Individually to Create Jobs** Our Liberal Spirit Our
Political Priorities ·
Fair Clean
Elections and Open Government ·
Fair Taxes and
Competent Spending ·
Investment for
Productivity ·
Quality
Health, Education, Jobs, Income ·
Environmental
Protection and Energy Independence ·
Security and
Equal Rights ·
Justice and
Peace Everywhere ·
International
Cooperation and Leadership Conservatives oppose all of these Let’s
End Our National Nightmare
Let’s
Restore Our American Dream More on Conservative opposition to our
American Dream Washington State’s 5 Major Needs · Federal Funding for Health and Education · Substituting
a Progressive Income Tax · Replacing
Conservative Legislators Quote of the Week Gross National Happiness
is more important than Gross National Product. Bhutan King Jigme Singye Wangchuck
Dean Baker:
Per Capita Emissions Are a Big Deal*
Calendar of Events
Friday, December 11 at
6:30 PM at Des Moines Activity Center (2045 South 216th Street, Des
Moines) - Casual Reception and Dinner
Party in support of Representative Dave Upthegrove and other Blue-Green
Alliance legislative leaders.
Suggested Donations $25 - $100.
Saturday, December 12:
All union members and organizations are urged to turn out and bring their union
banners and homemade signs to "Health
Care 4 the Holidays" rallies, organized by Health Care for America
NOW! and the Healthy Washington Coalition. Here is the schedule:
BELLINGHAM -- Noon at City Hall, 210 Lottie St.
BREMERTON -- 10:30 a.m. to noon at Harborside
Fountain Park.
EVERETT -- 1 p.m. at the Courthouse Amphitheater, Rockefeller & Pacific
OLYMPIA -- Permit application pending for noon at Heritage Park,
adjacent to the Capitol Campus.
SEATTLE -- 2 to 3 p.m. at Occidental
Park at Occidental Ave. South and S. Main St. Health
care rally featuring Congressman Jim McDermott, Mayor-Elect Mike McGinn,
Rabbi Yohanna Kinberg, Leno Rose-Avila, holiday caroling & more!! Participants are encouraged to bring holiday
greeting cards to Senators Murray and Cantwell saying why you want them to pass
health care reform before Congress takes its holiday recess.
SPOKANE -- Time/location TBA
TACOMA -- 1:30 to 3 p.m. at First United Methodist Church, 621 Tacoma Ave. S.
VANCOUVER -- Time/location TBA
YAKIMA -- 1 p.m. at Chesterly Park, N. 40th Ave and Powerhouse Rd.
We
have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to achieve something for which American
working families have fought for decades: genuine health care reform. We have
an opportunity to loosen the albatross of insurance company greed that is
making health insurance unaffordable, squeezing middle-class budgets, harming
U.S. businesses' competitiveness, and perpetuating the moral crisis of rampant
medical bankruptcies. We have the opportunity to do this for ourselves, for our
children and for their children.
But
well-heeled insurance industry and short-sided business lobbying groups are
spending millions every day to convince Congress to maintain the status quo and
kill health insurance reform. Although they have been voted into the minority,
politically motivated Republicans are doing everything in their power to keep
President Barack Obama from succeeding in this effort. That's why we need to keep up the pressure
and remind Congress that working families continue demand real health care
reform. For more information about the legislation before Congress, visit the AFL-CIO's
Health Care web site.
Sunday,
December 13 at 4:40 PM at Regal Meridian Theater (1501 7th Avenue,
Seattle) - Film: The End of Poverty and
Discussion
Communication
with Our Members
Commercial Media Pundits
Don’t Clarify Policy Issues. We Do.
On issue after issue - heath care
reform, Afghanistan and job creation- the commercial media pundits endlessly
express cynical comments concerning the political motives of the various
participants. They never seriously
address the issues in detail. We have
commented in detail about these issues:
Of these three issues, Afghanistan has
received the worst treatment. President
Obama has not just proposed adding troops with the expectation that they will
be withdrawing after 2 years. He has
proposed using the troops, development agents and diplomacy to assist the
independent development and security of villagers against both the Taliban and
corrupt government agents. This involves
working with non-corrupt government agencies, assisting village development,
co-opting non-ideological Taliban and training non-corrupt Afghan troops.
The Taliban cannot not afford to lessen
their activity for two years so that they can come back as we withdraw. If they do, so much the better.
It is not surprising that many people
are not sure whether to support President Obama’s policies, when their main
source of information (commercial media pundits) do such a lousy job of
describing them.
Opportunities
Useful
Websites: contacts, maps, community organizing tools, and more.
Petitions
Tell
Governor Christine Gregoire to present a balanced budget, both cuts and
increased revenues.
Tell
your senators to support the Casey Kids Amendment which provides support for
children
Tell your
senators to vote against confirming Ben Bernanke as Federal Reserve chair.
Tell
Carol Browner to advise President Obama to promote strong global warming
control action.
Tell your congress
members to refuse to fund any troops for Afghanistan.
Tell President
Obama to make genocide prevention a priority.
Tell
President Obama to commit to celebrating Global Family Day.
Commentaries
From Our Members
Beverly Isenson: LD 28 Supports 1 year Afghan
Withdrawal
Dave, On Friday, December 4th,
our 28th LD in Pierce County (Lakewood, Steilacoom, Dupont, University Place
and part of Tacoma) passed a resolution calling on the president to develop a
one-year timeline for withdrawal from Afghanistan. See Below. We'd like to see other Democratic LD
committees adopt the same or a similar resolution. We found that just
persuading people to support it worked to educate them about just how drastic
the situation is.
We're working on a couple of other resolutions, including one commending the
President for working with the Russians to continue to observe the START
treaty, while both nations work on formally renewing the treaty. The treaty
expires today at midnight. It provides for the reduction of both countries'
nuclear arsenals. It came into force toward the end of the Soviet Union, and
provides inspection teams in both countries. Each nation has already reduced
its nuclear arsenal from around 30,000 warheads to about 6,000. The new treaty
is expected to reduce the numbers by about one-third. Bush refused to consider
extending the treaty.
