An Article to Remember

Special Editors Note: First, my personal condolences to the Kennedy family. I also celebrate the life and contributions of Edward "Teddy" Kennedy. We will miss you Teddy.

Second, I would like to encourage all of you to please read the following article (The Debt is a Democratic Wake-up Call), even though it's a long one. I know I should be more succinct, but sometimes it takes time to make a good case and provide enough evidence to support it.

Historical facts are necessary to make the right decisions for our future. If you don't have time to read it now, click on the title to open a separate window, print it and read it at your leisure. I also encourage any publishers/bloggers to reprint it if they wish.

We Americans are at an important crossroads in our political life. It's important for us to know the truth so that we can make the right decisions.


The Debt is a Democratic Wake-up Call

Hello Bloggers! The national debt is a Democratic wake up call, but not the way the Republicans think. I want to answer their criticism about government spending in a more logical way. It all comes down to priorities. Not theirs, but ours.

We all got depressed this week when the White House and the CBO revised debt projections upwards showing that unless things change (more growth and revenues) we could be looking at huge increases in the percentage of the debt compared to the GDP - from 40% today to as high as 68% by 2019.

To put that into perspective, federal debt hit 109% of GDP at the end of World War II, and hit a second peak of 49% at the end of the Reagan-Bush years. Another way to look at it is that most European countries, and the majority of developing countries, have hit substantially higher debt levels without a crisis. So don't get too depressed by the news. We will survive.

On a side note, it's important to point out that most of the damage was done by the Bush Administration and the GOP, but instead of recriminations this article is about priorities.

It's Not ABout the Debt, It's About Our Priorities

It's true, it all comes down to spending priorities. There is enough money to do everything we need to do, if we're brave enough to make the right spending decisions. One good example, we have to decide to tell the Republicans they can't have all the money they want for defense. Other countries need to share some of that burden. We spend more on defense than almost every other major military power combined. It's too high a price considering the debt.

I would also like to point out to our Republican friends - screaming bloody murder at town halls about how we can't afford anything - that health care reform is just as important to us as military spending is to you. I know Republicans don't always seem to understand the principle, but we need to find a compromise. Politics should be give and take, not a win-win for the GOP.

We have a right to care about and spend money on health care. We have a right to talk about spending money on clean energy and better infrastructure. We cannot allow the Republicans to use the debt like a sledge hammer, smashing our desires for a better world. They will tear us apart if we allow them. We must stand up against their intimidation.

We have a right to talk about helping ourselves and our children for a change. We have a right to say NO! to wasteful war and corporate welfare. We Democrats represent more of the electorate, and the only reason that high debt should concern us is that we now have to make some important decisions - like a family - about where to spend our money.

Being fiscally responsible is important, but priorities are even more important. We have to decide what kind of a society we want to live in. We also have to answer now before it's too late. That's what we need to discuss here today.

Exposing the Republican Debt Scam

First of all let's talk turkey before we talk priorities. Let's debunk the popular myth that the Republicans are the "fiscally responsible party." Aside from their passion for personal wealth their actions while in government do not match their words. History proves it. They are the original "smoke and mirrors" party.

In terms of "political economics," after World War II the overwhelming majority (over 90%) of the overall federal debt (all money owed) was created by a Reagan or a Bush. Bush Jr. is also responsible for a large percentage of today's annual deficit (overspending within a fiscal year) that President Obama now shares.

Most important, all the debt spending Obama is forced to do today is a direct result of Bush and/or GOP economic leadership and incompetence.

I don't understand why my Republican friends can't do their homework and figure that out. It's pretty cut and dry. The history of annual spending (and who spent it) is available from multiple sources, but I recommend the easy-to-read gross national debt section on zFact.com.

Gross National Debt Chart

So, do the homework and figure it out! At least look at the chart (source: Government Statistics). It's clear the Democrats do not deserve a bad fiscal reputation. The Democrats under Clinton even reduced the overall federal debt (not just the annual deficit) for the first time since Carter. If you don't believe me, look it all up yourself.

The real irony is that Reagan ran in 1979 on a platform to lower the debt. Incredibly, the debt was less than $800 billion at the time. Reagan, of course, exploded the debt. Sadly, later Republicans like George W. took it much further.

What Party is Better for Our Future?
The Great American Santa

Once again, it's all about priorities. WE THE PEOPLE have to decide what kind of future we want using the ballot box. Democrats historically spend on domestic and "social" programs, while the Republicans are known more for their love of military spending - for the record, that love of military spending doesn't include money for veterans.

Democrats focus on regulating markets and creating jobs, while Republicans push for so-called "free market" wealth creation and quick gains. Unfortunately for the GOP, only one way is the right way.

