Platform for a New Political Party for the General Prosperity

Even liberal pundits now seem disappointed with President  Obama:

(Maureen Dowd -" Withholder- in chief"rhttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/10/opinion/withholder-in-chief.html?_r=1&ref=opinion), Drew Westen - "What Happened to Obama?"
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/opinion/sunday/what-happened-to-obamas-passion.html?scp=1&sq=what%20happened%20to%20Obama&st=Search

Given that the democratic party under the leadership has abandoned its New Deal legacy and collaborated with the republicans and conservatives, to continue the move toward rule by the wealthy, it is time for a third party effort.

Traditionally third parties do not win.  However, the lesson of the Ross Perot candidacy in 1992 can not be ignored. Perot ran on the issue of that era's deficit.  He changed the calculus of the election and shortly after Clinton's election the deficit was addressed, successfully.  It must be noted that as soon as the budget was passed the stock market took off and we headed into a recovery and expansion that resulted in budget surplus.

A platform for a third party.

1. Government on all levels must do all it can to stimulate economic growth.  This means stimulating consumer demand.  It is only demand that stimulates employment.  It does not matter how much cash companies have on hand.  They will not and should not hire workers to do nothing. No matter many service cuts are made and how much taxes might be raised, it is only economic growth that will achieve lowered deficits and national debt.  It is only economic growth that will create full employment. 

2. Stimulating consumer demand requires people have cash to spend.  Ways this can be achieved are:

• continuing unemployment compensation until unemployment falls back to normal levels.
• continuing the benefits of the social safety net
• After demand rises, targeted tax breaks for businesses that invest in expansion both by hiring and equipment and plant.
• completion of critical infrastructure projects
• continue to support education at the highest levels possible

3. Raise taxes back to the levels at the end of the Clinton administration.  This includes not only the wealthy, but the middle class as well.  We are going to need increased revenues to fund the growth initiatives.  It is of no use to isolate the wealthy.

4. End our involvement in wars of choice in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya as soon as possible without adding to chaos.  The era of American use of power continuously around the world must end.

5. Create a new foreign policy to deal with international terrorism without having to invade countries to insure our safety. (More detail on this to come)

6. Create a government mechanism to address the runaway cost of health care. In all the discussion of the last three years there has been little effort to deal with rising costs beyond the idea of cutting benefits.  Almost every attempt to add mechanisms to investigate ways to reduce costs was defeated. The present fee for service method cannot be the most efficient way to fund health care.  The present astronomical and still rising cost of drugs is not justified and unsustainable.

This effort is stimulated by two important issues The first is the terrible economic mess that is not addressed by our present government.  The second is that the entire congress and the president have colluded to defy the 14th amendment of the constitution.  In my opinion they have lost their legitimacy. In our system(since the civil war) we do not turn to violence to make change.  The only option is politics. 

Melvyn Polatchek


 

It is Time to Finally Fight Back.

As a senior citizen I lived my whole life I knowing America was far from perfect.  I knew the flag wavers and uber patriots exaggerated the greatness of America to aid in their agendas of acquisition.  But I also knew that unlike most nations our system was designed with the capacity to improve and develop.  I saw with my own eyes the passage of civil rights laws.  I participated in an anti-war movement that was not crushed by rolling tanks and guns as would have happened in so many other nations. I saw a nation begin to protect its water and its atmosphere and recently even the weather.  And I saw health care for the poor, for the elderly and finally an attempt at providing for everyone. Even before I was born there was social security which provided a financial floor for everyone. 

All these were bitterly opposed by the republicans. From the time of the votes on social security they opposed every one of these advances.  The basic republican/conservative philosophy is to allow no imposed sharing.

Now after the so-called compromise on the debt ceiling crisis, the credit rating of the United States of America, my nation, our nation has been lowered.

