Tuesday, June 30, 2020

Choice Survives Trump's Supreme Court To Fight Another Day-- John Roberts Disappoints Team Red Again

>





As usual, there was a lot of news yesterday-- head-spinning. But one thing that no-one should overlook is the importance of the Supreme Court striking down a Louisiana abortion law that was meant to prevent abortions in the state. Chief Justice John Roberts joined the 4 liberals on the Court to override the far right contingent working to overturn Roe v Wade. Roberts said "respect for precedent compelled him to vote with the majority," an indication that he would probably vote to uphold Roe v Wade as well.

Last week Roberts also sided with the liberals to preserve workplace equality for the LGBTQ community and to uphold the DACA program. I checked over at Breitbart to see what the lunatic fringe was taking the news.



I also checked in on some of the Blue America-endorsed candidates who are running against anti-choice candidates, starting with Audrey Denney, who is running against a California GOP dinosaur, Doug LaMalfa (CA-01). "This is a terrifying moment in U.S. history, when 46 years of precedent for recognizing women’s right to privacy and sovereignty over their own bodies is being systematically dismantled," she wrote. "The policymakers who have put forward these archaic bans on safe and legal abortion claim to be doing so because they value human life... Making the decision to end a pregnancy is a difficult and tragic one-- but having the right to make that decision is foundational to protecting women’s health, privacy, and well-being. If the people who wrote these laws truly cared for the sanctity of life, they would be working tirelessly to reduce our country’s maternal mortality rate (currently the worst among industrialized nations), but instead they are limiting or eliminating care, and more mothers are dying during childbirth. They would be investing in initiatives to improve infant and child health and access to early education and child care. They would be fighting for paid family leave, so that parents have adequate time to regain their own health and support their new child. They would be losing sleep over the 12 million children in this country who will go to bed hungry because their parents are trapped in poverty, unable to earn a living wage... The legislators who support abortion bans have failed us. They have failed their constituents. They have failed our nation. Their time is up."

Goal ThermometerJon Hoadley know exactly what she's talking about. He's running for Congress, while still a member of the Michigan state legislature, where he often has to debate with the kinds of failed legislators Denney was writing about. "Reproductive healthcare is healthcare," he told me today. "Frankly, I was surprised but also encouraged to see the Supreme Court affirming the right to access to healthcare for folks in Louisiana, and across the country. For Michiganders, Fred Upton has been a steadfast vote to scale back or otherwise diminish reproductive healthcare. While this decision from the Supreme Court is encouraging, it's critical that we elect leaders up and down the ballot who will continue to protect healthcare going forward." And that reminds me-- this Blue America 2020 congressional thermometer on the right will allow you to contribute to pro-Choice candidates all on one page. Just click on it.

Julie Oliver is running for a seat in Central Texas, taking on an entrenched anti-Choice incumbent, Roger Williams. "Every woman should have the choice of when she wants to have children, when she doesn’t, and every woman should have the freedom to raise those children in a safe, healthy environment," said Julie today. "But in Texas, ideological attacks on womens' reproductive healthcare have led to a tragic, alarming maternal mortality crisis that disproportionately harms Black women and their babies. We need to enshrine Roe v. Wade and repeal the Hyde Amendment."

Chris Armitage is a man in eastern Washington running for a seat held by a woman-- but she's anti-Choice and he's pro-Choice. "Cathy McMorris," he told me, "wants to criminalize abortion; she doesn't believe in a person's jurisdiction over their own body. She wants to see Roe vs Wade overturned. She is an extremist who is trying to create an America where victims of rape have no choice, and their voice over what happens to their body is once again taken away, as the government forces them to have a child without their consent. Then in Cathy's America they also cut SNAP benefits so that the mother and child subsequently starve. We can do better, we need to stop Cathy, and I will be the candidate to unseat her."

Kathy Ellis lives in southeast Missouri, a hot house of right-wing ideology and anti-choice fanaticism. Her opponent, in fact, is a right-wing fanatic who vehemently opposes women's choice. She told me that "As a candidate in a state like Missouri-- with some of the strictest abortion laws in the country-- I’m relieved to hear of SCOTUS’s decision today. It’s one many hope-inspiring decisions we’ve seen recently, and it reminds us that organizing and advocacy works. Now, about my opponent Jason Smith who is staunchly anti-choice and parades around his Right to Life endorsement at every chance he gets-- it’s time for him to go. He’s clearly on the wrong side of history and his stance on this topic is one held by only a few Americans. Even in a district like mine that’s rural and recently red, we’ve seen large actions and progress surrounding abortion rights. It’s time for a leader who agrees with the majority of Americans on this topic. Further, if Smith was truly 'pro-life,' he’d fight for healthcare for all, access to healthy food, and strong education systems. Instead, he regularly votes against all of these things. It’s a facade, and the American people see that clearly."


  

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Thursday, April 23, 2020

Neither The Pandemic Nor Trump Has Changed The Republican Party-- Both Have Just Exposed The Base For What It Is

>


You wouldn't know from the way the mainstream media is constantly, incessantly harping on it, but ending social distancing-- backed by Trump-- is a fringe position among most Americans. Earlier today I was speaking with one of the Blue America-edorsed congressional candidates from Texas, Julie Oliver and she told me, defiantly, that "We aren't going to let Texas be defined by its smallest minds. Sandy Hook truthers and anti-vaccination extremists in no way represent us and the national media is gullibly covering an astro-turfed fringe group as if they're reflective of what people really think. And they do so while there are human rights violations carried out in our name, in our state, every day at the border. We need the media to connect the dots." A new Morning Consult poll for Politico shows that only 14% of respondents say Americans should stop social distancing to stimulate the economy even if it means increasing the spread of the virus (up 4 points from last week). On the other hand, 76%, say Americans should continue to social distance for as long as necessary, even if it means continued economic damage." Politically that translates into 44% of Americans saying they would vote to send a Democrat to Congress and 39% saying they would vote for a Republican. The poll also showed that Americans perceive Biden as a weak and useless candidate/leader, no matter what they think of Trump.

Yesterday, The Atlantic published an essay by Peter Wehner behind its paywall, The Party of the Aggrieved where he makes the point that "the pandemic has revealed the animating forces of the Republican Party in the age of Trump." The forces ain't pretty, but it's important to be aware of them, since they threaten all of our lives and well-being. He began by noting that just one day after announcing guidelines the nation’s governors can use to carry out an orderly reopening of their states, Señor Trumpanzee "openly encouraged protests against the social-distancing restrictions that have saved tens of thousands of American lives," thereby "ceding any semblance of national leadership on the pandemic, and choosing instead to divide the country by playing to his political base." That's Señor T to a t.
Maskless demonstrations-- some featuring Make America Great Again hats, semiautomatic weapons, flags with rocket-propelled grenade launchers, and American and Confederate flags-- have now taken place in state capitals in Colorado, Indiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Washington. More are being planned.

“They’ve got cabin fever,” the president said of the protesters. “These are great people,” according to Trump. “These people love our country.”

The number of protesters at these rallies has varied from a few dozen to a few thousand. The importance of the protests isn’t so much their size but rather what they symbolize. It is a mistake to dismiss them.



The protests have become a rallying point for the right, encouraged by talk-radio and Fox News personalities such as Laura Ingraham, Jeanine Pirro, Tucker Carlson, and Brian Kilmeade. The anti-social-distancing rallies are drawing comparisons to the early days of the Tea Party movement.

Stephen Moore, who serves on Trump’s economic council to reopen the country, said, “So this is a great time, gentlemen and ladies, for civil disobedience. We need to be the Rosa Parks here, and protest against these government injustices.”

Even if one believes that some of the measures being put in place are too restrictive, this is hardly a Rosa Parks moment. The protesters, for their part, are not distinguishing themselves by making finely calibrated points about epidemiology or offering up more refined social-distancing plans. They are lashing out in frustration and in anger, frustration and anger that is being incited by the president and many-- although not all-- of his acolytes on the right.