Could you post the Afghanistan resolution in the Puget Sound Liberals
newsletter? We'd like to start working with other PCOs and members of the
State and county central committees on this. We won't keep silent, as many
people did in the early years of the Vietnam War, and then have the nation
explode with frustration. Beverly Isenson, PCO 28-451
(Steilacoom) 253-588-7115
RESOLUTION
ON AFGHAN WAR AND US FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
WHEREAS
the U.S. as the leader of a multi-national United Nations-sanctioned armed
forces invaded Afghanistan in 2001 and overthrew the despotic and violent
Taliban government, and
WHEREAS
at least 61% of Americans recognize that the Afghanistan war is going badly for
the United States, and a majority of Americans are increasingly disturbed about
the toll the war is taking on the 68,000 young men and women serving there, and
on their families, and
WHEREAS
the war costs the United States $43 billion per year, and will rise by $1
billion a year for each additional 1,000 U.S. troops sent to Afghanistan, and
WHEREAS
the U.S. debt is now approximately $12 trillion, and
WHEREAS
the $1 trillion spent on the Afghan and Iraq wars has increased the U.S. debt
almost as much as the 2001 tax cuts initiated by former President George W.
Bush and enacted by a compliant Republican-led Congress, forcing war spending
approved by Congress to be paid with borrowed money, and
WHEREAS
Afghanistan’s 23.4 million people are among the poorest in the world, with 53%
living in poverty; per capita income is $800, ranked 219 out of 229 nations;
life expectancy is 44 years, ranked 214 out of 224 nations; the literacy rate
is 28.1%; about one million Afghans are handicapped as a result of land mines
and other calamities of war and poverty; and Afghanistan is the world’s largest
opium producer, and
WHEREAS
a timely U.S. exit from Afghanistan will reduce the violence, misery and death
experienced by the Afghans; while the U.S. Ambassador, General Karl
Eikenberry, expresses concern about
corruption in the Afghan government and the inability of any non-Afghan force
to stabilize the situation;
THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that the 28th Legislative District Democratic Party
urges President Obama to develop a one-year timetable for U.S. withdrawal from
Afghanistan; a re-direction of American
financial expenditures from war activities to humanitarian and developmental
aid such as schools, water and waste disposal systems, public health
facilities, training teachers and health workers, and agricultural alternatives
to poppy-growing and opium production; and urges the U.S. government to exert
every effort toward multi-party talks among Afghanis, aimed at ensuring a
legitimate representation of the people of Afghanistan, as well as multi-party
regional diplomacy negotiations for the safety and stability of neighboring
countries; and,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the further spending for operations in
Afghanistan be funded by a war tax along the lines of the “Share the Sacrifice
Act” proposed by Rep. David Obey, Rep. John Murtha, Rep. Charlie Rangel, Rep.
Barney Frank, and others, and
BE
IT FURTHER RESOLVED a copy of this resolution shall be sent to the Washington
Democratic Party, to the Washington Democratic Congressional delegation, as
well as to President Obama.
ADOPTED
on Friday, December 4th, 2009
Linda Boyd: Stop Funding for Afghanistan Escalation
Friends:
Representative Barbara Lee is a hero. She understands that congress can
stop military escalation by stopping the funding. Her bill, H.R. 3699
would prevent funding for escalation in Afghanistan. Jim McDermott and 23
others have cosponsored so far. Please call him to say thanks, and urge
the rest of our congressional delegation to do the same.
McDermott: 206-553-7170
Jay
Inslee: (206)
361-0233
Rick Larson: Phone: (425) 252-3188, Toll free:
1-800-562-1385
Brian
Baird: Phone: (360) 695-6292, Phone:
(360) 352-9768
Dave
Reichert: (206) 275-3438 , (877) 920-9208 Toll free
Adam Smith: 253-593-6776
Norm Dicks: 202-225-5916
Thank
you, Linda Boyd
Dave Thomas: Polls show that
a majority of Americans support President Obama’s Afghanistan strategy, as do
I. But I am impressed that of the
hundreds of email commentaries that I get each week to use as possible source
information for our newsletters, virtually all those which refer to Afghanistan
want to bring our troops home immediately.
Our Liberals are overwhelmingly opposed to our continued military
involvement in Afghanistan. Among
Liberals, my views are held by only a small minority. This leads me to question whether my views
are wrong.
I might also note that
several years ago I was picketing near my house to bring our troops home from
Iraq. Like Barack Obama, I believe that
the Iraq and Afghan Wars are quite different.
In our next newsletter, I will comment on these differences and my views
concerning justified and unjustified wars.
John de Graaf: 5th International Gross
National Happiness Conference
Just before Thanksgiving, I
attended the 5th International Gross National Happiness Conference,
held at Iguassu Falls, Brazil. Several
hundred people from around the world gathered to discuss the latest in
“Happiness Science” research and practical applications currently being
adopted in several countries. The first
of these conferences was held in Bhutan, a tiny Himalayan kingdom, whose
monarch once proclaimed that “Gross National Happiness is more important than
Gross National Product.” I attended the
second conference in Nova Scotia, along with representatives from 46
nations.
Recently, there has been a
boom in happiness studies, stirred by “positive” psychologists and
sociologists, who sense that their disciplines have focused far too greatly on
neuroses and social problems and not enough on what kind of activities and
policies actually contribute to happier societies, and by economists who
believe
Not surprisingly, they have
found that beyond a certain minimum level of income, greater happiness comes
from strong and plentiful human connections, a sense of control over one’s life
and employment, meaningful work, good health, basic economic security,
trust in others and in government, and other opportunities less directly
connected with monetary remuneration.
Studies of life satisfaction
around the world are now enhanced by regular Gallup polling in many countries
using a broad range of questions, and have led to consistent findings in recent
years that the highest levels of satisfaction are found in such northern
European countries as Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands and Sweden—countries
with a strong sense of social solidarity and attention to work-life balance,
small income gaps, and—contrary to the thinking of American conservatives—high taxation rates.
These studies find that many
relatively income-poor nations, such as Costa Rica and Colombia, also have high
rates of life satisfaction, leading one group of British researchers to
establish a “Happy Planet Index,” dividing life satisfaction scores by
ecological footprints. They find that
many so-called developing countries actually rank at the top of their index.