The United States was not threatened with a downgrade in our credit rating until the republicans created the debt ceiling crisis and the democrats went along.  Our deficits are a real concern but the ratings agencies were not threatening. Downgrade was not on any one's radar.  It can not the have been the amount of debt that stimulated the downgrade. The unconstitutional willingness to call into question the public debt of the United States has caused real fear that congress could actually decide to default and that U.S. Treasury bonds might not be redeemed.
We have a president who still believe he got a compromise.  He is likely to continue on his outreach to republicans.  Where is the American leader who will demand victory over those who created this crisis and are destroying the America I have know my whole life.

We are all in for a tougher struggle.  The elderly will need to work longer, if they can find employment. Our adult children who are already struggling with employment will push on with the knowledge that they will not have even the social benefits their parents enjoyed.

I have always been a proud American.  I would have always defended our homeland.  Now we have been attacked from within.  The only legacy I can leave my children and grandchildren is to fight back.  There is no compromise with an enemy who is on the attack.  And the republicans and the democratic fellow travelers who have attacked my America are now my enemies.

Melvyn Polatchek

The Final Surrender

Some months ago the president caved in to the republican demands to extend the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.  Today we are told that the republican and democratic leaders of the senate and house along the president have a plan to avoid default.  This plan includes no revenue enhancement whatever.  It does include some trillions of dollars in cuts in government spending.  We have heard so many plans and speculations, we won't know exactly what will happen for some time.  We will hear different interpretations. The democrats will try to make the cuts sound benign. The republicans will try to make it sound like a blow for freedom.  The tea party activists will tell us it is a betrayal of core conservative principles.  They may even still try to block it.  They have not failed yet.  Whatever it is, it is not a compromise.  The democrats have given away everything.  Defense will be cut in time of war.  The social safety net will be cut.  Even if benefits are not cut directly in the first round(no guarantee) the welfare of those who need medicare, medicaid and social security is compromised. Of course all these cuts mean layoffs in the midst of the jobs recession we are still enduring.  They mean further erosion of the tax base and further loss of consumer spending to drive recovery.

This is more than a surrender.  The democrats, under President Obama did not fight for their core constituency.  There is no more damage that could have been done to America than what the two parties have accomplished in the past three terms of the presidency. 

Melvyn Polatchek

The Coming Financial Tsunami

The Washington Post headline reads"  "CBO: Reid plan saves more than Boehner’s". Now the democrats are actually ahead of the republicans in using cuts in what they call discretionary spending as the only means to limit the deficit.  Discretionary spending means the social safety net, social security, medicaid, medicare.  Chuck Schumer, the "progressive" senator from New York, spoke today about the democratic plan which raises the debt ceiling through 2012 with no increased revenue.

Schumer went on to say that it is a matter of getting the leadership to agree on a plan.  This means he believes no democratic representatives or senators will object.

Everyone who is not independently wealthy is being thrown under the bus.  It is no longer a debate about shared sacrifice. There will be no sharing. It is only a debate about which financial tsunami will wash over us, the U.S default or the rollback of all social programs since the New Deal. Guess which.

Melvyn Polatchek

Response to David Brooks. "The President has faltered"

The president keeps saying that cuts only without revenue will too harshly harm the entitlements we all care about.  The fact is that the republicans don't care about them and never did.  They have always thought the social safety net was a mistake. It has never been about the arithmetic of the deficit. It has always been about that view of America that says everyone takes care of themselves and themselves only and the government should never ask for taxes to assume a social responsibility.  David Brooks defends this view to the end.
He is correct that the president has faltered, but not from any battle with the republicans. Rather he has joined the republicans in offering massive cuts to the social safety net.  The only question for the president and David Brooks is whether there will be some revenue enhancement. And David Brooks only wants it so a deal will be made and he can "think big" and write about it.  And what about Harry Reid, who sounded like a whipped puppy today as he completely surrendered to the republicans, offering trillions of dollars in cuts and no revenue enhancement whatsoever. The republicans are going to cut the social safety net out of their original malice and the democrats are cutting  it out of continuing fecklessness. What is the difference.  For the first time in my life, I am hoping for an independent candidate.  Obviously the fix is in. I suppose we will hear from David Brooks some rationale from Edmund Burke soon enough.