Trump's eagerness to light the fuse is nothing new; it’s simply the latest manifestation of the president’s disordered mind, which I have written about before. He finds satisfaction not in resolving conflict, but in increasing it. That has been true for much of his life and all of his presidency.

In the midst of a lethal pandemic, Americans are striving for social cohesion and solidarity. They may yet achieve it, but if they do, it will be in spite of this president, not because of him. Trump is doing everything in his power to divide us, to keep people on edge, mistrustful and at one another’s throats. To that end, he will even cheer on people who are violating his own administration’s social-distancing guidelines.

But there is also method to Trump’s madness. From the moment he took office, the president has pursued a base-only strategy. Rather than trying to win over converts, Trump has decided his path to victory in November lies with inflaming his base, keeping his supporters in a state of constant agitation, even if that requires framing “a complex science/policy debate as evil oppressors vs. heroic victims,” in the words of the social psychologist Jonathan Haidt.
Progressive Democrat Chris Armitage is running in the eastern Washington congressional district that Trump won in 2106 by a wide margin-- 52-39%. His opponent is Trump doormat Cathy McMorris Rodgers. Armitage told us that "Here in eastern Washington, the majority people have not allowed a pandemic to be partisan. We believe doctors and other medical professionals and are incredibly grateful for people who stand up to protect public health and safety."

Goal ThermometerIn southwest Michigan, Trump's 2016 victory was narrower-- 51-43%-- and state Rep. Jon Hoadley is likely to knock off another Trump yes man, Fred Upton. "Here in Michigan," he told us on the phone, "we are lucky to have Gov. Whitmer leading the response and doing the right thing by listening to scientists and public health experts to keep Michiganders safe. Unfortunately, we also have Congressman Upton who is parroting President Trump and advocating for a rushed reopening that puts the health and safety of our communities at risk. We’re in a public health crisis, we must listen to scientists and public health experts about how to proceed and how to safely phase-out stay at home orders. Congressman Upton's choice to follow the lead of President Trump who called our global pandemic 'a hoax' instead of looking out for us with be one that voters across southwest Michigan will remember in November."

"I could be wrong," Omaha progressive Kara Eastman told us a few minutes ago, "but I think this virus is forcing many Republicans to re-think some of their positions. Many need government relief and the mythology that these are 'handouts' may be dissipating. Many are talking about the need to listen to the scientists (a departure for many climate change deniers). Many finally realize that our current healthcare system is wholly inadequate. All I can do as a candidate is try to speak to the issues that matter most to people and try to puncture these bubbles. I think it might be working..."

Back to Wehner, who wrote that Señor Trumpanzee is, as always, "acting the only way he knows how, but also in a way that resonates with the base of the party. He has succeeded in creating, at least among some significant number of his supporters, an almost cultlike attachment. The response to COVID-19, then, is acting like a CAT scan on the American right. What it reveals is alarming and, for those of us who have been lifelong Republicans, dispiriting." Well... actually most lifelong Republicans are not dispirited at all. They lap it up. Poor Wehner, doesn't get it. Most lifelong Republicans are not #NeverTrumpers like he and his friends, they're eager converts to the Death Cult. The corporate Democratic Party of Obama, Clinton, Biden, Schumer, Pelosi is where Republicans like Wehner belong. And an increasing trickle of his type of Republican has realized that. Wehner may too; something's telling him that his party is a nightmare and Donald Trump didn't make it that way.
I need to add, though, that it’s far too simple to say that what occurred with Donald Trump in 2016 and since was a “hostile takeover” of the GOP. Trump-- the only known con artist, conspiracy monger, and pathological liar in the 2016 GOP field-- gave the base of the party what it wanted, even as he toxified it, amplifying all the worst tendencies of the American right. To what degree Trump fundamentally changed the Republican Party, and to what degree he simply personified what it was becoming, is an impossible question to resolve. What we do know is that the base of the GOP and Donald Trump have now merged. There is no separation. (Trump’s approval rating among Republicans is 93 percent, according to Gallup.) The GOP is as much Donald Trump’s party today as it was Ronald Reagan’s party in the 1980s.

This pandemic and the response to it reveal some important things about the attitudes that animate the Republican Party in the age of Trump.

Trump’s supporters display a deepening mistrust of expertise of any kind, including medical figures such as Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. In rallies around the nation, protesters are chanting “Fire Fauci! Fire Fauci!” and holding up signs saying Fauci Lied, Main Street Died.

Fauci is hardly perfect; no one could be when dealing with a novel virus like the coronavirus. But the fact that Fauci is among the most experienced and respected epidemiologists in the world not only doesn’t reassure the protesters; for some number of Trump supporters, it is further reason to doubt him, since he must be part of the so-called deep state, which they view as implacably opposed to the president.

One person I know, who is very sympathetic to Trump and Trump’s supporters and is in constant touch with them, told me yesterday that the people he was hearing from felt a sense of solidarity with the protesters. (This individual asked for anonymity to speak candidly about these conversations.) Trump’s supporters took the president’s previous embrace of such guidelines as evidence that he was “being bamboozled by ‘deep-state actors’ like Fauci,” this person told me. “The natives are getting restless.”

During the pandemic, Trump supporters have relied heavily on Fox News and talk radio, which can be fountains of misinformation. The pandemic has deepened their grievances and tribalistic loyalties. And we’ve seen how eager many of the president’s supporters are to imagine themselves as heroic figures in a make-believe drama, as if demanding the right to go to a bowling alley or a nail salon during a pandemic makes them modern-day Thomas Paines.




“Government mandating sick people to stay home is called quarantine. However, the government mandating healthy citizens to stay home, forcing businesses and churches to close is called tyranny,” reads a statement released by Pennsylvanians Against Excessive Quarantine. One Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, protester’s sign quoted Jefferson: “I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.”

But what may be most unsettling just now is this: At a moment when states and local communities are trying to work together, when many churches and religious communities are seeking to be agents of support and healing, when health-care workers are risking their lives to save others, the president and many of his most devoted supporters are fomenting chaos, division, and antipathy. They want COVID-19 to be the latest battlefield in a never-ending culture war.


This is particularly worrisome because while some crises can unify a nation, pandemics have historically caused people to turn on one another. At the very moment we need as our national leader a person who can break down the dividing walls, who can strengthen our bonds of affection for one another, we have a president who is temperamentally determined to annihilate comity, a spirit of grace and self-giving, and feelings of empathy and compassion.

At least as worrisome is the president’s ability to marshal an army of supporters who model themselves after him, who take his lead, and who allow their sensibilities to be shaped by his.

There are exceptions, of course. Some Trump voters who strongly support his policies tell me they are disgusted by his ethical transgressions and antics. I know, too, Republican lawmakers who, in private, speak quite harshly about the president. But the justifications and rationalizations are getting a bit tiresome as Trump confirms with every passing day some of the gravest concerns about him-- psychological, emotional, cognitive, and moral. He is a badly damaged soul who draws energy by acting in ways that are degrading and dishonorable.

This is hardly a secret, and yet almost everyone in his own party-- with a few honorable exceptions, such as Utah Senator Mitt Romney and Maryland Governor Larry Hogan-- are complicit in the president’s desecrations. Donald Trump has broken them.

Whether or not the Republican Party can recover from the Trump years depends in part on how the Trump story ends. As a conservative, I believe the Republican Party can be saved. But it has to be worth saving. An essential step toward restoration is repudiation-- of Trump and of Trumpism. The GOP has to break free of both, and soon.

It may seem paradoxical, but those who care most about the future of the Republican Party need to hope for the defeat of this Republican president.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Thursday, April 02, 2020

Will Biden, Trump And Cuomo At Least Agree To COVID-Care For All?

>


As of today there are 912,998 confirmed coronavirus cases worldwide and 45,551 deaths. The U.S., which was very slow to react-- primarily because of shocking political cowardice among the ruling class, from Trump right on down-- has the most deaths, 4,526... and the pandemic is just getting started in the U.S.