My own interest in these
issues lies at the intersection between work (or overwork), health and
happiness. At the conference, I made the
case (apparently well-received by the audience) that shorter working
hours—especially in rich countries—are key to happiness, health and long-term
sustainability. Indeed, it is clear that
the United States, with among the longest working hours in the industrial
world, scores far below northern European nations in calculations of leisure
time, longevity and overall health, while having an ecological footprint nearly
twice as large—and these facts can be seen to be clearly related. ….
AT THE CONFERENCE:
Held in an enormous hotel in
the southern Brazilian city of Foz do Iguacu, the 5th International
Gross National Happiness conference began with a talk from an acknowledged
world expert in the field, economics professor John Helliwell, from the
University of British Columbia in Vancouver.
He led the entire audience of 700 people in rousing, if not always
on-key, English and Portuguese versions of the “happiness theme song,” an old
favorite I remembered from childhood:
The
more we get together, together, together,
The
more we get together, the happier we’ll be.
For
your friends are my friends and my friends are your friends.
The
more we get together the happier we’ll be.
Social connection, Helliwell
stressed is a key to happiness, but as a worldwide Gallup Poll of 140 countries
over three years reveals, quite a number of other factors also matter more than
our economic measure of well-being, the Gross Domestic Product. Income is not irrelevant—the highest scores
for happiness are found in wealthier countries.
Freedom from hunger and physical insecurity is a must. But after moderate levels of comfort and
security are met, other factors assert themselves.
Among them are a sense of
control over one’s life, government as free as possible from corruption,
friends and relatives one can count on, trust in one’s neighbors, generosity (a
key question in the poll is “Have you donated to charity this year?”), freedom
(another question: “Do you have the freedom to do what you choose in
life?”—consistently, contrary to what Americans might expect, the highest
scores on this question come in precisely the Scandinavian countries we often
mock as “nanny states”).
Religion is definitely a plus
for individuals, but probably because it helps build social connections. Countries with the most religious fervor,
like the United States, don’t necessarily rank near the top in life
satisfaction. The consistent happiness
champion? Denmark--with Finland, the
Netherlands and Sweden not far behind.
Jon Hall, an Englishman now
with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris,
followed Dr. Helliwell with encouraging news.
The OECD (made up of about thirty of the world’s richest nations) takes
happiness studies increasingly seriously.
It is looking for a whole new set of indicators on which to judge the
progress of member countries. Its new
“Global Project” aims at collecting so-called “best practices”—social and
economic policies that are clearly shown to increase life satisfaction.
Hall cited other good
news: French President Nicolas Sarkozy,
only two years ago the champion of economic growth and American-style
economics, is now singing a very different tune. He recently organized a commission led by
Nobel Prize economists Joseph Stiglitz and Amartya Sen. The commission called for a focus on
indicators such as health, family cohesion and leisure time instead of the
current emphasis on
A new European Commission is
called “
LEARNING FROM BHUTAN:
A bit groggy from jet lag the
next morning, I worried I might fall asleep during the first presentation. But there was nothing to fear; instead, the
content energized me. The speaker was
Karma Ura, director of the Center for Bhutan Studies, one of about a dozen
Bhutanese in attendance at the conference.
The tiny landlocked Himalayan country of Bhutan has been at the Center
of Gross National Happiness (or GNH) studies since 1972, when its king
proclaimed that “Gross National Happiness is more important than Gross National
Product.”
Since then, Bhutan has
enshrined the concept in its constitution and looked for ways to operationalize
it and measure it. Karma Ura explained
that, over time, the Bhutanese have identified nine aspects that factor into
analyses of happiness. They
include: psychological well-being; good health; time use (work-life balance);
community vitality; education; cultural preservation; environmental protection;
good governance; and financial security.
They have developed
questionnaires by which they assess life satisfaction in each of these areas
and which they use in regular polls of the Bhutanese people. Included are such questions as: How
safe do you feel from human harm?
Rarely? Usually? Always?
Bhutan uses the results of its indicator questionnaires to guide public
policy. Each decision is based on
assurance that it will not lower—and should raise—overall life
satisfaction. For example, one such
analysis led Bhutan’s government to decide not
to join the World Trade Organization.
I sat at a table with two
young Brazilian environmentalists, and a middle-aged Bhutanese man named
Tshewang Tandin. Soft-spoken, but open
and informal, Tshewang, who is Bhutan’s Director of Education, told us that
their polls found that Gross National Happiness was much higher in the
Bhutanese countryside, despite its materially poor life, than in the capital of
Thimphu, where westernization and globalization were changing daily life at an
alarming rate. Later the same day, he
gave me a book published in Bhutan and written by his 12-year old
daughter. Titled COMING HOME, it is the
story of a 15-year old Bhutanese girl and her efforts to fit in to the
newly-westernized life of Thimphu’s children.
For me, the book was a shocker.
A change in the names and one
might have heard the same story in any American suburb: children seeking
popularity in school by becoming part of the in-clique of wealthier girls; cell
phones and terse, often-nasty text messages; hazing of the less attractive or
popular children; competition for clothes and shoes with western brand names;
most disturbingly, eagerness to play
such disturbing and violent video games as “Grand Theft Auto.” Even the language mirrored American
slang: “As soon as I walked into the
room I saw him. I knew I was dead meat.”
I was saddened, but in
another sense, reassured. I’d believed
Bhutan was too different from the United States for its research on happiness
to apply much to us. Yet clearly, the
human struggle between an authentic life rich in family and friendships and a
media-directed life revering material possessions and outward image, is not
confined to the West.
I was further surprised to
find that, for the Bhutanese, one of the lowest polling scores comes on the
issue of “time use,” defined more simply as work-life balance. Even in Bhutan, work is expanding with
consumption to fill all the moments of life.
I talked with Susan Andrews,
a vibrant American with a Harvard Ph.D., who moved to Brazil in 1992 and now
runs Visao Futuro, a model “eco-village” and environmental learning center near
Sao Paulo. Clearly a popular leader in Brazil,
with great respect from government, corporations and activists alike, Andrews
had organized the conference and invited me to speak. She told me that the time
crunch is also a powerful limit to GNH in Brazil, where Natura, a natural
cosmetics company that was one of the sponsors of the conference, polled its
own workers using the Bhutanese model.