The Great Betrayal

If there is a compromise on the debt ceiling extension, it will be a blow to the social safety net.  We can hope there will at least be a tax increase at the upper end so that the wealthy don't get a free ride, but still there is no doubt that in the face of republican intransigence, the president has put the social safety net on the line.

While the democrats in congress will instinctively oppose this plan because of their long standing support and election promises, in the end they will have little choice but to go along.  Breaking the full faith and credit of the United States will be a worse blow to everyone and especially those depending upon the social safety net.

I believe the president has, under the constitution, the power to borrow to pay any bills upon the government. The 14th Amendment, says that “the validity of the public debt of the United States … shall not be questioned.”  The would need a great deal of political courage to endure the wrath of congress.  Given that he willingly put the social safety net on the table quite a while ago his only concern seems to be how much of a tax increase he can get out of the republicans.  This laudable goal still ends up a betrayal to all who depend upon the social safety net.






 
After this betrayal is in place, the battle of 2012 will shape up not as a struggle to preserve what is left, it will be a struggle to stop further republican predations and further fecklessness by the democrats.

Melvyn Polatchek

If my children, when they are senior citizens do not have adequate health care, what will it matter to them if at one time the U.S. reneged and defaulted on its loans.

For weeks now we have been exposed to political theater.  I say political theater because as Katrina Vanden Heuvel says in the Washington Post. "
President Obama may find that there is only one course left to avoid a global economic calamity: Invoke Section 4 of the 14th Amendment, which says that “the validity of the public debt of the United States … shall not be questioned.” This constitutional option is one that the president alone may exercise.
If the Aug. 2 deadline arrives and no deal has been made, Obama could use a plain reading of that text to conclude — statutory debt ceiling or not — that he is constitutionally required to order the Treasury to continue paying America’s bills. In that sense, this is not just a constitutional option, it is a constitutional obligation, one even the Tea Party will have trouble denying.  http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/invoke-the-14th--and-end-the-debt-standoff/2011/07/01/gHQAUif8yH_story.html
So all the politicans involved know the President has the power to act.  In the meantime for whatever political calculation he is making, he is apparently bargaining hard. He has offered as much as four trillion dollars in cuts, largely from the social safety net. While the republicans are "just saying no" to the slightest tax increases.  The grand bargain that will finally be passed will include massive cuts in government spending and perhaps some small increases on wealthy taxpayers and possibly no tax increases if the President folds completely.

What I want to know is, if my children, when they reach senior citizen status do not have adequate health care, what will it matter to them if at one time the U.S. reneged and defaulted on its loans.

Mel Polatchek

Save the American Dream

Some politicians are trying to default on the American Dream
Dear Melvyn,




Wars and tax cuts for the rich created this deficit crisis

Tell them: if you want to cut the deficit: tax the rich and end the war, leave the rest alone.




For years, Washington politicians have run up the national debt with two unpaid-for wars and tax breaks for millionaires. But now that everyone is talking about how to reduce the debt, they want the middle class pay for it by cutting programs we paid for and depend on like Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare.

That's not just wrong, it's an outrageous attack on the American Dream. And we need your help to stop it.
Congressional leaders are gathering on Sunday for another round of deficit talks, and the word is that Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare is on the chopping block, while tax cuts for millionaires are not.2 But no debt deal can pass without support from Congress, and that gives us a chance to change the debate, if you act fast:
Email your Representative right now and tell them that when it comes to reducing the deficit, they need to start by getting rid of  tax breaks for millionaires and cutting Pentagon spending, not social programs that hardworking Americans have already paid for.
                                                        Programs like Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare didn't contribute signifigantly to the deficit and politicians shouldn't be able to treat them like a piggy bank so they can keep us at war or protect their wealthy donors. But that's exactly what Republicans in Congress have proposed. And unless somebody speaks up, they might get their way.
                                                        And this is where you, and your Representative, come in. No deal can get done without approval in the House of Representatives. And that vote is expected to be close, very close. So in the next 72 hours, leaders in both parties will be checking with every member of Congress to see where they stand. We can win if even a handful of our Representatives tell their leadership that a deficit deal HAS to include taxing millionaires and reducing spending on war and weapons - but CANNOT include cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
                                                        Will your Representative be one of them? The only way to know is to ask: Click here to tell your Representative to tax the rich and cut Pentagon spending, not vital social programs.
                                                        Sincerely,
Drew Hudson
                                                        USAction/TrueMajority