On Monday, NY Times reporters Luis Ferré-Sadurní and Jesse McKinley wrote that in the midst of the pandemic, New York hospitals are losing hundreds of millions of dollars in funding, compliments of the state's neo-liberal governor, currently being painted by a generally imbecilic and lazy media as some kind of hero. Cuomo, like Trump, believes Medicaid is growing too fast and, though he's some kind of "Democrat," he is determined to rein in that growth. "Six lawmakers from Brooklyn" reported Ferré-Sadurní and McKinley, "wrote a letter to Mr. Cuomo calling the millions of dollars in cuts to four hospitals in their districts 'cruel, inhumane and unacceptable' and 'catastrophic during a pandemic.' Brad Hoylman, a state senator from Lower Manhattan, said the proposals seemed wildly out of step with the current images of doctors, nurses and others fighting the disease in hospitals across the city. 'It seems tethered to a different time and place,' Mr. Hoylman said, of the proposal, noting that the formation of the panel, the Medicaid Redesign Team, was announced the same day-- Jan. 21-- as the nation’s first confirmed case. 'Now New York is the epicenter of the pandemic. And the members of the M.R.T. frankly didn’t have that information.'"
The Democratic-controlled Legislature will be asked to approve the proposals this week, as it hustles to pass a state budget by the April 1 deadline, a usually arduous task made all the more difficult by the outbreak: Four members of the State Assembly have been diagnosed with the disease, and neither chamber has convened since mid-March.

...State Senator Gustavo Rivera, the Bronx Democrat who serves as chairman of the Senate Health Committee, said Mr. Cuomo’s plans were a “debacle,” and particularly jarring considering the governor’s much-applauded handling of the coronavirus crisis.

“It still boggles my mind that this is the same guy who goes, and sits down in front of that TV, and in front of you all in Albany, lays it all out, smartly and ably,” Mr. Rivera said, praising the governor’s coronavirus performance. “And then he breathes in, and the next thing that comes out of his mouth, ‘And you got to let me cut the Medicaid system.’”
This isn't the Democratic Party that millions of Bernie supporters feel any loyalty too. This is the Democratic Party pushing forward a walking corpse who is campaigning against Medicare-for-All. On Monday when MSNBC's Yasmin Vossoughian asked Status Quo Joe-- which MSNBC stealthily supports-- "Are you now reconsidering your position when it comes to single-payer healthcare?" Biden immediately doubled down on his agreement with the GOP and regurgitated "Single payer will not solve that at all."





On the same day, the NY Times published an OpEd by noted American economists Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman, Jobs Aren’t Being Destroyed This Fast Elsewhere. Why Is That?. Short version: "It’s not too late to start protecting employment or to make medical care for Covid-19 free."
The coronavirus pandemic is laying bare structural deficiencies in America’s social programs. The relief package passed by Congress last week provides emergency fixes for some of these issues, but it also leaves critical problems untouched. To avoid a Great Depression, Congress must quickly design a more forceful response to the crisis.

Start with the labor market. In just one week, from March 15 to March 21, 3.3 million workers filed for unemployment insurance. According to some projections, the unemployment rate might rise as high as 30 percent in the second quarter of 2020.

This dramatic spike in jobless claims is an American peculiarity. In almost no other country are jobs being destroyed so fast. Why? Because throughout the world, governments are protecting employment. Workers keep their jobs, even in industries that are shut down. The government covers most of their wage through direct payments to employers. Wages are, in effect, socialized for the duration of the crisis.

Instead of safeguarding employment, America is relying on beefed-up unemployment benefits to shield laid-off workers from economic hardship. To give just one example, in both the United States and Britain, the government is asking restaurant workers to stay home. But in Britain, workers are receiving 80 percent of their pay (up to £2,500 a month, or $3,125) and are guaranteed to get their job back once the shutdown is over. In America, the workers are laid off; they must then file for unemployment insurance and wait for the economy to start up again before they can apply for a new job, and if all goes well, sign a new contract and resume working.

Even if unemployment is generously compensated — as it is in the $2.2 trillion bill Congress passed-- there is nothing efficient in letting the unemployment rate rise to double digits. Losing one’s job is anxiety inducing. Applying for unemployment benefits is burdensome. The unemployment system risks being swamped soon by tens of millions of claims. Although some businesses may rehire their workers once the shutdown is over, others will have disappeared. When social distancing ends, millions of employer-employee relationships will have been destroyed, slowing down the recovery. In Europe, people will be able to return to work, as if they had been on a long, government-paid leave.

The battle for the speediest recovery starts today. The next congressional bill needs measures to protect employment for the duration of the shutdown. This does not raise insuperable technical difficulties. The bill passed last week provides support for wages in one industry, airlines. Congress could easily extend this program to other sectors. Some countries-- like Germany, with its Kurzarbeit system, a policy aimed at job retention in times of crisis-- already had the government infrastructure in place to send workers home while the state replaced most of their lost earnings. But several nations with no experience in that area-- like Britain, Ireland and Denmark-- were able to introduce brand-new employment guarantee programs on the fly during the epidemic.

This situation for laid-off workers would be bad enough if it were not aggravated by a second American peculiarity. As they are losing their jobs, many workers are also losing their employer-provided health insurance-- and now find themselves faced with the Kafkaesque task of obtaining coverage on their own.

One option involves continuing to be covered by one’s former employer, a program known as COBRA. It is prohibitively expensive: Participants have to bear the full cost of insurance, $20,500 per year on average. Another option is to go shopping for a plan on the Affordable Care Act insurance exchange, where one is faced with a bewildering choice between plans like Blue Shield’s Bronze 60 PPO (with a deductible of up to $12,600 per year) and Aetna’s Silver Copay HNOnly (with a $7,000 deductible and up to $14,000 in annual out-of-pocket expenses). The last option is to join the ranks of the uninsured, a catastrophic solution during a pandemic. There are reports that people have already died of Covid-19 because they refused to go to the hospital, worried about bills, or because they were denied treatment for lack of insurance.

The bill passed last week does nothing to reduce co-pays, deductibles or premiums on the insurance exchanges; nor does it reduce the price of COBRA. The next bill should introduce a Covidcare for All program. This federal program would guarantee access to Covid-19 care at no cost to all U.S. residents-- no matter their employment status, age or immigration status. Fighting the pandemic starts with eradicating the spread of the virus, which means that everybody must be covered.

Covidcare for All would also cover the cost of Covid-19 treatments for people who are insured. Insurance companies would be barred in return from hiking premiums, which might otherwise spike as much as 40 percent next year.

The United States also needs to ramp up its support to businesses. Since containing the epidemic requires government-mandated economic shutdowns, it is legitimate to expect the government, in return, to shelter businesses from the economic disruptions. To keep businesses alive through this crisis, the government should act as a payer of last resort. In other words, the government should pay not only wages of idled workers, but also essential business maintenance costs, like rents, utilities, interest on debt, health insurance premiums, and other costs that are vital for the survival of businesses in locked down sectors. This allows businesses to hibernate without bleeding cash and risking bankruptcy. Denmark was the first nation to announce such a program; it is being emulated by a growing number of countries, including Italy.

In the United States, calls to support businesses have been met with excessive skepticism so far. To be sure, the congressional relief package includes $350 billion in help for small businesses, but the program is complex, limited in scope and only a fraction of eligible businesses are likely to use it.

A liquidationist ideology seems to have infected minds on both the left and the right. On the right, opposition to government grants to businesses is grounded in the view that markets should be left to sort out the consequences of the pandemic. Let airlines go bankrupt; shareholders and bondholders will lose but the airlines will restructure and re-emerge. The best way government can help is by slashing taxes, according to this view. The relief package includes more than $200 billion in tax cuts for business profits.