While majorities reported overall satisfaction in every other area, only
30% felt positive about their work-life balance.
Susan Andrews told conference
attendees that standardized GNH questionnaires, developed by Dr. Michael
Pennock and other researchers in Victoria, British Columbia, would soon be
available for use around the world.
Pennock himself explained that the questionnaires had already been used
in Victoria by a group called the Victoria,
BC Happiness Index Partners. The
same results regarding time use prevailed: while 76% of Victoria residents were
satisfied with their overall quality of life, only 45% felt the same toward
their work-life balance.
Bhutan’s research, frameworks
and results can be found at its excellent Web site: www.grossnationalhappiness.com. While the country is among the world’s
poorest materially, the Bhutanese have quite a high level of GNH, especially in
the countryside, and especially when compared to the resources they
consume. Nic Marks of the New Economics
Foundation in London explained his measurement of international well-being, the
Happy Planet Index. HPI divides two
indicators—average life satisfaction and life expectancy—by a third—ecological
footprint, to see how efficiently countries are using natural resources to
create a high quality of life.
Bhutan, with a relatively low
life expectancy of 66 years, relatively high life satisfaction and one of the
smallest ecological footprints in the world, ranks 13th overall, a
highly respectable showing. Costa Rica
is number One. Brazil ranks 9th,
highest among large countries, while the United States is a dismal 111th. Imagine Americans chanting “We’re number One
(pause) One (pause) One…”
Nonetheless, North Americans
will not quickly buy HPI, nor be willing to sacrifice their material comforts
anytime soon, just to reduce our ecological footprint. Still, Bhutan’s ideas about measuring GNH as
well as
John de Graaf
is a filmmaker, co-author of AFFLUENZA: THE
Any news
article discussing the arguments over limits on greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions that doesn't discuss per capita emissions deserves to be thrown in
the waste basket. It is impossible say anything meaningful about the debate
without pointing out, for example, that the United States emits approximately
four times as much per person as China and about ten times as much as India.
Does anyone have a good argument as to why people in the United States should
have a right to emit four times as much GHG as people in China and ten times as
much as people in India? If the argument exists, it has not been widely
publicized. By not discussing per capita emissions, the NYT and other news
outlets are concealing what is really at issue in these discussions. Dean
Baker
Dean Baker: We Need Foreign Primary Care Doctors
The
Washington Post had a front
page piece that presents as a problem the possibility that health care
reform, by allowing more people to get care, will over-run doctors in rural
areas who already have more patients than they can deal with. The piece
suggests that changes in medical education, with more focus on primary care
physicians, may help the problem down the road, but that for the next decade or
so there could be a real crisis.
In fact, it would take much less time to remedy the situation if the United
States would adopt free trade policies with respect to physicians' services. If
the U.S. had a more open door policy for qualified doctors, we could fill any
gap in the supply very quickly. It is also a very simple matter to construct a
tax system on the earnings of foreign trained physicians, with the money used
to reimburse the home country. This could allow foreign countries to train two
or three physicians for everyone that works in the United States, ensuring that
they benefit as well. Dean Baker
Liberals and Democrats
Government Watch
Also go to Whitehouse.gov.
Government Transparency
More than any
previous administration, our Obama administration is implementing
transparency, participation and collaboration between our government and
our people.
Health Care Reform
Senators
present ideas for reducing health care costs.
Liberal
Senators offer proposals in exchange for dropping national public option: [8]
"One of the changes being pushed by the liberals would lower the age of
eligibility for Medicare to 55, from 65. Another would expand Medicaid to cover
people with incomes up to 150 percent of the poverty level (up to $33,075 for a
family of four). The Senate bill, as it now stands, would expand Medicaid to
cover people up to 133 percent of the poverty level ($29,327 for a family of
four) A third liberal proposal would require insurers to spend a specified
share of premiums - about 90 percent - on clinical services and activities that
improve the quality of care. This would, in effect, limit the profits that
insurers could make."
W. Post
reports a deal could be reached today: [9] "Reid is urging
the negotiators to wrap up their work by Tuesday, and participants said a deal
could be announced late in the day. 'It's coming together. We're very close,'
Sen. Tom Harkin (Iowa), the health committee chairman and a liberal Democrat
taking part in the talks, told reporters Monday night. 'Is it something that I
like? No. It's not going to be something that the moderates or conservatives
like, either. It's one of those things in the middle that doesn't make everyone
very happy.'"
The
Treatment's Jonathan Cohn sums up the good and the bad: [10]
" While [expanding Medicare] wouldn't qualify as creating a new public
plan into which anybody could enroll, it would qualify as opening up an
existing public plan to a group of people that might appreciate its many
virtues. And that's certainly a good thing ... How would such a plan work in
practice? That really depends on the parameters ... Who gets to enroll? ...
When do people enroll? ... What will people pay? ..."
FireDogLake's
Jon Walker raises questions: [11] "Would this Medicare
buy in program only be temporary, as a stopgap until 2014 when the exchange
starts, or would it be permanent? How much would premiums be for those who buy
in, and how would those premiums be calculated? Would it be open to everyone
over 55, only on the individual market, or only those who could not find
affordable insurance anywhere else? Would people who buy in need to pay a full
actuarially sound premium? Would people who qualify for affordability tax credits
on the new exchange be able to use them toward the cost of buying into Medicare
early? ... It could be a relatively open and useful program that would be a big
help to a small segment of the population that has had a lot of trouble finding
decent, affordable insurance. It is also possible that due to stringent
qualification restrictions and high cost, the program would only be a fig leaf
that helps almost no one."
And more
questions from Swampland's Kate Pickert: [12] "Here are just
three of the monumentally important things to consider ... The age at which
people would be allowed to qualify for Medicare ... The affect on providers ...
The affect on the Medicare program."
