Scarborough

This is a great clip of one of the Fox News idiots being called on their lies. The audio/video of this is stellar. It demonstrates how the Fox News people operate by misstating or outright lying about what they are discussing and then accusing the guests of misstating the facts. However, the guest Dr. Ronald Cranford does not take the B.S. and smacks back.

Moving in the Right Direction, but Still Wrong

Well Robert Barro, a conservative economist at Harvard, has moved a little bit towards the right idea. By publicly denouncing (in Business Week) the idea of private accounts, he counters the less thoughtful Martin Feldstein and Alan Greenspan who still support the plan (that hasn't been unveiled yet), although with hesitations about the fiscal reverberations of the transition costs. That is where Professor Barro and I part ways. He asserts that financing the transition costs with new debt (supposedly just replacing implicit debt with explicit debt) would have no effect is misleading. The fiscal state of America does not leave much room for increasing debt. Much of the (limited) stability of the U.S. economy in the last 4 years has been due to the confidence by the rest of the world (particularly East Asian governments) in the ability and willingness of the U.S. to repay its debts and not print money excessively to reduce the real value of the debt rather than simply a rational look at the path of the U.S. national debt. This good faith is not going to last forever (just remember the "jitters" in the value of the dollar after a few central banks, South Korea and Japan, suggested that they might diversify their central bank reserves which are now almost entirely in U.S. dollars before being quickly retracted) and privatizing Social Security will only add to the burden and speed up a financial crisis in the U.S.

2 years and counting

So today is the 2 year anniversary of the invasion of Iraq and what is there that has been accomplished. More than 100,000 Iraqis and 1,500 U.S. troops are dead. There are no WMDs anywhere in sight and Iraq is in chaos. The elections were not seen as legitimate by many Iraqis (most Sunnis boycotted them). So much for stability in the region. The majority of deaths are Iraqis killing Iraqis for collaborating the the U.S. who are almost universally seen as an occupying power. Iran is progressing towards having a nuclear weapon. Things went great, didn't they George! Hopefully this will be the last anniversary of the Iraq war before it ends. I doubt it though.

The Neo-con Bank

So, Bush has thrown down the gauntlet of U.S. multilateralism vs. U.S. unilateralism and dominance in international policy. Within the last week, Bush has nominated John Bolton as U.N. ambassador (a man who claimed that if 15 stories of the U.N. building were removed, no one would notice). This provides a big F.U. to the world and the U.N. If the U.S. cannot eliminate the secretary-general through a phony scandal (the U.S. had to approve every transaction under the oil-for-food program since it was directly controlled through the Security Council), then it will do everything it can to undermine the influence of the U.N. If that wasn't enough, yesterday, Bush nominated Paul Wolfowitz, deputy secretary of defence and a leading neo-con in the drive to war with Iraq, to head the World Bank. If the Europeans don't step in and block his nomination (traditionally the U.S. picks the head of the World Bank and the Europeans pick the head of the IMF) the transition of the World Bank from an organization involved in large infrastructure projects in the developing world (which largely failed) to an organization that does more to reduce poverty across the world will be slowed or stopped. This movement has been hugely beneficial to the World Bank and developing countries. To go back would to reinforce the idea that the World Bank is the tool of the countries that lend to developing countries instead of what it should be (a more democratic and transparent structure wouldn't hurt either). Bush is trying to undermine everything Keynes did outside of economic theory (Bush already showed his contempt for that in his tax cut plans), Bretton Woods. The World Bank and IMF have been evolving in the right direction,but apparently, Bush wants to undermine this evolution.

Hammer The Hammer

Over the past few months many scandals have swirled around Tom "The Hammer" Delay (R-TX) and it appears time for him to make his ungraceful exit. Tom Delay should resign his seat in Congress and the hand-picked by Delay need to resign from the House Ethics Committee in order for a full investigation of all of Delay's misdemeanors and unethical behavior. From bribing representatives to support the Medicare bill to using the FAA for partisan purposes to track Texas Democratic legislatures to taking trips to Scotland and South Korea on the bill of corporations and lobbyists, there is more than enough reason for Delay to resign.

And War on ANWR Continues

So, today the Senate in a close 51 to 49 vote authorized drilling within the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve. They way the Senate Republicans passed the measure was instead of having a bill on national energy policy or even a specific bill on drilling in ANWR, the Republicans simply tacked it onto the entire federal budget. The vote today was a vote to remove the amendment authorizing drilling for oil in ANWR. It provided a fillibuster-proof way to tack ANWR onto the omnibus spending bill and make it politically (and logistically) more difficult. It was somewhat heartening that 4 Republicans joined the 44 Democrats and Independent Jim Jeffords (I-VT) and the margin of failure of the amendment (to remove opening ANWR for drilling) was small demonstrating the narrowness of support for the proposal even by so many people who depend upon oil company money for their re-election campaigns.
Even if the vote had been more legitimate and did not reek of the odor of forced legislation, the proposal to open ANWR to drilling does nothing for the supply of oil (it would only provide 2.5% of the U.S.'s consumption and only be economically viable if oil stays above $35 per barrel, not exactly an incentive we want to give the government). In the absence of a comprehensive energy policy that is not created by the energy companies, the opening of ANWR to drilling may even reduce the incentives to develop new sources of energy. Overall, opening ANWR to oil drilling (and the way the Republicans did it) is a stinker of an idea, even aside of the environmental impact.

