Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer, Bill Hilty: The nation's wars are a heavy burden on the state

Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer, Bill Hilty: The nation's wars are a heavy burden on the state

From the Minneapolis Star Tribune---

Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer, Bill Hilty: The nation's wars are a heavy burden on the state

• Article by: JACK NELSON-PALLMEYER and BILL HILTY 
• Updated: July 25, 2011 - 7:02 PM

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/otherviews/126142923.html

Budget gap could have been easily closed with the money we send away.

Citizens in Minnesota are being encouraged to see scarcity as the new normal. If you are an elected official at any level of government, your job has been reduced to managing austerity.

It doesn't have to be this way -- if we address the elephant lurking in the budget deficit hall. That would be the high costs of militarization and war.

Technically, the military budget is a federal issue, distinct from state, county and city budgets. However, we can no longer maintain the fiction that distorted federal spending that prioritizes war and militarism is disconnected from state and local budget crises and is eroding living standards.

According to the nonpartisan National Priorities Project, Congress devotes 58 cents of every dollar of federal discretionary spending to war-related purposes. To better understand the impact on Minnesota of privileging military spending priorities, consider this: We have just experienced a painful government shutdown over how to deal with a two-year $5 billion shortfall. Yet Minnesota taxpayers over the same two-year period will spend $8.4 billion just for our share of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

This will bring Minnesotans' total contribution to those wars to about $36 billion. Additionally over the next two years, Minnesotans will pay $26 billion for our share of the nation's base military budget, a budget that has doubled since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Every Minnesota citizen and every layer of government is impacted negatively by current war-related priorities. Faced with pressing local needs, taxpayers in Fergus Falls will pay $17 million for their share of counterproductive Iraq/Afghan wars over the next two years; Minneapolis taxpayers will contribute $255 million.

We believe it is time for Minnesotans to communicate clearly to our members of Congress and to President Obama that federal funding priorities must shift from unnecessary wars to meeting essential needs. A new citizen-driven effort, the Minnesota Arms Spending Alternatives Project (MNasap), is a vehicle for doing so.

We have crafted a simple resolution that can be adapted and enacted by individuals, community groups, library boards, city councils and other elected bodies throughout the state. It reads in part: "Whereas our nation desperately needs to better balance its approach to security to go beyond military defense and include the economic, social, and environmental needs of our communities, state, and nation ... Therefore [we] call on Senators Klobuchar and Franken, and Representatives Walz, Kline, Paulsen, McCollum, Ellison, Bachmann, Peterson and Cravaack as well as President Barack Obama, to shift federal funding priorities from war and the interests of the few, to meeting the essential needs of us all."

The state government shutdown has ended, but the pain will be ongoing for many Minnesotans. As a recent Star Tribune editorial ("New budget rests on shaky structure," July 20) states, borrowing against future state revenues and delaying school payments will have serious consequences, and the budget "inflicts too much pain. The hurt will be felt most keenly on college campuses and among those who serve low-income disabled and elderly people."

Imagine what we can accomplish if we stop squandering wealth and talents on militarization and counterproductive wars. Schools could reduce class sizes and have adequate supplies. Bridges could be repaired. Food shelves could be adequately stocked but rarely needed. We could take steps to make homelessness rare and temporary. Cities and states could adequately provide essential services, including meeting their authentic security needs. Critical investments could be made in infrastructure and green technologies. Public libraries could expand hours and programming. Urban and national rail systems could be built. The country could address climate change and end child poverty. All Americans could have access to quality, affordable health care.

This sounds like a fantasy only because current choices keep us on the dead-end road of militarization. It is a realistic possibility once we demilitarize priorities, realistically assess security needs and refocus governing on serving the common good.

Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer is associate professor of justice and peace studies at the University of St. Thomas. Bill Hilty, DFL-Finlayson, is a member of the Minnesota House. For information on the resolution campaign, contact MinnesotaASAP@gmail.com

Previously Pallmeyer and Hilty authored this resolution:

Resolution Calling for Re-ordering Priorities

Resolution Calling for Re-ordering PrioritiesResolution Calling for Re-ordering of Priorities:

Whereas Minnesota is faced with a $5.028 billion budget shortfall; and,

Whereas past budget cuts have resulted in painful reductions in essential services and future cuts would further erode the quality of life for and, in fact, endanger the lives of many citizens; and,

Whereas many cities and communities in Minnesota are laying off police, firefighters, teachers and other essential employees; and,

Whereas past budgets have been balanced by cutting social services, under investment in essential infrastructure, and other measures that push the crisis onto local governments and the poor; and,

Whereas Minnesota taxpayers even during these times of economic crisis and fiscal austerity are poised to pay the equivalent of the entire state biennial budget, more than $35 billion over the next two years, for their share of the Defense Budget of the Federal government; and,