Guest Blog from the Urban League on Financial Justice re the deficit

This is from Marc Morial of the National Urban League.  It says it all.
Mel

Marc H. Morial
President and CEO
National Urban League

"We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation."  Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Rarely have the divisions in American politics been more clear - or more onerous.  In less than a month, on August 2nd, if Congress refuses to raise the nation's $14.3 trillion debt ceiling, the United States economy could be thrown into a fiscal tailspin that would eviscerate America's credit rating, lead to sky-high interest rates, rip a giant hole in the social safety net, jeopardize the well-being and savings of millions of working and middle class citizens and result in the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs. 
Majority leaders in the House and minority leaders in the Senate have taken the unprecedented step of linking a raise in the debt ceiling to the debate about deficit reduction and spending cuts.  In effect, they are attempting to extort big cuts in programs benefiting working and middle class citizens while protecting exorbitant tax breaks for oil companies, corporate jet owners and hedge fund managers.  They say this is the only way they will agree to increase the debt limit.  If they get their way, fiscal experts from Nobel Prize winning economist, Paul Krugman to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke warn severe disruptions will occur.   Beginning August 2nd, Social Security checks may be halted.   Medicare, Medicaid and unemployment benefits may stop.  Troops in Iraq and Afghanistan may not get paid.  And Hundreds of thousands of government workers may be laid off.  This is no way to run the most trustworthy and powerful government in the world.  And it is no way to honor the hard work and sacrifices of its people.
It should be noted, that prior to this current showdown, the debt ceiling has routinely been raised almost 100 times since its establishment in 1917.  Former President George W. Bush raised it seven times without objection while racking up trillions of dollars of new debt for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and big tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans. 
The Obama administration is not oblivious to the need for spending cuts.  For months, Vice President Joe Biden has led bipartisan negotiations aimed at agreeing on a sensible deficit reduction plan.  Progress has been made.  But recently several members of the so-called "Gang of Six," walked out of the negotiations because of ideological resistance to balancing spending cuts for the middle class with ending some tax breaks for the wealthy.
As they defend the rights of working-class Americans, I would urge them also to consider the recommendations included in the National Urban League's 12-Point Jobs Plan, "Putting Urban American Back To Work."  The creation of Urban Jobs Academies to train the critically unemployed, or Green Empowerment Zones to locate manufacturing jobs in urban areas, could ease the transition to spending cuts.
So far, the President and sensible members of Congress have stood firm in their refusal to give in to ideological extortion.  As the President said in last week's press conference, "Any agreement to reduce our deficit is going to require tough decisions and balanced solutions. And before we ask our seniors to pay more for health care, before we cut our children's education, before we sacrifice our commitment to the research and innovation that will help create more jobs in the economy, I think it's only fair to ask an oil company or a corporate jet owner that has done so well to give up a tax break that no other business enjoys."  We agree. Raise the debt ceiling, but not on the backs of working and middle class Americans.

Two legislative plans, a presidential speech and no cost containment

So now we have the Ryan plan and the Lieberman plan both of which put the major burden on the retired beneficiaries.  We have a presidential speech which sounds somewhat more fair, but the president has not actually asked for legislation. 

But where in all this political noise is there even a discussion of cost containment?

One would think that there has been no discussion at any level of cost containment.  One would think there have been no ideas.  Wrong. . .

Here is a link to a summary of a discussion from the National conference of State Legislatures.

http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=14465

Briefly some of their ideas.