HCAN-led coalition
criticizes. LAT: [2]
"'Using nonprofits to replace a public option won't work,' a coalition of
left-leaning groups said Tuesday in a joint statement coordinated by Health
Care for America Now. 'In fact, with half of people in private insurance
currently enrolled in nonprofit plans, they are part of the problem.'"
Ezra Klein approves:
[3] "A public
option partnered with Medicare might have been better than these policies, but
national non-profits and direct competition between Medicare and insurers is
more promising than the compromised public plans that succeeded the initial
policy idea. In fact, it's like we split the strong public option into two
parts ... we'll see how long it is before representatives begin getting calls
from 50-year-olds who'd like the opportunity to exchange money in return for
insurance as good as what 55-year-olds can get."
White House approves
[4] reports NYT. Politco
reports Rep. Grijalva rips deal [5] as a "whitewash." HuffPost
reports Sen. Rockefeller has a "smile"
[6] and Sen. Harkin
would reluctantly "support" The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder has Sen. Feingold's mixed
reaction [7]
"Sen. Russ Feingold rejected the compromise, but he did not say it would
force him to vote against final passage."
Howard Dean likes,
reports Wonk Room: [8]
"Proponents of the public option should be happy to hear that the Senate
is considering a provision that would allow Americans to buy into the existing
Medicare program ... I've been a long-time strong supporter of opening up the
Medicare system to any American who wants to enroll in it..."
Lieberman and Snowe yet
to take position on compromise. CQ: [9] "Two other centrist senators
whose votes are seen as pivotal - independent Joseph I. Lieberman of
Connecticut and Republican Olympia J. Snowe of Maine - said they were
interested in learning more about the proposal and did not rule out voting for
it. But of the two, Lieberman voiced considerably more enthusiasm."
More
alternatives are being discussed including expansion of Medicare to cover
55 to 65 year olds and expansion of Medicaid.
For
more. For more.
For
more. Allowing 55 to 65 year olds to
buy into Medicare if priced right could provide
competition to private insurers. For more. For a detailed evaluation.
The new Senate
health care reform proposal will be more clearly defined before a decision
whether to pass it is made. It appears
that whether it will force private insurers to cut costs or quit operating will
depend
upon details to be decided concerning its implementation. It may be premature to evaluate it. Any evaluation now may be influenced by one’s
optimism or pessimism. If the house is
willing to accept the bill which the Senate finally passes, there will be no
need for a conference to merge two bills.
The bill would go directly to President Obama (who
has indicated his support) and we could proceed to attend to many other
priorities.
Jobs
Jobs
summit produces job creation proposals.
For
more. For
more. Watch videos of the
sessions.
December
4th Jobs report contains various positive figures, but little
evidence of what’s to come.
On
December 8th, President Obama suggested some next steps to stimulate
more jobs. For
more. But President
Obama should have made some more suggestions.
Until now, this
recession has taken longer to reach a bottom and the bottom is lower than any
of the others since after World War II.
Its impact on the 2010 elections will depend upon how much recovery
occurs in the next 8 months (by week 31 on the chart above).
Global Warming
EPA sends
message that U.S.
will cut greenhouse gas emissions one way or another.
Here’s the Beef
200
Economists support a financial transactions tax to reduce harmful speculation.
Senator
Bernie Sanders blocks reappointment of Ben Bernanke as Fed Chairman.
Ben
Bernanke resists taking regulatory functions for Federal Reserve.
Federalism
may be undermining our economic recovery.
Read
Dean Baker’s proposals for creating jobs.
‘It’s not such a
wonderful life’ Movie makes recommendations for stopping speculation.
Read
the Republican tactics manual for delaying health care reform.
Support may be increasing
for immigration reform.
More
voters support a hypothetical Teabag Party than support the Republican Party.
State
and Local
A Tax Plan
for Washington
Several weeks ago, House Speaker Frank Chopp indicated that a tax
reform to increase Washington State government revenues is being
discussed. Governor
Christine Gregoire has now reversed her 2008 opposition to tax reform which
would increase Washington State government revenues. For
more. For
more. I recommend the following
approach.
Raising
Sufficient Revenue
Imagine a graph which has the period of several business cycles as
the horizontal axis and amount of money as the vertical one. Charting the economy would look something
like this:
_______________ ______________
State Production \/ \/
Underneath this would be similar smaller lines for the revenues
from property, sales and a new progressive income tax which together would
produce enough revenue to appropriately fund government services.
_______________ ______________
Income tax revenue \/ \/
_______________ ______________
Sales tax revenue \/ \/
_______________ ______________
Property tax revenue \/ \/
Producing
Stable Revenue
Notice that each of these tax revenues and their sum would be
unstable, bringing in less revenue during economy declines. To produce stability, increase the amount
income tax, so that there is a surplus during good times, which can be put in a
rainy day fund to be used during bad times, thus leveling the possible
expenditures (and producing a Keynesian impact during bad times).
In order to reduce the amount of unfair sales tax and property tax
revenue, increase the income tax some more, enough to reduce the sales and
property tax revenues by perhaps one third.
The result is reduced sales and property taxes, with income tax set at a
level to produce enough money during good times to fund needed states services
during both good and bad times.
Increasing Tax
Fairness
This analysis indicates how much state revenue should be raised,
but so far has not indicated how it will be raised in a way that is fair. What should the tax rates be for various tax
payers? Imagine another graph, with the
horizontal axis ranging from people with low incomes to people with high
incomes. The vertical axis would
indicate the percentage of their income that people pay in taxes. We know that under our present system our
lowest income people are paying as much as 18% in taxes while the highest
income people are paying as little as 3%.
By reducing sales and property taxes by one third, we would be lowering
these figures by 6% of their incomes for the lowest income people and 1 percent
for the highest income people.
Now imagine that separately for single tax payers and those who
file jointly, we levy a 5% income tax on only the amount of money which people
earn more than the median income. For
example, if joint filers have a median income of $60,000, only people who have
incomes higher than $60,000 would pay 5% on their income minus $60,000. The 50% of people with lowest incomes would
experience a tax reduction (lower sales and property taxes and no income
tax). People with incomes of $120,000
would pay an income tax of $3,000 = 2.5% of their income, but they would pay
less sales and property taxes, perhaps enough to offset the income tax. People with the highest incomes would pay an
income tax of close to 5%, which would be more than the amount (1%) they would
save on sales and property taxes.