Whereas Minnesota taxpayers alone have already spent more than $27.5 billion, and will spend $8.4 billion more over the next two years for the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; and,

Whereas 58 cents of every dollar of federal discretionary spending is devoted to military purposes; and,

Whereas military spending priorities at the national level negatively impact budgets and quality of life at all levels of government and society; and,

Whereas our nation desperately needs to better balance its approach to security to go beyond military defense and include the economic, social, and environmental needs of our communities, state, and nation;

Therefore be it resolved that we, the Legislature of the State of Minnesota call on Senators Klobuchar and Franken, and Representatives Walz, Kline, Paulsen, McCollum, Ellison, Bachmann, Peterson and Cravaack as well as Congressional leadership and President Barack Obama, to shift federal funding priorities from war and the interests of the few, to meeting the essential needs of us all.

Approved [date]

Drafted by Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party State Representative Bill Hilty.

A more comprehensive alternative I put together based on talks with people across the Great Lakes Region:

A program for real change...

* Peace--- end the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya and shutdown the 800 U.S. military bases on foreign soil. 

* A National Public Health Care System - ten million new jobs. 

* A National Public Child Care System - three to five million new jobs. 

* Works Progress Administration - three million new jobs. 

* Civilian Conservation Corps - two million new jobs. 

* Tax the hell out of the rich and cut the military budget by ending the wars to pay for it all which will create full employment. 

* Enforce Affirmative Action; end discrimination. 

* Raise the minimum wage to a real living wage 

* What tax-payers subsidize in the way of businesses, tax-payers should own and reap the profits from.

 

* Moratorium on home foreclosures and evictions. 

* Defend democracy by defending workers' rights including the right to collective bargaining for improving the lives and livelihoods of working people. 

* Roll-back and freeze the price of food, electricity, gas and heating fuels; not wages, benefits or pensions. 

* Wall Street is our enemy.

How is Barack Obama's Wall Street war economy working for you? 

Let's talk about the politics and economics of livelihood for a real change. 

Obviously the resolutions by Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer and Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party State Representative Bill Hilty will never be realized as government policy while we are stuck in this "two-party trap" because militarism and wars are an integral and primary component of Wall Street's imperialist agenda. 

The question we need to keep asking...

As liberal, progressive and left working class activists we should strive to make sure the entire politics of this country begins to revolve around how the American people answer this one basic and fundamental question:

How is Barack Obama's Wall Street war economy working for you?

- Ask this question in letters to the editor.

- Post it on your refrigerator, on bulletin boards at work, in churches and community centers.

- Use it on protest signs at vigils and demonstrations.

Most people will tell you that this economy is not working very well for them. After finding out why it isn't working very well for them we can begin to put together a program to turn this country around in creating the kind of country we really want.

This is such a basic and fundamental question as we approach the 2012 Elections that it is dishonest to be engaged in politics not asking this question of the American people.

-- 

Alan L. Maki

Director of Organizing,

Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council

58891 County Road 13

Warroad, Minnesota 56763

Phone: 218-386-2432

Cell: 651-587-5541

Primary E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net

E-mail: alan.maki1951mn@gmail.com

Blog: http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/

Greetings from Walkerville

Greetings from Walkerville

Phil Neuenfeldt, Wisconsin State AFL-CIOpresident,  < http://www.wisaflcio.org/ > sends an update on the actions around Wisconsin’s Walkerville.

Day six of the Walkerville tent city protest has seen overwhelming support from Wisconsin workers, students and community members. Over the course of the week, thousands of Wisconsinites have gathered on the cement blocks lining the Capitol Square in order to call attention to Gov. Walker and his legislative allies’ destructive budget proposals—proposals which will cripple Wisconsin’s schools, health care system and communities.

Many have said that they are surrounding the Capitol to bear witness to their elected officials’ decisions and to let their Representatives know that the people of Wisconsin are preparing to take back their government back this summer.

“Walkerville is a way to focus the spotlight on Gov. Walker and Sen. Alberta Darling’s budget that will devastate higher education, public education and Wisconsin as we know it,” explained Michael Rosen, President of AFT Local 212, and professor at the Milwaukee Area Technical College. Rosen traveled to Walkerville on Wednesday to spend the night.

About 150 tents have sprung up around the Capitol since Saturday June 4, when the Walkerville tent city was erected.

Stephanie Bloomingdale, Secretary-Treasurer of the Wisconsin State AFL-CIO, brought her son, Nicholas to Walkerville. “We are here to tell Scott Walker that his attack on Wisconsin’s unions, middle class, and communities will not stand.

The people are coming together here in Walkerville to fight for a just budget and for an economy that works for all.”