This view is misguided. There is nothing efficient in the destruction of businesses that were viable before the virus outbreak. The crisis cannot be blamed on poorly managed corporations. Government support, in the case of a pandemic, does not create perverse incentives. Bankruptcies redistribute income, but in a chaotic and opaque way. And while bankruptcy might be a way to deal with the economic fallout of the pandemic for large corporations, it is not well adapted to small businesses. Without strong enough government support, many small businesses will have to liquidate. The death of a business has long-term costs: The links between entrepreneurs, workers and customers are destroyed and often need to be rebuilt from scratch.

On the left, a popular view contends that the government should help people, not corporations. It holds that big corporations acted badly before the crisis-- buying back their shares, paying C.E.O.s exorbitant salaries-- and should not be bailed out. If they are, in this view, they should be subject to strict conditions, like swearing off share buybacks, reducing C.E.O. pay, and a $15 minimum wage for their employees.

The concerns underlying this view are understandable. Inequality has surged since the beginning of the 1980s. This crisis, however, is unlike the financial crisis of 2008-9. The firms seeking aid today bear no direct responsibility for the disaster that threatens their survival. If the government mandates a shutdown for public health reasons, why should it attach any conditions to temporary financial support for directly affected industries?

No doubt some companies will exploit loopholes in government relief plans. Some businesses, more broadly, will disproportionately benefit from the pandemic. While tens of thousands of brick-and-mortar stores are closed, Amazon sales rise. The Seattle-based company is one of the few S & P 500 firms whose stock price is higher today than at the beginning of the year. Cloud computing is exploding. Facebook traffic is booming.

But these windfall profits have a fair, comprehensive and transparent solution: The government should impose excess profits taxes, as it has done several times in the past during periods of crisis. In 1918, all profits made by corporations above and beyond an 8 percent rate of return on their capital were deemed abnormal, and abnormal profits were taxed at progressive rates of up to 80 percent. Similar taxes on excessive profits were applied during World War II and the Korean War. These taxes all had one goal-- making sure that no one could benefit outrageously from a situation in which the masses suffered.

To help make this happen, the next bill needs an excess profits tax. If Congress fails to act, the pandemic could well reinforce two of the defining trends of the pre-coronavirus American economy: the rise of business concentration and the upsurge of inequality.

Some will say that the solutions we’ve outlined show excessive faith in government. They will correctly point out that some of these policies are undesirable in normal times. But these are not normal times. The big battles-- be they wars or pandemics-- are fought and won collectively. In this period of national crisis, hatred of the government is the surest path to self-destruction.
Arizona progressive Eva Putzova, a candidate for Congress from the biggest district in Arizona is a fighter for universal healthcare. Last night she told us that "The coronavirus pandemic has exposed the dysfunction inherent in our profit-driven healthcare non-system-- needed supplies not getting to the hospitals, price-gouging, millions out of work and no longer covered by their employer's insurance plan, and a promise of exorbitant health premium increases. Of course, prior to the current health crisis, 30,000 people died prematurely each year because they were uninsured, and 500,000 personal bankruptcies were attributed to healthcare bills that couldn't be paid. We needed Medicare for All then, and we need it now more than ever. Perhaps 'Covidcare For All' as proposed by Saez and Zucman would be the right legislation to pass at this critical point in time as a first step towards the more comprehensive Medicare For All. All testing and treatment for anyone seeking medical care for Covid-19 would be covered by the federal government without charge to the individual. This would encourage people to get tested and get the needed care without worrying about huge medical bills afterward. It would be wildly popular and would empower more elected representatives to support Medicare For All as the ultimate solution to our healthcare coverage woes."

Chris Armitage, the eastern Washington state progressive taking on Trumpist shill Cathy McMorris Rodgers, came up with his own ideas for dealing with the pandemic. Last night he reminded me that "Any politician who receives tax payer funded healthcare and paychecks but then tries to cut Social Security, Medicare, food stamps, or emergency aid, does it for one reason. They think they're better than us.

  Goal ThermometerHistorian-- and Riverside County progressive congressional candidate-- Liam O'Mara pointed out that "The U.S. health care system is the worst in the rich world, for most of us. We have excellent care for the wealthiest, but our overall resilience in the face of shortages, our total care capacity, the quality of coverage, and the sheer availability of that coverage, is lower here than practically anywhere in the developed world. The problem may lie in the for-profit model, which is rightly disregarded in much of the world. The workers themselves, the caregivers and physicians, they deserve to be well compensated for what they do. But an insurance industry...? Why add an expensive middle-man layer that simply extracts wealth and offers no benefit? With what the U.S. spends right now, we should have the best coverage anywhere. But we waste cash on administrative overhead and shareholder profits that could be going into patient care. The result is that we have the 35th healthiest population in the world, and that simple fact ought to offend any patriotic American. It's time to rethink our approach."


Labels: , , , , , ,

Tuesday, March 31, 2020

Washington Congressional Candidate Chris Armitage vs COVID-19

>


Goal ThermometerChris Armitage is a progressive running for Congress in the Spokane area of eastern Washington, a seat occupied by Trump toadie and enabler Cathy McMorris Rodgers. Chris, who served abroad in the U.S. Air Force, says he's running because "it’s time the working people of Eastern Washington have a voice that doesn’t sell them out to the highest bidder." Blue America endorsed him back in January and this week we were thrilled to see him present his constituents with a bold, comprehensive response plan for the battling the pandemic. Please take a look at it below and consider helping him replace a hard core, do-nothing conservative with a working class progressive by clicking on the thermometer on the right and contributing what you can in these tough times for us all.

COVID-19 presents an unprecedented threat to our nation. Dealing with it requires a bold response on par with the actions taken during World War II. As we observed from the rapid spread of Coronavirus COVID-19 in other nations, the result of continued inaction will be the death of millions domestically. This is a summary of how we can mobilize all resources at our disposal a nation to create a united front and save lives as a national community. We must unite against these threats if we are to save more than just our economy.

COVID-19 DOMESTIC RESPONSE

UTILIZING THE DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT


Temporarily nationalize the medical supply chain using the Defense Production Act.
Create or augment medical fluid, gear, and equipment production lines with active duty military. Research long-term supply chain disruptions and bring some of this production capacity back to the US permanently.
Use military transportation assets and personnel to condense time between production stages and reduce the time between production and market.
Mandate production of required medical protective gear and equipment (masks, gowns, gloves, ventilators, etc.) from companies with the capability and provide grants to do so.
Mandate production of medical fluids (hand-sanitizer, hydrogen peroxide, etc.) from companies with the capability and provide grants to do so.
Provide grants to companies building 3D printers capable of mass producing medical gear and equipment.
Make current 3D printer designs for medical gear and equipment open-source and mandate production from companies with the capability.
Begin a competition similar to Google Lunar X Prize (GLXP) to design a 3D printed cost-effective ventilator on an accelerated timeline (30-60 days).
Provide grants to companies to build and deploy mobile hospitals
Will generate tens of thousands of jobs.
ECONOMIC RECOVERY FOR ALL

Heavily subsidize or even temporarily nationalize the renewable energy industry in the US, creating tens of thousands of jobs in the process.
Saudi Arabia and Russia were able to further crash the US and world economy by infighting over oil supply. Thousands of Americans in oil and shale companies are losing their jobs.
Federally contract the erection of solar energy infrastructure across the country with immediate start dates.
Provide substantial grants to companies to build and expand production o renewable energy storage (a.k.a. batteries).
Use military engineers and planners to identify ideal areas for solar farm placement and use the resources of the federal government to begin purchase of required land.
Workers in the oil and shale industry will get dual-priority placement in new renewable energy jobs, the shared priority will be paired with current subject matter experts in the relevant fields.
Provide grants to companies that can create online courses to certify people in operation and maintenance of solar systems.
CORPORATE ACCOUNTABILITY

Stipulate that a bailout of the Airlines is contingent on activation of the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) to help transport all the supplies and equipment we will create.
Suspension of CEO/Executive Pay Increases during crisis, Suspension of Stock Buybacks for duration of crisis
Mandate Paid Sick Leave, Freeze Layoffs
Turn diminished demand for passenger travel to increased cargo traffic.
Ensures support crews can keep their jobs.
Ensure we don’t diminish readiness by overburdening our vital military airlift assets and crews.
CENTRALIZING EXPERTS AND OUR RESPONSE