For fairness, we want only the 5% of people with the highest
incomes to pay an income tax which is larger than the reduction in their sales
and property taxes, which is fair because they should pay for maintaining and
enhancing our state’s infrastructure which others created to enable them to
make their high incomes. We want the
other 95% of people with lower incomes to experience a tax decrease as their
sales and property taxes are reduced more than they would pay in income tax.
Suppose that levying a 5% income tax on income above the median
incomes reduces taxes for less than or more than 95% of people. We could adjust the tax in one or both of
several ways: change the 5% percent rate, or change the point at which it
begins (such as to the 60th quartile instead of median income). Once
necessary adjustments are made, the reformed tax system would produce
sufficient revenue during good times and bad.
And 95% of tax payers would pay less tax than they do now, with the top
5% paying their fair share, unlike at present.
Two Other Concerns
Since we are now in a down turn without a rainy day fund,
implementing this system now would not adequately fund our services. One possibility is to have a higher income
tax for only several bad years, and then reducing the income tax when the
economy recovers to the permanent rate.
Another possibility is to delay the full reductions in the sales and
property taxes.
The other concern is that this tax system should meet
constitutional requirements. I am not an
attorney, but I believe that the income which would be taxed is as well defined
as the sales and property which have long been taxed. In spite of not having better graphics, I
hope you can easily understand the proposal described above. I welcome your reactions. Dave Thomas
Featured Advocacy Group
------------------------------ American Civil
Liberties Union ------------------------
The ACLU is our nation's
guardian of liberty, working daily in courts, legislatures and communities to
defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties that the Constitution
and laws of the United States guarantee everyone in this country. These rights include:
·
Your First Amendment rights - freedom of speech,
association and assembly; freedom of the press, and freedom of religion.
·
Your right to equal protection under the law -
protection against unlawful discrimination.
·
Your right to due process - fair treatment by
the government whenever the loss of your liberty or property is at stake.
·
Your right to privacy - freedom from
unwarranted government intrusion into your personal and private affairs.
·
If the rights of society's most vulnerable members
are denied, everybody's rights are imperiled. The ACLU also works to extend rights to
segments of our population that have traditionally been denied their rights,
including people of color; women; lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgender
people; prisoners; and people with disabilities.
Key issues include:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Washington State Republican Farm Team Is Weak
Washington
Republicans are mostly consistent Conservatives who can’t win state wide
elections. No
one has appeared who has much chance of beating Senator Patty Murray in 2010. Rob McKenna may run for governor, but his
incompetence or corruption with respect to recovering state money erroneously
given the BIAW may cost him support.
Reagan Dunn is another Republican to watch.
Let’s
avoid electing Republicans to lower level offices, so that they can’t create a
farm team of potential candidates for higher office.
David Spring: Our Budget Shortfall May be $4-5
Billion
Why the Budget Shortfall
will exceed $4 billion dollars in 2010
David
Spring, M. Ed. Director, Fair School Funding Coalition, November 23, 2009
For
more than 6 months, I have been critical of the overly optimistic revenue
forecasts issued by our Revenue Forecast Council. In March, 2009, I predicted
that the Forecast Council had over-estimated revenue by at least one to two
billion dollars. I noted that “This is assuming that things do not get any
worse. If things get worse, we could be
looking at shaving another $3 billion (during the 2010 session).” The term “shaving” was not a good choice
in words since the 2009 legislature already cut $3 billion and cutting another
$3 billion in education and social programs would be more like slitting our
collective throats than “shaving.”
I
accused the revenue forecast council of replacing the objective rules of
statistical analysis with subjective wishful thinking. I noted that the Revenue
Forecast Council’s assumption of a strong recovery was not supported by any
real data. I repeated my concerns after the Council lowered their revenue
estimate in June by only $300 million and again in September after another drop
of only $200 million. Last week, the Council lowered their estimate by another
$760 million. Including other problems, they now set the total budget shortfall at $2.6 billion. Thus,
the situation is approaching my “worse case scenario” of $3 billion in cuts
during the 2010 session.
Unfortunately,
a review of the Council’s November estimate confirms that they continue to make
the same mistakes they made in March, June and September. They continue to
assume a strong recovery at the end of the biennium even though there is no
evidence to support that assumption. This will become more obvious by their
next forecast in February 2010 when I
predict they will increase the budget shortfall to more than $3 billion.
The
following chart confirms that the 2007-2009 revenue forecast was over-estimated
by $2.4 billion dollars and the 2009-2011 revenue forecast thus far has been
over-estimated by $5.4 billion dollars. The total over-estimation during the past 9 quarterly reports has been $7.8
billion dollars. This makes 9 straight quarters that the Revenue
Council has over-estimated State revenue and under-estimated the extent of our
economic problems. In data analysis, this is called “systematic error” in that
the odds of tossing a coin and having it come up tails 9 times in a row is less
than one percent. It is as if the Revenue Forecast Council has their heads
firmly buried in the sand. The error they keep making is assuming that the
economy is cyclical and that, even if we do nothing, the current recession will
behave in the same way as past recessions with an economic recovery in the next
few months.