Each day in Walkerville has had a theme, complete with educational programs to inform citizens on the budget and how it will impact their everyday life. Public services, health care, education and higher education have all been a theme of the day. Many local musicians have taken to the stage on State Street to show their support for the protestors and entertain the family-friendly crowd.

“As Wisconsinites, we cannot standby in silence while our friends, family and neighbors suffer at the hand of Governor Walker’s bad choices for our state,” explained Dian Palmer, President of SEIU Health Care Wisconsin and a public health nurse from Milwaukee who has been spending multiple nights in Walkerville. “I am here because what I have heard from Governor Walker does not represent the Wisconsin that I believe in or that my fellow Wisconsinites believe in. And I am here to bear witness and ensure that our leaders do right by education, healthcare and programs for senior citizens.”

Walkerville Events

On Health Care Day, nurses and home care patients took on a mock Scott Walker in the fight for quality health care in a play boxing match. Candice Owley, President of the Wisconsin Federation of Nurses and Health Professionals, took to the ring in order to ensure quality care for all of Wisconsin.

On Public Services day, state and county employees held a mock town-hall listening session

< http://wisaflcio.typepad.com/wisconsin-state-afl-cio-blog/2011/06/walkerville-mock-listening-session-.htmlwith > characters of Gov. Walker, David Koch, Sen. Glen Grothman and Sarah Palin. On Sunday, Wisconsin teachers held a citizen speak-out:

< http://wisaflcio.typepad.com/wisconsin-state-afl-cio-blog/2011/06/teachers-rally-walkerville.html >

Last Monday, fire fighters, farmers and cops lead a march of thousands to call for a fair and just budget. Read more about it here:

< http://wisaflcio.typepad.com/wisconsin-state-afl-cio-blog/2011/06/fair-budget-march-walkerville.html >

As the winds blew in last night Walkerville residence took refuge by patronizing local businesses as they waited out the storm. After the storm, Walkerville citizens returned to their tents, tucked-in for the night and continued to raise awareness of Gov. Walker’s bad budget choices.

More information on Walkerville

For pictures of Walkerville click here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/wisaflcio/

For Walkerville stories click here: http://wisaflcio.typepad.com/ 

To donate to help the Walkerville, tent city run click here:

http://wi.aflcio.org/statefed/index.cfm?action=article&articleID=8853d778-e839-4967-982e-c4ca49b2d26c

For live updates from Walkerville visit the Wisconsin State AFL-CIO Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/wisaflcio

Twitterpages: http://twitter.com/#!/wisaflcio

Press Clips From Walkerville

Wisconsin Protesters Erect ‘Walkerville’ Tent City To Protest Scott Walker’s Budget Cuts, Hufftington Post.

In Wisconsin, Legislative Urgency as Recall Threat Looms, New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/08/us/politics/08wisconsin.html?_r=3

Friendly Spirit Prevails in Walkerville, Wisconsin State Journal:

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_75c648fa-8f6e-11e0-a928-001cc4c03286.html

CNN in Walkerville:

http://www.criticalmention.com/ctv3-1/landing_email.php?type=email&video=true&random_string=67b2d92dedfb1f74df9b4c7a1e8950f9

Check out my blog: http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/

The War Prayer

The War Prayer
by Mark Twain
a.k.a. Samuel Clemens
(1835-1910)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was a time of great and exalting excitement. The country was up in arms, the war was on, in every breast burned the holy fire of patriotism; the drums were beating, the bands playing, the toy pistols popping, the bunched firecrackers hissing and sputtering; on every hand and far down the receding and fading spreads of roofs and balconies a fluttering wilderness of flags flashed in the sun; daily the young volunteers marched down the wide avenue gay and fine in their new uniforms, the proud fathers and mothers and sisters and sweethearts cheering them with voices choked with happy emotion as they swung by; nightly the packed mass meetings listened, panting, to patriot oratory which stirred the deepest deeps of their hearts and which they interrupted at briefest intervals with cyclones of applause, the tears running down their cheeks the while; in the churches the pastors preached devotion to flag and country and invoked the God of Battles, beseeching His aid in our good cause in outpouring of fervid eloquence which moved every listener.

It was indeed a glad and gracious time, and the half dozen rash spirits that ventured to disapprove of the war and cast a doubt upon its righteousness straightway got such a stern and angry warning that for their personal safety's sake they quickly shrank out of sight and offended no more in that way.

Sunday morning came-next day the battalions would leave for the front; the church was filled; the volunteers were there, their faces alight with material dreams-visions of a stern advance, the gathering momentum, the rushing charge, the flashing sabers, the flight of the foe, the tumult, the enveloping smoke, the fierce pursuit, the surrender!-then home from the war, bronzed heros, welcomed, adored, submerged in golden seas of glory! With the volunteers sat their dear ones, proud, happy, and envied by the neighbors and friends who had no sons and brothers to send forth to the field of honor, there to win for the flag or, failing, die the noblest of noble deaths. The service proceeded; a war chapter from the Old Testament was read; the first prayer was said; it was followed by an organ burst that shook the building, and with one impulse the house rose, with glowing eyes and beating hearts, and poured out that tremendous invocation -- "God the all-terrible! Thou who ordainest, Thunder thy clarion and lightning thy sword!"