Create a new Joint Task Force or the 1st Homefront Support Wing (HSW), primarily comprised of Civil Engineers, Supply Chain Managers, Vehicle Fleet/Transportation Specialists, Aircraft Mechanics.
This would be an extended deployment for all personnel assigned. Families would remain at home station. If the requirement extends beyond 1 year, begin rotations.
Place a well qualified Air Force Logistics Officer in Charge. (i.e. Brigadier General Hurry or Brigadier General David J. Sanford).
Put logistics officers (Army and Air Force) in charge of procurement and disbursement of goods.
Model off of Supply Chain Operations Squadrons (SCOS) and Vehicle Supply Chain Operations Squadrons.
Establish a rapid response cell that sends military logistics experts to hard-hit areas or companies in need to diagnose logistics problems and implement solutions.
Place an Army Logistics Officer in charge of a geographically dispersed vehicle fleet comprised primarily of long-haul tractor trailers and pickup-trucks. Ensure sufficient drivers are attached to the fleet.
Place civil engineering officers in charge of rapid engineering responses within the United States, modeled off the 1st Expeditionary Civil Engineer Group (ECEG) in CENTCOM. Place a former 1 ECEG Commander in charge.
Begin constructing field hospitals outside hard hit areas or where needs are projected.
Create designs for hospitals that can be rapidly executed by civilian construction companies.
Rapidly repurpose government buildings into hospitals. Many states are also mobilizing plans to convert unused dormitories (from closed universities) and hotels into temporary housing for quarantine or medical care. Kuwait is using several resorts as quarantine facilities, for example.
For people who've been exposed but are not yet symptomatic.
Include a rapidly deployable Services Squadron to respond to dire need throughout the country.
Provide with specialized, mobile kitchens, tents, and beddown equipment.
COVID-19 FOREIGN POLICY RESPONSE

Part of the reason we are in such a precarious position as a nation, with vulnerabilities left unattended, is because the U.S. has degraded our standing and relationships with the international community for years. Whether through endless wars, trade deals that enable human rights abuses, or backing out of agreements previous presidents have entered into; these are not behaviors that would gain our nation support during challenging times. If we hope to receive a helping hand when we are in need, we must be ready to extend the same kindness to others. Selfishness begets selfishness, and a nation that has no true allies is a nation that is lost and alone like any individual person who has spurned friends, family, and community members.

MOBILIZING THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY

Organizing a multilateral response
Call for virtual UN Security Council Meeting
Call for virtual UN General Assembly Meeting
Call a joint virtual meeting with Canada and EU
Immediate humanitarian relief
Immediately remove sanctions on Iran, Venezuela and North Korea on a temporary basis (i.e. 60 days), except for weapons. Include automatic renewal of relief at intervals dependent on the status of the COVID-19 situation.
Bolstering fair trade to support American worker
Declare global free trade if countries reciprocate.
Immediately remove tariffs on Chinese goods if they agree to reciprocate.
LEADING A TRULY GLOBAL RESPONSE

Afghanistan
Express support for the Ghani government.
Facilitate negotiations with the Taliban for an immediate, indefinite ceasefire between Taliban and Government Forces.
Begin airdropping food and medical supplies to tribes, Afghan government forces, and particularly hard-hit regions.
China
Immediately begin coordination between American, Chinese, and International Scientists on COVID-19 origins, containment, treatment, vaccines, etc.
Take initiative to end all tariffs if China reciprocates.
Coordinate with China on measures the international community can take.
Iraq
Express support for the Alawi government.
Begin airdropping food and medical supplies to villages, government forces, and particularly hard-hit regions.
Iran
Temporarily remove all sanctions on non-military equipment.
Facilitate humanitarian aid to Iranian people.
Begin trading in food and sustenance items with Iran without restriction.
North Korea
Temporarily remove all sanctions on non-military equipment, contingent on humanitarian aid and organizations being allowed into the country.
Coordinate with China and South Korea to begin humanitarian aid shipments to North Korea.
Venezuela
Immediately remove all sanctions and enter into talks with the Maduro government to allow flow of humanitarian aid.

Labels: , , ,

Friday, February 14, 2020

Equal Rights For Women? Is That Radical And Extreme? Only For Trump Republicans

>


Last month we mentioned that when the Virginia legislature, now controlled by the Democrats, passed ERA-- the Equal Rights Amendment-- Trump and his Republican enablers were still attempting to prevent it from being added to the Constitution. And that continues, of course. But yesterday, the House passed Jackie Speier's H.J. Resolution 79 removing the deadline for the ratification of the amendment.

Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, took to the floor to urge her colleagues to vote for the bill. Actually it was more like a celebratory statement, since she already knew the bill was going to pass. "What a glorious day this is! Today, the House will vote to remove the arbitrary deadline to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment. With our vote today, and with Virginia’s historic vote to become the thirty-eighth and final state necessary to ratify the amendment, little girls, their moms and women across this country will know that yes, our Constitution can and will enshrine a ban on discrimination on the basis of sex. Equality of the sexes is not debatable. It has no expiration date. First proposed almost a century ago and passed by Congress in 1972, the Equal Rights Amendment would be a momentous step forward for women-- to end unequal pay, pregnancy discrimination and sexual harassment and exploitation. To women across the country who are watching today, let me just say: 'We see you and we stand with you' as we take this step toward equal rights."

Every single Democrat, even the worst Blue Dogs, voted for passage. And, of course almost all of the Republicans did as well. Almost. Five Republicans broke with Trump and McCarthy and crossed the aisle to vote with the Democrats. After all, half their constituents are women and they must have figured that out. The Republicans who voted in solidarity with women were John Curtis (UT), Rodney Davis (IL), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA), Tom Reed (NY) and Jeff Van Drew (NJ). The rest of the Republicans in the House-- or 182 of them anyway (+ ex-Republican Justin Amash)-- voted to continue waging the GOP war against women.

Audrey Denney is running for Congress in the northeast corner of California, a seat held by anti-equality Republican Doug LaMalfa. Audrey told us that she is "inspired by the women who have been unceasingly fighting for the Equal Rights Amendment for decades. Now that the ERA has passed the requisite number of states required to become law, we must continue to advocate for it to become a part of our Constitution and we must continue to fight to ensure that nobody is discriminated against based on their gender. This has been a bad week for Rep. LaMalfa’s record on defending women as he voted against enshrining the ERA in the Constitution and was one of only 37 Representatives to vote against the wildly bipartisan H.R.1980 which would have established a Smithsonian Museum of women’s history. Rep. LaMalfa claims to be 'one of us,' yet makes it clear from his votes that he doesn’t advocate for the women of our nation or California’s First District.

Liam O'Mara is also a California progressive running for Congress. His district, in Riverside County, is represented-- poorly-- by reactionary Republican Ken Calvert, who was arrested after being caught in a parked car with an underage, drugged-up prostitute (his pants down around his ankles)-- and then trying to flee from the police. Obviously, Calvert voted against the Equal Rights Amendment. Liam would have been proud to vote for it. "182 Republican legislators did not consider women worthy of equal citizenship (many do not consider women fully equal as humans, of course)," he told us after the vote. "One of those 'no' votes was Corrupt Ken Calvert, the Republican who has held CD-42 since 1993. Even half a century after the ERA was introduced, he still does not think women deserve legal equality. It is a sad fact of American life that in some ways a male corpse has more rights than a living woman, and the reason for this is 100% the Republican party. It remains beholden to the same sort of reactionary views on femininity which animated the fascist movement, and this anti-woman agenda is one more element of the GOP's steady drift into overt neofascism. Are women people? Do they deserve to be regarded as free and equal citizens? Vote to replace Calvert and the other 182 Republicans who disagree."