The consequences wrought by Republicans and their reckless economic experiments are now famous. The entire world has paid a high price for their adventures, especially in 1929 and 2008. Both crashes were disastrous, and sadly could have been avoided.

The way Republicans spend while cutting taxes, coupled with their inability to cut federal "social" programs for their own political reasons (they would lose elections), is why we are in debt today. Simply put, they pass all of today's costs to tomorrow's children.

Republicans are also famous for getting the government to pay large sums (billions or trillions) when large financial banks and corporations go bust. The Democrats are also responsible, since neither party is big on anti-trust, they have to pay up. Unfortunately, the term "too big to fail" is now part of our modern day lexicon.

Other new expressions include "welfare for the wealthy," and "privatizing the profits, socializing the losses." No matter how you spin it, it's government socialism, or give-aways. It's certainly not a free market.

It's clear to most of us now - after the Bush crash - the GOP lacks understanding when it comes to the role of government. They only want it involved if things go wrong. They don't want it anywhere around when they're making money - in their so-called free market.

So, you can now see that Republicans have tried to play the "Great American Santa" leaving us our "social" programs (despite their majorities) while at the same time cutting our taxes. The bill has now been left to future generations to pay. It's now obvious they never really had the courage of their convictions, or their so-called "conservative" principles.

It's Time to Rediscover Our Democratic Roots
It's Time to Believe in Ourselves Again

You see, we Democrats have always been true fiscal conservatives. We were in power for decades after World War II and did a great job of growing the economy while paying down the massive debt left after the war. Don't let the Republicans cast us as the bad guys. History shows us they are the bad guys.

I was a big supporter of Clinton when he lowered the debt and created more jobs than ever before in the history of the nation. That is something we should be proud of. Let's stop allowing the Republicans to question our credentials. Just look hard, we have excellent credentials.

So, let's use our great experience and record of success to make the right decisions again. Let's work on reforming what is broken, and cut back where we think we're spending too much money. Let's do it together like one big American family.

What Should We Do Next?

First of all, it's time to hold a funeral for "Reaganomics." It's time WE THE PEOPLE (Republicans too) admit that growth does not trickle-down to average working Americans, no matter how hard you would like it to.

That means we need to stop talking about lowering taxes on the rich. For one thing the debt is too high; it would be insane. It's true well-heeled members of the GOP supported by most in our corporate media constantly argue for their taxes to be lowered, and I truly believe most of them somehow convince themselves it will help, but unfortunately all credible evidence shows the opposite is true.

If anything, like Obama says taxes must be increased on the rich. The top tax rate in the recent past - until Reagan - was between 60 - 90%. There is plenty of room for increases.

The rich tend to hoard, or create wealth without creating jobs. The stock market and real estate is great, but it's not enough to employ the millions of low-income Americans who are suffering today. Real investment is when people invest to create jobs and recurring wealth. It's not about a fast buck or a get rich quick scam. Lending must be encouraged to create jobs. We need to focus once again on steady growth, and leave the high flying GOP experiments behind us. It's what we're best at.

Second, the Republicans must be held to account. In other words, they can no longer be allowed to play the role of the "Great American Santa." If you the electorate vote them back into power, then you must force them to cut our federal "social" programs or don't bother to vote them back at all. Allowing them to spend while cutting taxes, and not our expensive "social" programs, is both irresponsible and cruel to future generations. It's time the Republicans practice what they preach.

The way I see it, you have a choice between the GOP, low taxes and no social programs, or the Democrats and a more moral, civilized society.

Let me be clear, if the majority of Americans choose to vote away Social Security, Medicare, the Veterans Administration, Medicaid and other federal programs, then I will live with it. I won't like to see Americans die in a world where they don't have to (remember, it's all about spending priorities), but I agree to live with those choices. At least the Republicans will be honest for a change.

I could go on and on, but I won't. Just remember, both parties spend, but ask yourself which party has been more responsible? The answer is clearly the Democrats. Sharing military responsibilities with the world, while spending on programs like health care and social security to help average Americans live with dignity, coupled with reasonable taxation to keeps future generations solvent, is the way to go. Those are good spending priorities for the future.

We cannot continue to spend so much. Republicans want America strong, but at too high a price. We need to change direction, and it requires decisive action at the ballot box.

I wish I could convince my Republican friends of all these truths, but they never seem to listen long enough to hear anything. I only wish they knew the truth. In the end it's everybody's responsibility to learn the truth. Ignorance is not bliss. It could mean bankruptcy, and a bleak American future.

Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday's Political Rant and Rave - Michael

Michael's Economics 101

Even though it's more complicated, just remember the two main opposition theories. Supply-side or "Reaganomics" (incentives to individuals to produce goods and services without limits basically) and the the more traditional Keynesian or "Obamanomics" (government can help create/regulate markets and spur growth, especially job growth). Those two sum up most of the debate.

Remember, the worst human influence on modern economic theory was Milton Friedman. He influenced every Republican alive today. His free theories about minimal regulation, low taxes and privatization thrilled Ronald Reagan and George Bush and have led to chaos in the marketplace today. Incredibly, Republicans still don't see the era of his ways, despite all the turmoil.

President Obama appreciates the more traditional "Institutional Economics" made famous by great thinkers like John Kenneth Galbraith. It was in vogue during the time of Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal. Just like Democrats today, they acknowledged the positive role institutions and government can play in shaping economic behavior and success.

Last but not least, it's important to remember that - at least in academic circles - recent Republican-led experiments in supply-side economics by Reagan and Bush were a complete disaster. From what I read, most educators don't even teach the theories as practical applications in the real world anymore. They are completely discredited except in a few radical right-wing circles and institutions.

Just remember, we the voters need to end the Republican "School of Economic Chaos." We all need to reject the next great Republican rip-off.

Those Who Don't Learn From History

Hello Bloggers - I thought I would try an experiment today. I was talking to a friend yesterday about the stimulus package and the Republican opposition, and something interesting happened during the debate. I found myself saying that I used to love to believe what the Republicans preach - smaller government and lower taxes - until I found out it doesn't work. So, what changed my mind?

I wanted to remember, so I began to recall my political past, and how I wasn't always what Republicans like to call a "liberal" Democrat. (I personally like the term "progressive," because it describes our thinking better.) I was a Democrat, just not the same kind. I was misguided.

Growing up in New Orleans, I campaigned and worked for Representative and later Senator John Breaux (D-LA) in the mid-eighties. He was a moderate "Blue Dog" Democrat, believing in many Republican issues at the time. Smaller government and lower taxes were high on the list. I supported many of the same positions, and even voted for George H. W. Bush after leaving the Senate.

I was young and foolish, and like so many Americans believed their stories about how smaller government and lower taxes would create a fantastic economy and society where success would trickle-down to everybody willing to reach for it. Reagan was a GREAT salesman, and charlatan. After the first Bush presidency, it all started to smell like old, rotten fish.

For those of us who were paying attention, the Lee Atwater movement under the first Bush began to show the ugly side of Republicans. If anybody wants to learn more about that political period, I recommend watching "Boogie Man: The Lee Atwater Story." It's an excellent documentary about how Republican tactics evolved to create Karl Rove and George W. Bush. Be sure to have a friend nearby while watching - it's VERY SCARY!

Anyway, Republicans at that time started to look negative, racially divisive (their "Southern Strategy" was in full swing), and unconcerned about the economics that help ordinary people. They were looking great at getting people to vote against their best interests. It was weird. They started to divide and conquer the nation based on "wedge issues." It was also obvious nothing was "trickling down" to help Average Americans. If anything, they were shipping jobs overseas and destroying the middle-class.

Unfortunately, most Americans weren't paying attention. By and large most Americans hate politics, and would rather be spoon fed slogans than do their homework. They didn't want to know or understand Lee Atwater or Newt Gingrich during the first Bush recession; they only wanted a promise of better times.

That ignorance led to support priming the gears for the Republican revolution, but fortunately for Democrats they suffered a significant set-back when the "Man from Hope" - or Clinton - came along. He was the kind of salesman Americans love. Unfortunately, Americans eventually gave Newt Gingrich and his Republicans Capitol Hill.

Before they won the bulk of their power, Bill Clinton and the Democrats passed legislation to lower the debt and raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans. Republicans called it "job killer" legislation, just like they did with the stimulus this week, and voted against it en masse. Democrats called it responsible government. They focused on reducing the Reagan-Bush era debt and creating jobs.

They Republicans followed-up with their "Contract with America," and despite being bold at the time, it was pretty much ignored and dismissed in the end. They were more concerned with acquiring more power, and they knew they could if they turned their attention to wedge issues, creating a cult-like following, and impeaching the President.

The real political irony of the nineties is how the Republicans took credit for the work of the Democrats. Incredibly, they convinced their flock, and many independents, that the greatest economic boom in American history was the work of Bush and the Republicans in Congress. Clinton's debt reduction initiatives and national stabilization programs were dismissed. Despite facts to the contrary, their ignorant, sheep-like constituents believed it.