History of Errors in the
State Revenue Forecast (in $ billions of dollars)
From
efrc.wa.gov Quarterly Economic and Revenue Forecast Publications, Executive
Summaries, September 2007 through November 2009. Biennial Estimates
|
Year & Quarter |
07-09 Prior Forecast |
07-09 Revised Forecast |
07-09 Over Estimated |
09-11 Prior Forecast |
09-11 Revised Forecast |
09-11 Over Estimated |
||||||
|
2007
Nov. |
$30.1
B |
$30.0
B |
$0.1
B |
---- |
---- |
---- |
||||||
|
2008
Feb |
$30.0
B |
$29.5
B |
$0.5
B |
------ |
$32.0
B |
First
estimate |
||||||
|
2008
June |
$29.5
B |
$29.4
B |
$0.1
B |
$32.0
B |
$31.8
B |
$0.2
B |
||||||
|
2008
Sept |
$29.4
B |
$29.1
B |
$0.3
B |
$31.8
B |
$31.5
B |
$0.3
B |
||||||
|
2008
Nov |
$29.1
B |
$28.6
B |
$0.5
B |
$31.5
B |
$30.1
B |
$1.4
B |
||||||
|
2009
March |
$28.6
B |
$27.9
B |
$0.7
B |
$30.1
B |
$27.9
B |
$2.2
B |
||||||
|
2009
June |
$27.9
B |
$27.7
B |
$0.2
B |
$27.9
B |
$27.6 B* |
$0.3
B |
||||||
|
2009
Sept |
$27.9
B |
$27.9
B |
$0.0
B |
$27.6
B |
$27.4
B* |
$0.2
B |
||||||
|
2009
Nov |
$27.9
B |
$27.9
B |
$0.0
B |
$27.4
B |
$26.6
B * |
$0.8
B |
||||||
|
Total
|
Over |
Estimated |
$2.4 B |
|
+$5.4 B |
= $7.8B |
||||||
*
In June 2009, ESSB 5073 changed the definition of the Biennial Operating
Budget, expanding it to include $2.2 Billion in funds previously not in this
account. Thus, the November Forecast estimate is listed as $28.8 B. We
have retained the old definition for the sake of consistent comparisons to the
2007-2009 budget.
Why the Budget Shortfall
will exceed $4 billion dollars in 2010, page 2
The
evidence, as shown in my prior reports, is that this current recession is
structurally different than all other recessions during the past 50 years.
Unless our State legislature takes bold and aggressive action to restore equity
and fairness in our State economy, through reform of both taxation and
oversight policies, there will not be a recovery. Instead, job losses will
continue to rise and State revenue will continue to decline. So given this
evidence, the question is what the
budget shortfall will be if we do not have a recovery?
Starting
with the current shortfall of $2.6 billion and using the average rate of
decline for the past three quarters of $0.4 Billion a quarter, one guess would
be a $3.0 billion shortfall by February 2010 and $3.4 billion by June 2010 (and
$5 billion shortfall by June 2011).
The
November 2009 09-11 Biennium Budget is estimated to be $28.8 billion using the
new definition. Without a recovery, the actual budget will be between $27.4
billion (for a $4 billion shortfall) to 26.4 billion (for a $5 billion
shortfall).
The
Forecast Council Estimate is based upon an assumption of a rapid rise in
employment in 2010 and 2011 and a V shaped recovery (see chart to right). This V shaped recovery assumption is not
based on any current evidence, but simply on more wishful thinking by the
Revenue Forecast Council.
Why the Budget Shortfall
will exceed $4 billion dollars in 2010, page 3
On
page 41 of their report, the Revenue Forecast Council says there is a “10%
chance” that the budget shortfall will rise another $1.4 billion to $4.0
billion. Given their track record for the past 9 quarters, I would say the odds
are nearly 100% that the budget shortfall will rise to $4.0 billion. And if the economy forms an “L” instead of a
“V” or a “U” (in other words, if there is no recovery), there is at least a
50-50 chance the budget shortfall will rise to $5 billion.
Given
the continued state of denial of our Economic Revenue Forecast Council, we
should expect a continuation of inaccurate and overly optimistic reports.
However, by the February 2010 Revenue Forecast, it will become increasingly
obvious that the long awaited recovery is a myth. I assume the Forecast Council will then call
it a “double dip” recession. But the truth is it will simply be the predictable
continuation of the current recession which we have failed to deal with. But
perhaps in February we can begin a serious discussion of the tax reform steps
that will be needed to protect our public schools and restore our State
economy.
I
personally do not believe it is possible to cut even $1 billion more dollars
from the budget - much less $4 to $5 billion. But even if the legislature were
to cut $4 to $5 billion more in 2010, there will still be the need to cut
another $3 to $4 billion in 2011 to make up for the loss of the federal
stimulus funds.
Obviously
our current budget of $32 billion will not be sustainable once the $4 billion
in federal stimulus funds are gone. Unless we put a $6 to $8 billion revenue
package on the Fall 2010 ballot, we will be facing an additional $6 to $8 billion in cuts during the 2011 legislative
session (making the $3 billion in cuts during the 2009 legislative session look
like the good ole days).
Fortunately,
there are three easy ways to get billions of dollars in additional revenue
without raising taxes on our poor or middle class. We simply need to require millionaires to pay their fair
share of State taxes by passing a High Earners income tax. Another obvious
option is to eliminate tax breaks for any corporation making more than $10
million per year and/or eliminate all tax exemptions passed since 1996.
These
three options would restore taxes in our State to the national average. They
would also provide funding for hundreds of thousands of urgently needed jobs to
stabilize our State’s economy.
I
will send out an update of this report on February, 2010 to those who are
interested. Just email me back and ask to be added to the update list. In the
meantime, feel free to email me with any questions or comments.
Regards,
David Spring M. Ed., Director, Fair School Funding
Coalition, springforschools@aol.com
Let’s Replace Brian Baird with a Consistent Liberal
Brian
Baird has decided to not run for re-election. He was the only Washington Congressman to
vote against the house health care reform bill.
Several years ago, he voted for changes in our bankruptcy law which prevented
people from escaping debts due to illness.
Let’s hope that a more consistent Liberal Democrat wins the South West
Washington 3rd Congressional seat in 2010.
Here’s the Beef
Small
houses allow more people in urban areas.
There
is increasing demand for green homes.
Seattle
has worst traffic congestion. We
need fewer people.
Governor
Christine Gregoire promotes Washington’s green companies.
Nation
and World
Breakdown in Accountability
Have you noticed the lack of accountability for the many people who got
us into our economic mess? Real estate
and mortgage agents, bank loan officers and appraisers who assisted fraudulent
loans benefits, but are not being identified and punished. Investment bank and insurance company
personnel who created and sold fraudulent securities are not being identified
and punished. Government agency personnel
who should have identified these frauds, exposed them and stopped them are not
being identified and punished.
Commercial media pundits who similarly failed, and even promoted these
frauds are not being identified and punished, except that Dean
Baker is identifying the latter.