In southeast Missouri-- Limbaugh country-- the local congressman, Jason Smith, isn't someone anyone could possibly expect to either break with his party leadership or vote for women's equality. Cathy Ellis is the progressive Democrat taking him on. She told us that "Today is a proud day for the ERA and for women across this country. I have been a proud advocate for the ERA since I was young, and I am honored to see it finally move forward towards ratification. Unfortunately, my opponent does not feel this way. Jason Smith proudly voted no today, and he should truly be ashamed of himself. A vote against the ERA is a vote against women and equality. It’s time for a new leader in Missouri’s 8th that respects the rights of all people to have equal treatment under the law. It’s clear where Smith stands and who he works for. He doesn’t work for women, the LGBTQ+, our animals, our unions, or our families. All I can say is-- I’ll see him in November.”


Goal ThermometerSteve King isn't someone anyone would expect to stand up for women either. He's the only member of the Iowa congressional delegation to vote NO-- and J.D. Scholten wants to make sure it's the last time he votes against equality for women. "Today," said Scholten,"should have been one of Steve King’s easiest votes to cast: removing the arbitrary deadline to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment and banning discrimination on the basis of sex. Unsurprisingly, King voted no. This is a slap in the face to the 380,000 women and girls in Iowa’s 4th district and millions more across this country. Plain and simple: Steve King does not value women. He sees them as vehicles for childbirth-- but to him, that’s the extent of their worth. King couldn’t be more wrong that women deserve full lived and legal equality under the law, and are critical to the success of our communities, government, culture, and economy."


You might think Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a fairly senior Republican woman, might speak up for the ERA. But then you'd be wrong. She voted NO today and her progressive opponent in the Spokane-centered district, Chris Armitage noticed. "This," he said, "is a continuation of Cathy's near three decade long crusade to ensure that women, the LGBT community, and marginalized communities are not protected from discrimination. Whether voting against the Equal Rights Amendment, Same Sex Marriage, or even something as simple as changing the word 'Oriental' to 'Asian' in WA State Documents, Cathy has remained reliably bigoted. Now she is one of Trump's most important fundraising chairs. This is a race she won by single digits in 2018 and as she runs for her 9th term, her pro-discrimination platform will lose her this Congressional seat."

Jon Hoadley's opponent, Fred Upton, tries painting himself as a moderate in a moderate district-- and then he gives in (always) to the slightest pressure from the extremists who run the GOP. Upton was a NO vote. State Rep Hoadley told us that Upton "turned his back on every single woman in Michigan and across the country. Upton's vote against allowing the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment to move forward is completely inexcusable and downright shameful. Equality isn't partisan, it doesn't expire, and it's long past time that we ensure that women have equal rights, equal protections under the law, and equal pay in the workplace. It's time the women of Southwest Michigan have someone representing them who values them every bit as much as they value their male constituents-- in Congress, I'll always fight for equality."

Want to help replace LaMalfa, Calvert, Smith, King, McMorris Rodgers and Upton with men and women who believe in equality? That's why I included the 2020 Blue America congressional thermometer above.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, February 11, 2020

How's Your Buying Power Lately?

>


The stock market continues to soar. My financial advisor ignores me when I wring my hands and tell her to change my asset allocation so that I have less stock. By ignoring me, she's brought me a lot more money. But I would just feel so much safer in more bonds and real estate and less sticks. Because, everyone knows this asshole is going to crash the market at some point. And that comes fast and hard and it's too late when that death spiral begins. Every time I can get her to put even a small amount more into bonds, I feel a sense of accomplishment. I'm having dinner with her in a week or two and I'll tell her to lighten up on the stocks some more. Meanwhile, though, I'm certain she's not as big a Bernie fan as I am. Although she loathes Trump.

This morning, the Financial Times reported that 56% of all equities (in terms of value) in this country are owned by just 1% of Americans... and yet Trump's whole campaign is going to eventually come down to "the economy, the economy, the economy." Without a doubt Bernie is best equipped to go toe to toe him on that, not Steyer and not the more venal billionaire Bloomberg, let alone clowns and empty suits like Mayo, Status Quo Joe or Klobuchar. Presidents don't react jobs by Trump's policies and administration created 1.5 million fewer jobs in his first three years in office than predecessor Barack Obama did in his final three. Newly revised figures from Trump’s own Department of Labor show that 6.6 million new jobs were created in the first 36 months of Trump’s tenure, compared with 8.1 million in the final 36 months of Obama’s-- a decline of 19% under Trump. During the SOTU address, when Trump said "If we hadn’t reversed the failed economic policies of the previous administration, the world would not now be witnessing this great economic success," he was-- as he does constantly-- lying and gaslighting.

Last week, writing for The Atlantic, Annie Lowrey noted that "in one of the best decades the American economy has ever recorded, families were bled dry: The Great Affordability Crisis Breaking America. "In the 2010s," she wrote, "the national unemployment rate dropped from a high of 9.9 percent to its current rate of just 3.5 percent. The economy expanded each and every year. Wages picked up for high-income workers as soon as the Great Recession ended, and picked up for lower-income workers in the second half of the decade. Americans’ confidence in the economy hit its highest point since 2000, right before the dot-com bubble burst. The headline economic numbers looked good, if not great. But beyond the headline economic numbers, a multifarious and strangely invisible economic crisis metastasized: Let’s call it the Great Affordability Crisis. This crisis involved not just what families earned but the other half of the ledger, too-- how they spent their earnings. In one of the best decades the American economy has ever recorded, families were bled dry by landlords, hospital administrators, university bursars, and child-care centers. For millions, a roaring economy felt precarious or downright terrible."
Viewing the economy through a cost-of-living paradigm helps explain why roughly two in five American adults would struggle to come up with $400 in an emergency so many years after the Great Recession ended. It helps explain why one in five adults is unable to pay the current month’s bills in full. It demonstrates why a surprise furnace-repair bill, parking ticket, court fee, or medical expense remains ruinous for so many American families, despite all the wealth this country has generated. Fully one in three households is classified as “financially fragile.”

Along with the rise of inequality, the slowdown in productivity growth, and the shrinking of the middle class, the spiraling cost of living has become a central facet of American economic life. It is a crisis amenable to policy solutions at the state, local, and federal levels-- with all of the 2020 candidates, President Donald Trump included, teasing or pushing sweeping solutions for the problem. But absent those solutions, it looks certain to get worse for the foreseeable future-- leaving households fragile, exacerbating the country’s inequality, slowing down growth, smothering productivity, and putting families’ dreams of security out of reach.

The price of housing represents the most acute part of this crisis. In metro areas such as the Bay Area, Seattle, and Boston, severe supply shortages have led to soaring prices—millions of low- and middle-income families are no longer able to purchase centrally located homes. The median asking price for a single-family home in San Francisco has reached $1.6 million; even with today’s low interest rates, that would require a monthly mortgage payment of roughly $6,000, assuming that a family puts down the standard 20 percent. In Manhattan, listings for sale now ask an average of nearly $1,800 per square foot.




The housing cost crises in the Bay Area and New York might be the country’s most obscene. But the problem is national, driven by a combination of stagnant wages, restrictive building codes, and underinvestment in construction, among other trends. Home prices are rising faster than wages in roughly 80 percent of American metro regions. In 2018, housing affordability declined in every one of the 160-some urban areas analyzed by the National Association of Realtors, save for Decatur, Illinois. Rising prices and housing shortages are squeezing families in Reno, Minneapolis, and Phoenix.

The problem now even extends to rural areas, where income growth has lagged in the post-recession period. A recent report by the Pew Charitable Trusts found “sizable” increases in the number of households spending half or more of their income on housing in rural counties across the country. The housing crisis is hitting Bertie County, North Carolina, and Irion County, Texas, too.

One central effect of the housing-cost crisis has been to turn the United States into a country of renters. The homeownership rate has fallen from a peak of nearly 70 percent in the mid-aughts to under 65 percent today; the numbers are more acute for Millennials, whose homeownership rate is 8 percentage points lower than that of their parents at the same age. Unable to buy, roughly 3.5 million younger families have kept renting-- delaying the Millennial and Gen X cohorts’ wealth accumulation, thus consigning them to worse net-worth trajectories for the rest of their lives. And renting, for many families, is not affordable, either: Nearly half of renters are facing uncomfortable monthly bills, and the cost of renting has risen faster than renters’ incomes for a full 20 years now.