1.Direct Cost Containment Ideas
I-1. Repeal or modify "any willing provider" (AWP) laws
I-2. Enact a Certificate of Need law if your state doesn't have one.
I-3. If your state has a certificate of need law, apply it to only those circumstances where it is likely to be effective in controlling costs.
I-4. Regulate prices for health care.
I-5. Require public posting of prices for specified common procedures and tests
2.Prescription Drug Ideas
II-1. Institute a preferred drug list under Medicaid, similar to Oregon's.
II-2. Implement a preferred drug list with a supplemental rebate similar to Michigan's.
II-3. Join with other states in a drug purchasing pool to obtain volume discounts.
II-4. Hire pharmacists to provide patient education about how to reduce drug bills and avoid dangerous drug interactions.
II-5. Require pharmacies to publicly post the prices of drugs, grouped by class so people can see where substitutes may save money.
II-6. Implement a Medicaid "Pharmacy Plus" section 1115 waiver to cover Medicare recipients with incomes up to 200 percent of federal poverty guidelines.
II-7. Require state employees to use a mail-order pharmacy benefit manager for all maintenance drugs.
II-8. Encourage greater participation of safety net providers in the "340B Federal Drug Pricing Program."
II-9 Audit pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) and administrators (PBAs).

There can be no reason for cost containment not to be part of the legislative discussion.  Does anyone think there are political agendas at play?

The Joe Lieberman Plan

Joe Lieberman, independent Senator from Connecticut has a plan. Briefly, here are the salient points.

1. Raise the age limit for medicare gradually to age 67.

2. Charge co pays for all health care services rendered.

3. Increase premiums to 35% for all new enrollees after 2014

4. Increase taxes by 1% on those earning over 250,000.

Like the Ryan plan most of the increased burden is placed on the beneficiaries.

1. How many people will still be employable by age 67 and therefore able to continue on employee health care insurance?   Politicians talk about raising the benefits age for these programs as if there was no such thing as age discrimination in the workplace. 

2. It would be nice to assume that all retirees have the wherewithal to make co payments.  There are large numbers who have no other income aside from social security and no other way to add to their health care payments.

3. Increasing the premium for medicare has the same negative effect on retirees.  Where will they get the money?

4. One percent for all those earning over 250,000 is a bad joke.  It essentially says that the wealthy have no obligation to bear any real part of the national burden.

Why is the Social safety Net the Deficit Reduction Target?

June 30, 2011

A few weeks ago, in his speech on the deficit, President Obama gave a little history of how we got here. At the end of the Clinton presidency, we had a projected budgetary surplus. According to the president we knew we could manage the baby boomer retirements. This was a result of some cost cutting, some increased taxes and a generally strong economy.

Then under George W Bush, we cut taxes drastically, particularly on the wealthy. We suffered the 9/11 attacks. We launched two wars on borrowed money. We had a great recession with massive worker layoffs, causing the tax base to shrink.

Nothing on this list show the cost of the social safety net as the reason for the deficit. Yet, the main plan for dealing with the deficit is to "reform" medicare. Presumably medicaid and social security itself is not far behind.

I firmly believe the reason is political. The republicans have been against these programs from the very beginning of the New Deal. They sense that frightening the American people over the deficit can win the argument and the political battle they have been fighting since the 1930s.

This blog is dedicated to providing information and yes, opinion, with which to arm ourselves in this battle.

The Attack From the Right

June 30, 2011

I first heard the term "social safety net" in a speech by Ronald Reagan. After campaigning against social security, but realizing the battle was not a political winner he used this term to describe social security, medicare and medicaid. The republicans today believe they can win the political battle. They are on the attack.

The first salvo was Rep.Paul Ryan's plan, which has passed in the house of Representatives. This plan features defined payments to eligible seniors to purchase private insurance. The payments would approximate the price of medicare in 2012 minus already existing senior contributions.

Some clear problems for seniors
1. The Ryan plan does not allow for the growth in health care cost, so each year the payments would become more inadequate to the actual need.

2. The Ryan plan presumes private insurance would be available. Yet, it makes no provision to deal with the current difficulty of seniors obtaining private health care insurance at any price.

It has been promised that these changes would not effect current beneficiaries, but only those who are today under 55. Politicians do occasionally mangle the truth.

Tomorrow: New Senate plan authored by Sen.Lieberman and Sen.coburn