Dave Thomas
Dean Baker noted, “The WSJ is
effectively covering up for the Fed and the economics profession by implying
that there was something difficult about recognizing the 70 percent jump in
real house prices as a bubble or realizing that its collapse would lead to
serious economic damage. The bubble was not difficult to spot for any serious
analyst of the economy. The run-up was a sharp divergence from a 100-year
long-trend that could not be explained by any change in the fundamentals of the
housing market. It also was not accompanied by any notable increase in rents.
It also should have been evident that the bursting of the bubble would
devastate the economy. This article wrongly focuses on the financial aspects of
the collapse. While this is important for Wall Street, the real aspects are far
more important for the economy. The bubble added more than 3 percentage points
to GDP in the form of excess housing construction and another 4 percentage
points of GDP in the form of excess consumption driven by bubble generated
housing wealth.
This demand was absolutely certain to disappear when the bubble burst. The Fed
has no mechanism that can readily replace a drop in annual demand equal to 7
percent of GDP or more than $1 trillion. (The downturn was exacerbated by the
collapse of a bubble in non-residential real estate which is still in process.)
This is all very simple. None of this requires complex economic analysis, just
competent economists. It is also worth
noting that the WSJ refuses to discuss what could be one of the Fed's most
important tools against an asset bubble: talk. If the Fed had devoted its
enormous research capacities to documenting the existence of a bubble and the
likely implications of its bursting, and the Fed chairman used his enormous
megaphone to widely disseminate this information at congressional testimonies
and other public appearances, it would have almost certainly been sufficient to
burst the housing bubble. While
economists question this possibility, since the cost is trivial (talk is
cheap), there is no excuse for the Fed not following this route in addition to
whatever other measures it may take.”
Unused and Repaid TARP Money Should Be Used for
Stimulating Jobs
Both Dean Baker and I believe that more job stimulus is good. If possible, we should use the TARP money for
this purpose. Hopefully we can do this
without Conservatives criticizing it as another increase in our federal
deficit. Dave Thomas
We Can Each Invest Individually to Create Jobs
Our economy can be described as two highly interrelated economic
subsystems. The first is a working
subsystem which consists of Main Street enterprises using capital to hire
workers to create products which are sold to yield revenue for paying the
workers who then buy products. The second
is a speculative subsystem which consists of large financial and other
companies which drain money off from the first economic system to create
speculation and richly reward its top personal.
We can imagine that our working subsystem covers America. Reaching out from Wall Street, our
speculative subsystem sends its tentacles throughout working America. The two connect at all those points where
people and other organizations in working America can allow their money to pass
into speculative America. The money is
drained from the working to the speculative subsystem through:
· Firms which
don’t sufficiently reward their workers retaining excess profits
· Workers and
others speculating in stocks and other financial instruments, through 401(k)s,
mutual funds, pension funds, endowment funds, municipal funds, etc.
· Workers
borrowing through mortgages, lines of credit, credit cards and paycheck loans,
for which they pay high fees
· Workers paying
extra for products produced in insufficiently competitive markets, ones with
high price/earnings (P/E) ratios
The money which is drained into the
speculative subsystem goes to large financial companies, which use it to
stimulate speculation and to provide enormous incomes to their top
employees. When the speculative
subsystem crashes, much of this money disappears, leaving working America with
even less capital.
To create jobs, we should instead put our savings into credit unions
and small financial companies which are providing loans to appropriate business
and consumer borrowers. We should avoid
allowing our money to drain into the speculative subsystem in any of the ways
noted above. We should especially avoid
borrowing for speculation or excess consumption. We should change from Borrow, Consume and Speculate mindset and practices to Earn, Conserve and Invest mindset and
practices. If large numbers of us would do
this, credit would be available to enable business expansion and increased
employment.
If many of us
would pledge to shift 1%, 2%, or 5% of our income from the speculative
subsystem to the working subsystem, we could provide the capital to hire many workers. We can each do this individually, without
involving our government which is so beset by corrupt campaign contributions
and lobbyists. We might not make quite
as much return on our savings. But it
should now be evident that with a higher return through speculation comes
greater risk, both individually and systemically. The net effect is that speculation doesn’t
yield much more than invested savings and in the long run, it yields much less. Let’s not put all the responsibility for
creating jobs on the Obama Administration which most likely creates larger
federal deficits. Let’s act
individually, with no expense to our government.
Note that Conservatives still argue for tax cuts for the wealthy, even
though the evidence is clear that the wealthy use their money to serve
speculative America instead of working America.
Unfortunately, it is difficult to get people to pledge and follow
through on such actions, as we can see with respect to reducing our carbon
footprint. Much of our advertising tempts
us to give our money to the speculative subsystem, with virtually no advertising
tempting us to put our savings in small financial banks to serve working
America. It would be good for books to
appear which advise us about 100 ways to use our money to create jobs. Dave Thomas
Here’s the Beef
Consumers
are purchasing services, even as they pay off their debts.
Progressive
States Network’s foreclosure prevention and mitigation legislation proposals.
The
number of people using plug-in hybrids is increasing, but not fast enough.
New green
technologies are available for cremating dead bodies.
Federal
forests can be managed to store carbon.
Attempts
are made to offer inexpensive healthy school lunches.
World
Trade Organization makes totally wrong proposals for dealing with economic
collapse.
Latin
America has finally escaped U.S. domination.
Our
Liberal Spirit
Learning from Others
It is not enough to have
freedom and opportunity. To benefit, we
need to recognize our freedom and opportunity and know how to use them. One of the easiest ways to do these is to
learn from others who are recognizing their freedoms and opportunities and
taking advantage of them. Relevant is John de Graaf’s commentary which appear above.
Recommended Books – See our list of books for liberals
Nell Irvin Painter, 1987, Standing at Armageddon, The United States,
1877-1919.
Nell Painter’s book describes the transition from rural agricultural to urban industrial America. Like our present transition to a metropolitan informational America, this previous period experienced the political turmoil as newly emerged groups struggled against the power of traditionally powerful groups. As now, there was a struggle concerning government’s role in responding to economic depressions. And a struggle to contain the rampant corruption of government by businesses.