Then came the "long" prayer. None could remember the like of it for passionate pleading and moving and beautiful language. The burden of its supplication was that an ever--merciful and benignant Father of us all would watch over our noble young soldiers and aid, comfort, and encourage them in their patriotic work; bless them, shield them in His mighty hand, make them strong and confident, invincible in the bloody onset; help them to crush the foe, grant to them and to their flag and country imperishable honor and glory -

An aged stranger entered and moved with slow and noiseless step up the main aisle, his eyes fixed upon the minister, his long body clothed in a robe that reached to his feet, his head bare, his white hair descending in a frothy cataract to his shoulders, his seamy face unnaturally pale, pale even to ghastliness. With all eyes following him and wondering, he made his silent way; without pausing, he ascended to the preacher's side and stood there, waiting.
With shut lids the preacher, unconscious of his presence, continued his moving prayer, and at last finished it with the words, uttered in fervent appeal,"Bless our arms, grant us the victory, O Lord our God, Father and Protector of our land and flag!"

The stranger touched his arm, motioned him to step aside -- which the startled minister did -- and took his place. During some moments he surveyed the spellbound audience with solemn eyes in which burned an uncanny light; then in a deep voice he said

"I come from the Throne-bearing a message from Almighty God!" The words smote the house with a shock; if the stranger perceived it he gave no attention. "He has heard the prayer of His servant your shepherd and grant it if such shall be your desire after I, His messenger, shall have explained to you its import-that is to say, its full import. For it is like unto many of the prayers of men, in that it asks for more than he who utters it is aware of-except he pause and think.
"God's servant and yours has prayed his prayer. Has he paused and taken thought? Is it one prayer? No, it is two- one uttered, the other not. Both have reached the ear of His Who hearth all supplications, the spoken and the unspoken. Ponder this-keep it in mind. If you beseech a blessing upon yourself, beware! lest without intent you invoke a curse upon a neighbor at the same time. If you pray for the blessing of rain upon your crop which needs it, by that act you are possibly praying for a curse upon some neighbor's crop which may not need rain and can be injured by it.
"You have heard your servant's prayer-the uttered part of it. I am commissioned by God to put into words the other part of it-that part which the pastor, and also you in your hearts, fervently prayed silently. And ignorantly and unthinkingly? God grant that it was so! You heard these words: 'Grant us the victory, O Lord our God!' That is sufficient. The whole of the uttered prayer is compact into those pregnant words. Elaborations were not necessary. When you have prayed for victory you have prayed for many unmentioned results which follow victory-must follow it, cannot help but follow it. Upon the listening spirit of God the Father fell also the unspoken part of the prayer. He commandeth me to put it into words. Listen!

"O Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth to battle-be Thou near them! With them, in spirit, we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved firesides to smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with their little children to wander unfriended the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames of summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring Thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it-for our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimage, make heavy their steps, water their way with their tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet! We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of Love, and Who is ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts. Amen.

(After a pause)

"Ye have prayed it; if ye still desire it, speak! The messenger of the Most High waits."

It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said.

Peace = health care + child care + over 15,000,000 new jobs

Neither Paul Krugman nor Evan Bayh place the questions about the economy correctly by asking this very important and fundamental question:

How is Obama's war economy working for you?


One has to ask how it can possibly be that neither Krugman the economist nor Bayh the politician don't even mention these extremely costly dirty wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in either of their op/ed pieces when putting an end to this massive waste is what is required if we our going to solve our many problems.


In fact, Bayh talks about Obama making a mistake about putting health care reform before creating jobs while Krugman turns around and says that Bayh is wrong.


Well, the fact is both Krugman and Bayh are wrong because Obama and the Democrats could have killed three birds with one stone by ending these dirty wars and using the money saved to finance a National Public Health Care System providing the American people with free health care through a national network of 30,000 public health care centers which would have created around ten-million new decent good-paying jobs.


Peace = health care + jobs


There would have been enough money left to create a National Public Child Care System, too; thus solving another major problem for most working class families while creating over 5 million new jobs.


Peace = health care + child care + over 15,000,000 new jobs


Why is it so hard for these economists and politicians to figure out the most jobs are created by putting people to work solving the problems of working people while creating a more just and humane society?

If additional funding is needed you simply tax the hell out of the rich who have been stashing away their profits for four or five generations so what we need to do is take their money to redistribute this massive wealth that working people created and Wall Street coupon clippers socked away.