The cost-of-living crisis extends beyond housing. Health-care costs are exorbitant, too: Americans pay roughly twice as much for insurance and medical services as do citizens of other wealthy countries, but they don’t have better outcomes. In the post-recession period, premiums, deductibles, and out-of-pocket costs in general just kept rising, eating away at families’ budgets, casting millions into debt, and consigning millions more to bankruptcy.
Shan Chowdhury, the progressive candidate running in southeast Queens has made affordable housing his top campaign issue, along with affordable healthcare. "The cost of living is way too high and wages have remained stagnant," he told us today. "We have to ask ourselves who this country is changing for? The wealth disparities are greater today than it was 50 years ago. With crumbling student debt, low wages, inaccessible healthcare, jobs and opportunities-- we have to tip the power back to working families and out of the hands of billionaires who profit off our backs."



Spokane area progressive Chris Armitage is running hard on Medicare-for-All. "Here in eastern Washington, folks share plenty of stories about their healthcare situations," he told me. "While in a local farming community, a woman told me about how her family of five. Three have diabetes, but they share a single insulin prescription each month. I wish this horrible situation was unique, or even uncommon, but the truth is many families in our rural communities lack the basic healthcare all humans need to live a full, productive life. Inaction in DC is killing people in our district. Our rural families deserve better. We are ready for Medicare for All because, as my former Commander said 'the best answer is the right answer, the second best answer is the wrong answer, and the worst answer is no answer."

Rachel Ventura, a progressive candidate for Congress in the Chicagoland suburbs sits on the modern housing solutions committee in Will County and she told me they too have a housing crisis. "We just don’t have enough housing period. Affordable housing, transitional housing, starter homes, mid size, or high market homes are all on high demand. As our area grows the incomes are definitely not keeping up which is pushing more Chicago residents to move to our area furthering the problem. Our committee is looking at cargo homes, tiny homes, vertical building, and other solutions outside the box. Unfortunately the trade war and the race to the bottom labor practices have complicated the issue even more. It is no longer profitable to build homes in our area because they can’t buy quality products or hire qualified labor for the price people can afford. Instead our area builds more warehouses. Creating millions of living wage jobs is just the beginning. Just one more reason why we must pass the Green New Deal. I look forward to applying my knowledge from the local level to the federal level to create policies that help communities build and retrofit homes for the future."

Young Turks founder and host Cenk Uygur is a first-time congressional candidate in the suburbs north of Los Angeles. "This current barbaric system," he told us this morning, "is crushing us on a daily basis. In some ways, I view my election as a rescue mission-- 45,000 people a year die because they don't have health insurance. We have to save their lives! We also have to save families from being financially ruined and out on the streets even if they have insurance. Every other developed country covers everyone and pays less!"

Montana state Rep. Tom Winter is running for the Montana open congressional seat this year. There are both a conservative Republican and a conservative Democrat who believe in Austerity. Tom backs single payer Medicare-for-All and is campaigning on it. "The whole reason I'm running for Congress," he told me "is because our broken political system is failing working Montanans. Working families all across this state are struggling to afford to live in an economy that seems to be rigged against them every step of the way. Healthcare is unaffordable. Housing is unaffordable. Childcare is unaffordable. 'Full employment' used to mean everyone had a job-- now it means many of us have two. Montanans shouldn't be priced out of being able to live in the state they built simply because they don't have the power to buy politicians and pay lobbyists to cater each and every law towards their best interest. We must rebuild an American economy that rewards work rather than wealth, and doesn't make living unaffordable. He was just getting warmed up:
Montana's hospitals charge patients nearly three times more than what the federal government sets as a 'fair' cost for care under Medicare. Prescriptions are being left unfilled. Life-saving drugs are being rationed. Working families are being saddled with medical debt, and in some cases across the country they are being imprisoned for it. People are being charged hundreds and sometimes thousands of dollars a month for insulin costs-- while it costs $39 just 15 minutes north of Eureka, MT over the border. Montana's critical access and rural hospitals are at constant risk of closure.

Montana’s cities rank as some of the most unaffordable in the nation. The rest of the country thinks this is only a problem in cities like Seattle and San Francisco. But ask anyone working a 9-to-5 in Bozeman or Missoula if they have a realistic chance of owning a home. For the same price you would have paid 5 years ago you get half the square footage, bedrooms, and bathrooms for a median house now.

Every day, families across Montana wake up to our ongoing childcare crisis. Over 45,000 children under the age of 6 need childcare in Montana while childcare facilities in the state only have capacity for 20,000. Childcare costs ($34k for 4 years) families more than in-state college tuition ($29,900 for 4 years) in Montana. Over 42% of single mothers with children under the age of 5 are living in poverty. Single Parents earning minimum wage pay 54% of their income towards childcare.


"If I'm painting a dire picture," Winter concluded, "it's because this is how the other half of the country lives. Politicians always claim to support families, but when it comes right down to it working families are left in the lurch. Montana is running out of time. We could care less how well the Dow is doing or how low the unemployment rate is. We need healthcare. We need housing. We need childcare. We need to be able to afford to live."
The “cost burden” of health coverage climbed through the 2010s; just from 2010 to 2016, family private-insurance premiums jumped 28 percent to $17,710, while median household incomes rose less than 20 percent. That meant less take-home pay for workers. Deductibles-- what a family has to fork over before insurance kicks in-- also soared. From 2010 to 2016, the share of employees in health plans with a deductible jumped from 78 percent to 85 percent. And the average annual deductible went from less than $2,000 to more than $3,000.

The country’s insurance premiums and out-of-pocket health-cost burdens are just very, very high-- including for people with publicly subsidized or public coverage. The average person on Medicare spends $5,460 on health care beyond what they pay for insurance every year. The average person with Medicaid forks over nearly half that. No wonder two in three bankruptcies are related to medical issues, and nearly 140 million American adults report “medical financial hardship” each and every year.

Next up is student-loan debt, a trillion-dollar stone placed on young adults’ backs. Or, to be more accurate, the $1.4 trillion stone, up 6 percent year over year and 116 percent in a decade; student-loan debt is now a bigger burden for households than car loans or credit-card debt. Half of students now take on loans of one kind or another to try for a higher-ed degree, and outstanding debts typically total $20,000 to $25,000, requiring monthly payments of $200 to $300-- though of course many students owe much more. Now nearly 50 million adults are stuck working off their educational debt loads, including one in three adults in their 20s, erasing the college wealth premium for younger Americans and eroding the college earnings premium.
The Rochester, NY congressional district is safely blue but with a useless middle-of-the road backbencher as their Representative. Robin Wilt is running for that seat on a full-bore progressive platform. "The sharp increase in student loan debt is negatively impacting the U.S. economy by delaying the timeline for young people to buy houses and start families. Simply speaking, Boomers are less likely to be able to sell their homes because Millennials aren't in a financial position to buy them. We see this stagnation across the board, but this burden disproportionately affects borrowers of marginalized racial, gender and socioeconomic groups." She had a lot more to say about it:

"More and more, student borrowers have to dedicate ever-increasing portions of their income to student loan repayment, rather than spending on goods or services, traveling, getting married or buying a house. Moreover, many within marginalized communities are paying student loans with additional financial challenges stacked against them. This is particularly true in Rochester and Monroe County, which is plagued by the highest rates of segregation in the country. Not only are students of color more likely to borrow more for a degree and borrow in higher amounts for the same degree, but they’re more likely to struggle to repay student loans than their white counterparts. Meanwhile, the wage gap exacerbates the burden of student debt for women borrowers, since at all levels of educational attainment, women earn, on average, 25% less than men. Not only is the crushing burden of student debt weighing down potential growth in the U.S. economy, it is fundamentally altering our culture-- with people getting married and starting families later in life, and some questioning the value of higher education. Debt forgiveness is a positive way forward, with estimates that over the course of 10 years, student debt cancellation would create $943 billion in GDP, adjusted for inflation. Student debt cancellation results in economic growth by increasing the average households’ net worth and disposable income. This net increase in wealth drives consumption and investment spending. I wholeheartedly support student debt cancellation from a social justice standpoint, as well as from an economic sustainability standpoint."
 