Eventually, after creating a web of lies about their "success" and tactical wedge issues like gay marriage, the Republicans stole the 2000 election. Instead of Al Gore - who we voted for, we wound up with George Bush, Dick Cheney and more Republicans. It was a very sad day for the majority of Americans who actually voted to continue with the Democrats, and the well managed Clintonian economy.

The Republicans got to work on their "ill gotten gains" and focused immediately on castrating the government. In early 2001, George Bush and his team began installing incompetent, unqualified people into positions of power - EVERYWHERE in government. They were mostly loyalists it turns out; people they could count on to shrink what they saw as a bloated, inefficient and ineffective government. Unfortunately for them, it turned out to be the opposite. It turns out that less government led to less of everything!

Their version of the US government FAILED to prevent a massive attack on 9/11, FAILED to protect Americans from predatory lenders, FAILED to enforce financial regulations that created a housing bubble, FAILED to regulate Wall Street losing trillions in American savings, FAILED to provide assistance that led to the death of thousands after Katrina, FAILED to prevent war profiteering and incredible waste, and FAILED in just about every area of running the US government and helping the American people. The Republicans would later call it bad luck.

They pretty much FAILED everywhere, leading to the LOWEST APPROVAL RATINGS of any administration in history. They said they didn't care, but what else could they say. They were failures. Overall, the Republican principles that guided George Bush and Dick Cheney led to the worse government in American history, which contributed to some of the greatest disasters in American history.

At this unique time in American politics, listening to the Republicans continue to insist their principles of smaller government and lower taxes work best for the American people, it's important for us to assess what is right and what is wrong about their sales pitch.

So, let's try something we all do from time to time. Let's create a list of pros and cons, to help us visualize it. Let's explore whether our Republican friends should continue to believe their REPUBLICAN policies and beliefs. Here are just a few of my examples for now. Feel free to add your own.

PRO: Smaller government is better government.
CON: Republicans have proven smaller government is not better government. Size isn't the issue. It's about effective government, and the best value for money. Democrats like Obama support that idea.

PRO: Lower taxes help grow the economy and create jobs.
CON: Republicans proved that lower taxes are not enough. Most economists believe growth is encouraged by multiple factors, including government assistance related to education, health care, regulation/oversight, and all kinds of government stabilizing forces. Surgically applied tax cuts are good, but Republican efforts to simply lower taxes across the board have led to lower wages and bubble economies. It's also untrue that lowering taxes on the rich creates jobs - at least AMERICAN JOBS. The rich create some jobs, but how and where is debatable. It's also true that many hoard their money; the middle-class always spends it.

PRO: Less or no regulation is better for a free market.
CON: Republicans proved that reducing or eliminating regulations can lead to bubble economies and chaos. Republican-led deregulation has led to disruptions in every major area supporting the economy, including infrastructure, transportation, state and local economic development initiatives, health care, industrial safety/mining, industrial pollution, protecting the environment [for human health], urban planning/growth, executive compensation, investor protections, and much more. Deregulation has proven to be very dangerous to both the economy and people.

PRO: Transfer payments/social safety nets are harmful to the market and society.
CON: Republicans support transfer payments and social safety nets when it applies to saving large corporations or their own investments, but call it "socialism" and harmful when it's designed to protect individual, less affluent Americans. It's obvious to most Americans now that Republicans support the "privatization of profit and the socialization of risk." Republicans tolerate the "redistribution of wealth" as long as it benefits wealthy Americans. In the end, transfer payments like Social Security, Unemployment Insurance and Medicare stabilize the economy and society.

PRO: A strong defense is critical to American power and overall success.
CON: Just like Dwight D. Eisenhower predicted, the American military-industrial complex has become a behemoth that threatens to strangle the nation. Republicans are obsessed with American power. They have grown to believe in American unilateralism and hegemony. The truth is America must work with partners in today's multi-polar world, and those partners must be forced to share the burden. The industrial-military complex needs to be put on a diet, and Republicans need to accept that America cannot continue to go it alone. America needs to invest in a renewable economy, not just bombs and guns.

That's it for now. I hope you enjoyed my little list. Feel free to add your own.

So, based on this little journey through time, I now see why I left the Republican sales pitch behind. Smaller government and lower taxes SOUND AWESOME, but are really nothing but a pipe dream when you begin to see them applied in the real world. Republicans need to realize that Milton Friedman was wrong. Republican efforts at supply-side economists are a failure. Free trade over fair trade is a failure. American jobs have become CRAP!

We took a chance on Republican principles, and Americans are overwhelmingly throwing in the towel. We're ready to go back to the principles that work. The Democrats didn't invent those principles; Democrats simply embrace what works. I hope the American people understand that and support what is right.

Saturday's Political History/Perspective #1 - Michael