If need be a tax similar to the Social Security tax could be implemented to pay for national public health care and national public child care... no one would or could object since they would be getting something of real value instead of the bloody mess that comes with wars that cost way more than health care or child care ever would cost.


Paul Krugman says he wants to hear answers so this is my answer to him and the politicians.



I don't get it; how can any reasonably intelligent person not understand that by implementing both National Public Health Care and National Public Child Care programs you create jobs at the same time?


Chances are, like the wars, which the majority of the American people want to end... the majority of the American people would favor creating both a National Public Health Care System and a National Public Child Care System when given the facts.


Would anyone care to venture how it is an economist the stature of the award-winning Paul Krugman and a long-time serving U.S. Senator like Evan Bayh could not come up with any of this?







http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/05/opinion/05krugman.html?src=me&ref=general

November 4, 2010
The Focus Hocus-Pocus
By PAUL KRUGMAN

Democrats, declared Evan Bayh in an Op-Ed article on Wednesday in The Times, “overreached by focusing on health care rather than job creation during a severe recession.” Many others have been saying the same thing: the notion that the Obama administration erred by not focusing on the economy is hardening into conventional wisdom.

But I have no idea what, if anything, people mean when they say that. The whole focus on “focus” is, as I see it, an act of intellectual cowardice — a way to criticize President Obama’s record without explaining what you would have done differently.

After all, are people who say that Mr. Obama should have focused on the economy saying that he should have pursued a bigger stimulus package? Are they saying that he should have taken a tougher line with the banks? If not, what are they saying? That he should have walked around with furrowed brow muttering, “I’m focused, I’m focused”?

Mr. Obama’s problem wasn’t lack of focus; it was lack of audacity. At the start of his administration he settled for an economic plan that was far too weak. He compounded this original sin both by pretending that everything was on track and by adopting the rhetoric of his enemies.

The aftermath of major financial crises is almost always terrible: severe crises are typically followed by multiple years of very high unemployment. And when Mr. Obama took office, America had just suffered its worst financial crisis since the 1930s. What the nation needed, given this grim prospect, was a really ambitious recovery plan.

Could Mr. Obama actually have offered such a plan? He might not have been able to get a big plan through Congress, or at least not without using extraordinary political tactics. Still, he could have chosen to be bold — to make Plan A the passage of a truly adequate economic plan, with Plan B being to place blame for the economy’s troubles on Republicans if they succeeded in blocking such a plan.

But he chose a seemingly safer course: a medium-size stimulus package that was clearly not up to the task. And that’s not 20/20 hindsight. In early 2009, many economists, yours truly included, were more or less frantically warning that the administration’s proposals were nowhere near bold enough.

Worse, there was no Plan B. By late 2009, it was already obvious that the worriers had been right, that the program was much too small. Mr. Obama could have gone to the nation and said, “My predecessor left the economy in even worse shape than we realized, and we need further action.” But he didn’t. Instead, he and his officials continued to claim that their original plan was just right, damaging their credibility even further as the economy continued to fall short.

Meanwhile, the administration’s bank-friendly policies and rhetoric — dictated by fear of hurting financial confidence — ended up fueling populist anger, to the benefit of even more bank-friendly Republicans. Mr. Obama added to his problems by effectively conceding the argument over the role of government in a depressed economy.

I felt a sense of despair during Mr. Obama’s first State of the Union address, in which he declared that “families across the country are tightening their belts and making tough decisions. The federal government should do the same.” Not only was this bad economics — right now the government must spend, because the private sector can’t or won’t — it was almost a verbatim repeat of what John Boehner, the soon-to-be House speaker, said when attacking the original stimulus. If the president won’t speak up for his own economic philosophy, who will?

So where, in this story, does “focus” come in? Lack of nerve? Yes. Lack of courage in one’s own convictions? Definitely. Lack of focus? No.

And why would failing to tackle health care have produced a better outcome? The focus people never explain.

Of course, there’s a subtext to the whole line that health reform was a mistake: namely, that Democrats should stop acting like Democrats and go back to being Republicans-lite. Parse what people like Mr. Bayh are saying, and it amounts to demanding that Mr. Obama spend the next two years cringing and admitting that conservatives were right.

There is an alternative: Mr. Obama can take a stand.

For one thing, he still has the ability to engineer significant relief to homeowners, one area where his administration completely dropped the ball during its first two years. Beyond that, Plan B is still available. He can propose real measures to create jobs and aid the unemployed and put Republicans on the spot for standing in the way of the help Americans need.

Would taking such a stand be politically risky? Yes, of course. But Mr. Obama’s economic policy ended up being a political disaster precisely because he tried to play it safe. It’s time for him to try something different.





http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/opinion/03bayh.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
Where Do Democrats Go Next?