Moral Bankruptcy

So, Bush's propsed "bankruptcy reform" bill is about to pass and it is great. That is, if you represent the financial industry. They can't wait to recoup on their losses from those irresponsible people who happen to get sick, get divorced or lose their job. That's what the bill really does. It removes many people from eligiblity to file Chapter 7 bankruptcy, which would give them a fresh start (albeit, with the bankruptcy on their record and future credit still uncertain) and force them into Chapter 13 bankruptcy, which requires those filing for bankruptcy to arrange a repayment schedule of their debts. The Republicans try to push this as an anti-banruptcy-abuse bill, but it is really just a keep-the-poor-poor-and-make-them-poorer bill. A recent study came out showing that over half of bankruptcies in the U.S. are due to medical bills, with or without health insurance. It is really time for people to wake up and realize they are being screwed by the Republicans and their pro-business, pro-rich, anti-American agenda. The idea of the American dream is to do better than your parents, but doing that poses risks and without any insurance against a bad outcome, fewer and fewer Americans will realize that dream. Of course, the Republicans' bill still allows the rich to claim bankruptcy while withholding wealth from creditors (here you go Mr. Lay) and allowing anti-choicers to get out of the fines imposed on them for intimidatng patients at family planning clinics.

Tax Cheats

It is slightly pleasing to hear that Walter Anderson has been arrested for tax evasion (over $200 million, it is alleged). However, as David Cay Johnston documents in the book Perfectly Legal, it is a rare thing for wealthy tax evaders to be caught, particularly since the gutting of the tax enforcement budget and powers in the late 1990's by the Republican Congress. While there is one evader that has been caught, there are, unfortunately, many, many more out there that have not been caught (or if caught, not prosecuted) that in total cost the government (and law-abiding taxpayers) far more than the $200 million Anderson is alleged to have evaded. It is a large factor in the skewing of the tax system away from being financed proportionately more by the wealthiest (who are better able to pay and owe their wealth in large part to the public goods like enforcement of contracts, etc. that the tax dollars pay for) and towards a system where those with low and middle incomes are forced to pay proportionally higher than the wealthiest. It is a progression that hurts many, many Americans to benefit very few and it erodes the contract between the government and the governed.

From Mr. Reich

In a recent post, I put up an email I wrote to Robert Reich (former secretary of labor under Bill Clinton) regarding his op-ed in the NY Times. He emailed me back and really gave me confidence in his values. He is a good pro-labor, pro-union Democrat. He is a very positive, intelligent voice for Democrats and I look forward to his future contributions.

Thank you Mr. Reich!

Greenspan: The New Neo-Con

In another neo-conservative moment, Alan Greenspan has significantly reduced his credibility as a monetary policy maker by focusing on spending cuts rather than irresponsible tax policy as the root cause of the Bush deficits (sound familiar?). Greenspan offered little in the way of warning for the continuation of Bush's reckless tax cut policies that benefit the wealthy. Voodoo economics (a term coined by George H.W. Bush,by the way) do nothing to stimulate growth while inflating the deficits. The solution to the deficits of today and the fiscal challenges of tomorrow is to remove the Bush tax cuts, increase the taxation of the wealthy to more reasonable levels (i.e., the levels before the cuts Reagan made). Furthermore, the private health care and health insurance systems need to be nationalized (strong words from an economist, I know) in order to reign in the administrative costs of health care. Furthermore the FICA tax (that pays for Social Security) needs to be extended, but not to the middle class. Instead, it should be raised to incomes of $120,000 per year and also to those making more than $200,000 per year. This would increase the tax base of the FICA tax while exempting much of the middle class from this burden. This would insure the solvency of Social Security for an indefinite period, while shifting some of the burden onto those who can afford it more than the marjority who fund it currently. Any talk Bush gives of "spending cuts" only relate to cuts of popular programs benefitting the working and middle classses. That is not where the defict lies and that is not where the cuts should be from. End of Story!

To Disappear

The U.S. policy of detention of nationals who are labeled 'enemy combatants' and the evasion of habeas corpus has really got me down in the last couple of days. To think that the U.S. can detain suspects indefinitely abroad as well as in the U.S. (Jose Padilla has been held in a brig in South Carolina for over two and a half years without charges), it is another reminder of where this country has been headed in the years since 9/11. Today the Supreme Court ruled that executing people who committed crimes when they were under 18 constitutes crueel and unusual punishment. This finally removes us from the list of countries endorsing such practices that includes countries with such stellar records on human rights like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan and China. However, in other areas the U.S. is headed towards positions more in line with those countries. To refuse the right of habeas corpus is to deny 800 years of judicial tradition. Beginning with the Magna Carta (in 1215), people had the right to not be held without a verdict from a jury of their peers. In a few instances it has been suspended (in England to deal with the surrender of Napolean; in the U.S. during the Civil War). During the Civil War, it was decided by a vote of Congress and with much contemporaneous and later criticim of the decision. It is unspeakable that a president should deem himself capable under the U.S. constitution to suspeend the right of habeas corpus for anyone, let alone a U.S. citizen. I do now support the actions Padilla was alleged to have taken, but regardless, he is entitled to his day in court for the facts to shed light on the truth. That is the American way and that has been the Western Anglo-American way for almost 800 years. Take the facts as they stand and judgement follows from that and may that be the way towards truth.