Finally, child care. Spending on daycare, nannies, and other direct-care services for kids has increased by 2,000 percent in the past four decades, and families now commonly spend $15,000 to $26,000 a year to have someone watch their kid. Such care is grossly unaffordable for low-income parents in metro areas across the country, causing many people to drop out of the labor force. But one in four American mothers returns to work within two weeks of giving birth, so heavy are the other cost burdens of living in this country. The whole system is broken.
I spoke to three experienced candidates, Audrey Denney (CA), Brianna Wu and Marie Newman (IL) who came close in 2018 and plan to finish the job against their reactionary opponents, respectively Trumpist Doug LaMalfa, New Dem Stephen Lynch, and Blue Dog Dan Lipinski, this year. Audrey has watched her "friends struggle to afford to deliver their babies, miss work to care for their newborns, and provide childcare when they go back to work. I’ve watched as my close friends drop out of the workforce once they’ve had a second child-- not because they wanted to-- but because they could afford it. These are women who are teachers, manage restaurant chains, and who had management roles at non-profits. Celebrating our mothers on Mother’s Day is not enough, we must pass legislation to support maternity leave, women’s health, and affordable childcare options. Not only do we have the highest maternal mortality in the developed world, we are the only developed country that is seeing increases in maternal mortality. We are also experiencing shocking rates of postpartum depression (as high as 1 in 5 in some states!). We have to be better at creating conditions where new moms can care for their physical and mental well-being and that starts with paid maternity leave."

Everything that motivates and propels Brianna Wu's campaign has been about greater equality. And when it comes to the high cost of educational loans, she told us that "Higher education has become big business in this country, and the burden is placed on the backs of nearly 50 million Americans who just want an education for a chance of success at life. I know people in their 40s who are still paying off student loans 20 years after they graduated from college. Higher education, whether it's a college or university or a trade school, should not have the potential to bankrupt any American, or place an incredible burden on students right out of the gate. I fully support tuition-free public college for all.  It's the right thing to do, and it can be done. We need leaders in our government with the political will to do it. My opponent, Rep. Stephen Lynch, is silent on it, as he is most every initiative that will better the lives of Americans. When I get to Congress, tuition-free public college will be a priority for me."

Marie Newman had similar experiences and told me "The cost and lack of affordabilty of our daily lives, Is why I have an affordable solutions set in platform. Among these solutions in this platform is universal childcare where we would leverage existing assets like schools, libraries and community centers to offer 12 hr care to our kids. We cannot expect parents to continue to work 2 and three jobs round the clock."
The federal government has set as a benchmark that low-income families should not spend more than 7 percent of their income on child care. But child care is generally the single biggest line item on young families’ budgets, bigger even than rent or mortgage payments: Putting a kid in daycare costs 18 percent of annual income in California; home-based options equal 14 percent of family income in Nebraska; having an infant in professional care in the District of Columbia costs more than most poor families earn.

It all adds up, and it all subtracts from families’ well-being. The price tags for tuition and fees at colleges and universities have risen twice as fast as wages, if not more, in recent years. Rental costs are outpacing wage gains by a percentage point or more a year. Health-care costs have grown twice as fast as workers’ wages. And child-care costs have exploded. These cost pressures are particularly acute on young Americans who have seen worse employment prospects and smaller raises than their older counterparts.

The effects are wide-ranging. High costs are preventing workers from moving to high-productivity cities, thus smothering the country’s economic vibrancy and putting a drag on its GDP; economists have estimated that GDP would be as much as 10 percent bigger if more workers could afford to live in places like San Jose and Boston. High costs are forcing families to delay getting married and to have fewer children, and putting the dream of owning a home out of reach.

What is perhaps most frustrating is that the Great Affordability Crisis is amenable to policy solutions-- ones most other rich countries adopted decades ago. In other developed economies, child care, early education, and higher education are public goods, and do not require high-interest-rate debts or endless scrambling by exhausted young parents to procure. Other wealthy countries have public-health systems that cover everybody at far lower cost, whether through socialized or private models. And numerous proposals would transform residential construction in this country, including one that just failed in California’s legislature.

But the Great Affordability Crisis hides in plain sight, obvious to households but unmentioned in the country’s headline economic numbers. It persists even as President Donald Trump rightly praises the country’s growth, low unemployment rate, and rising household incomes. And though there are many nationwide policies that could end the crisis, they all seem unlikely to pass through the country’s broken Congress; the brightest glimmer of hope lies in housing and health-care policy by individual states. But it is still a dim glimmer. This crisis looks sure to stay with us for the coming decade, whatever recessions or expansions it may hold.
Jennifer Christie is a first time candidate, running for a seat north of Indianapolis. She knows quite a bit about the costs of child care. "I left a 'good job' when we adopted four children," she told me today. "In three years, we tripled our family size and had four children under four years old. My job required travel several times per month and often overseas. Childcare was not only complicated, but it was expensive. It would have cost well over 30,000 per year with so many littles. It just didn’t seem worth it to be away from my children so much and to give that much of my paycheck away.  So I started a home-based business and began teaching. My business was very successful; we were profitable, I had several employees, and was able to have a flexible schedule. I was so passionate about giving families freedom and a living wage that I mentored hundreds of other women entrepreneurs on starting their own business too. What I found was that childcare was the biggest challenge that women faced to start a business or to work at all, especially single moms who are some of the hardest working people on the planet. Childcare needs to be safe and affordable while paying childcare workers a living wage too (most childcare workers are also moms). We need the skills that moms bring to the table. I have worked in the sciences most of my career, but the toughest job around is Mom: it requires patience and strength, compassion and determination, selflessness and grit and so much more. Now more than ever we need a mom’s voice in Congress. I am running to be that voice to lift up families by guaranteeing universal healthcare, a livable planet, a living wage, education for all and universal childcare."

Pramila Jayapal, co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus went over the Trump budget and told her Seattle constituents that his "budget proposal leaves no question: His Administration does not care one bit about poor, middle-class and working Americans, nor about the future of our country, global relationships or planet. On every level, this budget neglects the health of our people, planet and democracy. Trump’s budget slashes funding for the Environmental Protection Agency, leaving our water, air and communities vulnerable to pollution, toxins and climate change. It recklessly destroys infrastructure investments that our communities badly need, completely zeroing out federal funds that the 7th congressional district relies on to make our highways and bridges safer, maintain and expand our port and public transit systems and build more affordable housing."
Trump’s budget also destroys critical programs that have supported vulnerable Americans and helped lift millions out of poverty. It cuts $6.2 billion in federal funding for education programs, jeopardizing our children and their future, and proposes changes to Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security that will hurt millions of Americans. It also slashes funding for important programs that help workers stay safe on the job and protect seniors in the workforce.

Instead of investing in education, health care, affordable housing, public health and other important priorities, the Trump budget floods money into more cruel attacks on immigrants and people of color. Trump wants to steal money from vital programs to fund his vanity wall and flood billions in immigration enforcement activities that promote racial profiling and mistreatment of communities of color. President Trump does not understand the values and investments that have made America and our people strong-- and it is no surprise his budget fails to reflect them as well.

President Trump’s national security budget is completely out of touch with reality. For the fourth year in a row, Trump’s budget also cuts funding for the State Department and international development-- the deep and disproportionate 22% cut to these programs will undermine our diplomatic efforts around the world. Meanwhile the budget includes $740.5 billion in defense spending for an unaccountable Pentagon plagued with corruption. Funneling more and more money to the Pentagon, which has been unable to even pass an audit, does not make us more secure.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,