Brian Stauffer
By EVAN BAYH
Published: November 2, 2010


DEMOCRATS can recover from the disappointments of this election and set the stage for success in 2012. But to do so we must learn from Tuesday’s results.

Many of our problems were foreseeable. A public unhappy about the economy will take it out on the party in power, even if the problems began under previous management. What’s more, when one party controls everything — the House, the Senate, the White House — disgruntled voters have only one target for their ire. And the president’s party almost always loses seats in midterm elections.

Nonetheless, recurring patterns of history, broad economic forces and the laws of politics don’t entirely account for the Democrats’ predicament. To a degree we are authors of our own misfortune, and we must chart a better path forward.

It is clear that Democrats over-interpreted our mandate. Talk of a “political realignment” and a “new progressive era” proved wishful thinking. Exit polls in 2008 showed that 22 percent of voters identified themselves as liberals, 32 percent as conservatives and 44 percent as moderates. An electorate that is 76 percent moderate to conservative was not crying out for a move to the left.

We also overreached by focusing on health care rather than job creation during a severe recession. It was a noble aspiration, but $1 trillion in new spending and a major entitlement expansion are best attempted when the Treasury is flush and the economy strong, hardly our situation today.

And we were too deferential to our most zealous supporters. During election season, Congress sought to placate those on the extreme left and motivate the base — but that meant that our final efforts before the election focused on trying to allow gays in the military, change our immigration system and repeal the George W. Bush-era tax cuts. These are legitimate issues but unlikely to resonate with moderate swing voters in a season of economic discontent.

With these lessons in mind, Democrats can begin to rebuild. Where to start?

First, we have more than a communications problem — the public heard us but disagreed with our approach. Democrats need not reassess our goals for America, but we need to seriously rethink how to reach them.

Second, don’t blame the voters. They aren’t stupid or addled by fear. They are skeptical about government efficacy, worried about the deficit and angry that Democrats placed other priorities above their main concern: economic growth.

So, in the near term, every policy must be viewed through a single prism: does it help the economy grow?

A good place to start would be tax reform. Get rates down to make American businesses globally competitive. Reward savings and investment. Simplify the code to reduce compliance costs and broaden the base. In 1986, this approach attracted bipartisan support and fostered growth.

The stereotype of Democrats as wild-eyed spenders and taxers has been resurrected. To regain our political footing, we must prove to moderates that Democrats can make tough choices. Democrats should ban earmarks until the budget is balanced. The amount saved would be modest — but with ordinary Americans sacrificing so much, the symbolic power of politicians cutting their own perks is huge.

Democrats should support a freeze on federal hiring and pay increases. Government isn’t a privileged class and cannot be immune to the times.

The most important area for spending restraint is entitlement reform. Democrats should offer changes to the system that would save hundreds of billions of dollars while preserving the safety net for our neediest. For instance, we could introduce “progressive indexation,” which would provide lower cost-of-living increases for more affluent Social Security recipients, or devise a more accurate measure of inflation’s effects on all recipients’ income.

Democrats should also improve legislation already enacted. Health care reform, financial regulation and other initiatives were first attempts at solving complex problems, not holy writ. The administration’s grant of sensible exemptions to the health care bill, permitting some employers to offer only basic coverage, is an example of common-sense, results-oriented fine-tuning.

If President Obama and Congressional Democrats were to take these and other moderate steps on tax reform, deficit reduction and energy security, they would confront Republicans with a quandary: cooperate to make America more prosperous and financially stable, running the risk that the president would likely receive the credit, or obstruct what voters perceive as sensible solutions.

Having seen so many moderates go down to defeat in this year’s primaries, few Republicans in Congress will be likely to collaborate. And as the Republicans — including the party’s 2012 presidential candidates — genuflect before the Tea Party and other elements of the newly empowered right wing, President Obama can seize the center.

I’m betting the president and his advisers understand much of this. If so, assuming the economy recovers, President Obama can win re-election; Democrats can set the stage for historic achievements in a second term. The extremes of both parties will be disappointed. But the vast center yearning for progress will applaud, and the country will benefit.

Evan Bayh, a Democratic senator from Indiana, is retiring from the Senate in January.

Chile Remains An Area Of Concern And Interest

Brian McAfee

2838 Mason Blvd.

Muskegon Heights, MI 49444

(231)737-8726

brimac6@hotmail.com

                              Chile Remains An Area Of Concern And Interest

                                                by Brian McAfee
 
The massive earthquake that struck Chile February 27 continues to have a heavy impact on the Chilean people. The 8.8 magnitude earthquake and the subsequent tsunami has killed at least 497 people while about 500 remain missing. Considering the numbers injured and rendered homeless from the Initial earthquake and the numerous aftershocks Chileans will continue to need assistance. Numerous countries and aid organizations have offered and given assistance.
 
Given the not that distant history in Chile of the Pinochet Dictatorship the aid and assistance that has come in from Cuba, Russia and Bolivia are particularly interesting. Cuba flew in a team of doctors and a field hospital, Russia flew in rescue workers and humanitarian aid, in Bolivia, president Evo Morales and his vice president Alvaro Garcia are donating half their March salaries to earthquake victims in both Chile and Haiti, this in itself is not hugely significant but but if other political leaders did the same they would be showing a degree of decency often in short supply among politicians.
 
Some aid organizations that are working with the ongoing relief effort in Chile are SOS Children's Village which has been active in Chile since 1965,

www.childrensvillage.org, 

OXFAM has been helping with the earthquake relief since the guake struck February 27, www.oxfamamerica.org, and Red Cross,

www.redcross.org. When contacting these agencies please specify that it is for Chilean earthquake relief.

Brian McAfee-  brimac6@hotmail.com

---

The World is in Crisis with Dark Clouds Ahead

This statement should be widely distributed. For what these wars and militarism is costing the American people we could have a world-class public healthcare system.

The World is in Crisis with Dark Clouds Ahead


Written by Alfred L. Marder, President, US Peace Council

Remarks of Al Marder, President, US Peace Council, to the World Peace Council Secretariat meeting at Katmandu, Nepal.



Comrades and Friends:





I wish to thank the Nepal Peace and Solidarity Council for providing the opportunity to come together to exchange ideas and proposals at this critical period for united action against the continuing and accelerated drive of imperialism that threatens world peace. We must seize this occasion to fulfill our historic responsibility to seek to unite the global peace movement in common struggle for peace. We recognize that our brothers and sisters in countries throughout the world, in many forms and many organizations, are struggling for national independence, for sovereignty, for the right to determine their own destiny, for peace. The World Peace Council, founded in the cauldron of anti-imperialism and internationalism, must reach out as never before, to seek common ground with all those forces, to forge a “superpower,” a global people’s movement for peace and justice.



In the last few days, further ominous steps have been taken by the Obama Administration intensifying the dangers to peace. The Polish Government announced the agreement to station a US Missile base 60 kilometers from the Russian border of Kaliningrad in the city of Modrag, Poland, stationing 100 US soldiers. The Polish Defense Minister boasted that this site would be combat-ready! The newspapers reported that a leading Russian General questioned the justification that the northern flank of NATO had to be strengthened. He said, “NATO has manifold superiority over Russian conventional arms, as it is.”



That issue, dear friends, is stalling an agreement on the START talks between the US and Russia on the reduction of nuclear weapons. Putin and Medvedev have stated that the negotiations must include missile bases before Russia will seriously negotiate on the reduction of nuclear weapons, let alone on their abolition.



Further, Rumania has announced an agreement with the US to station a missile base. Together, with a base already in Bulgaria, new military bases will be erected, costing $110 million dollars. They will house 4, 000 US troops.



We celebrated the heroic actions of the Czech people against stationing bases in their country. The Obama Administration has now announced they will arm all US warships in the Mediterranean and Middle East waters with these missiles.



Washington has increased the drone attacks in Pakistan and now there are calls for drone attacks on Yemen against the so-called terrorists. The recent attack on a vehicle in Pakistan revealed American soldiers in Pakistan dress from head to toe. The press reported that they dress the American soldiers this way in order to hide the fact from the Pakistan people that American troops are actually in Pakistan. The wars of invasion for imperialist domination have expanded: Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.



The US has moved into Haiti again, using the horrible natural catastrophe as the excuse. French, Cuban, Venezuelan planes, bringing humanitarian supplies and assistance, were forbidden to land in the Porto-Prince airport. The French Minister of Defense has said it bluntly; the aim is to assist not occupy.



The Obama administration signed an agreement with Colombia for ten years for seven new bases. Colombia receives billions in US aid, third, after Israel and Egypt. 1,400 US troops will be dispatched to Colombia to man the new bases in Colombia. Why the need for bases and soldiers in Colombia?



These steps are clearly a threat to the independence movement in Latin America. The overthrow of the Zeyala administration in Honduras is a clear warning that US Imperialism is not ignoring the historic struggle of the peoples of Latin and Central America to rid themselves of the US yoke that has been choking them for centuries. Activities, including killings, in opposition to the new people’s governments, are taking place daily with the support of US embassies. The oligarchs and the murderous paramilitary mercenaries of Latin America are actively supported by the CIA and other US agencies.



The African Command has announced increased activities on the coast of Africa beyond the counterinsurgency operations in Somalia, Uganda, Mali, and Djibouti. Who is active in the Congo and other African countries for their rich resources? The US now gets 17% of its oil from Africa. By the year of 2015, the US will get 25% of its oil from Africa. There is now a Drone base in the Seychelles.



The World Peace Council is a member of the International Network Against Foreign Bases. The struggle against foreign bases is a struggle against imperialism at the national level, capable of mobilizing the people in the name of national sovereignty and independence. The WPC must play a leading role commensurate with its mission. It must encourage all of our members to become active in this movement.



While all of the above is very serious and dangerous, the most ominous of decisions is the decision to sell $6.5 billion dollars of weapons to Taiwan. In the mix will be 200 Patriot anti-ballistic missiles. China has rightfully denounced this dangerous situation, as direct intervention in their internal affairs. The US moves deliberately to surround China and Russia.





The Obama new missile-shield project will be extended to all of Europe integrated with NATO and will extend to the Middle East and the Caucuses. All the warships plying the oceans in Europe and the Middle East will be have Standard Missiles 3 and a new land-based version. Plans are afoot to deploy missile interceptors on the soil of European nations





The Review of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is to take place on May 4 again in New York at the United Nations. This is at a critical stage in the struggle against nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons have been the excuse for the invasion of Iraq; the attacks against Iran and the maneuvers against North Korea. The issue of nuclear weapons has been with us since the days of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It sparked the founding of the World Peace Council itself. While it is important to recall that it was the WPC that initiated the historic Stockholm Peace Pledge, it is now 60 years later. The World Peace Council is regaining its strength. We must become deeply involved in the global movement to rid the world of nuclear weapons, in collecting signatures on the global petition , in mobilizing national movements and particularly, participating in the International Conference in New York and the Demonstration on April 30, May 1, and May 2.



The duplicitous role of the former Secretaries of State and Defense, Kissinger, Schultz, Perry and Schlesinger in the United States right-wing hawks, pretending, by major articles in the world press, that they were calling for the abolition of nuclear weapons, has been revealed. Honest anti-nuclear weapons proponents pointed to the apparent change in the thinking of the right-wing hawks in the United States calling for the abolition of nuclear weapons. These imperialists have strong financial ties to the nuclear weapons industry. They were misleading the public, hoping, obviously, to lull the opposition to nuclear weapons. Today, prior to the NPT Review, they are calling for increased funding and manufacture of new and more deadly nuclear weapons. Obama’s budget obliges them.



The President of the United States, Barack Obama, made a forthright statement in Prague calling for the abolition of nuclear weapons. He asserted that it was the moral duty of the United States, as the only nation to use nuclear weapons, to take the lead in their abolition. The global anti-nuclear weapons movement seized upon this statement to demand that the words are followed by concrete action. However, here again, an examination of the budget of the Obama administration shows that new money is being funneled into the major laboratories for new bombs, more deadly weapons, for a policy that will continue nuclear weapons as an essential party of military strategy. Manufacturers and laboratories devoted to these weapons of mass destruction are not going to give up their huge profits. President Obama’s words prove to be rhetoric not backed by deeds.



The Obama Administration is asking for almost $1 trillion dollars in military and war spending this year. This is double all the world together spends on killing machines.



All this is not a sign of strength of US imperialism. The US is a debtor nation, financed by China and Japan and other foreign investors; 28 million people are unemployed or under employed, African American and Hispanic workers are most affected: 17% to 10%; 50 million people have no health insurance; 8 million homes have been foreclosed by the banks; one out of 5 children go to bed hungry. Pensions have been either destroyed or seriously depleted. 38 million n people are now forced to get government stamps for food. Yet, the banks and corporations register huge profits as productivity per worker is up with fewer workers! The people had demanded a change. Obama talked of change. There is little change.



It was quite common to hear that war provides jobs; while it is true our sons and daughters die, the economy benefits. That is no longer the case. Our sons and daughters die and the people suffer. That is the reality.



The World Peace Council has a noble history, holding its anti-imperialist banner high during a very difficult period, resisting all attempts to change its anti-imperialist foundation. Yesterday, the world, seeking liberation from colonial rule and the horrors of fascism, looked to the World Peace Council for solidarity and internationalism.



Today 2 billion of our brothers and sisters are hungry; without clean drinking water; homeless or living in deplorable conditions. Disease is rampant. Internal conflict is encouraged by imperialism and their domestic agents so that the natural resources, their wealth, end up in foreign hands. Their countries are in deep debt, and their destiny is decided in foreign capitals.



We must find a way to reach out to these brothers and sisters, as we did before. Their struggle is our struggle. We need them in our ranks.



The world is in crisis with dark clouds ahead. The WPC is no stranger to crisis. There is a historic global peace movement today. We must assume our role in that movement. We must respond today as we have in the past. This meeting should propel us forward to meet our responsibilities.





Thank you.





February 18, 2010