Going Beyond Various Levels Of Suckage

Nick Ruiz, may have run into some unexpected good luck, when Florida Republican legislators-- embarrassed by Congresswoman Sandy's Adam's mindless extremism-- just gerrymandered her district (and Ruiz's) in such a way that will make it more difficult for her to be elected. Ruiz was the very first candidate endorsed by Blue America this cycle. His platform alone tells much of the story. No one is ever going to accuse him of being a Blue Dog type or of being a corporate shill, like so many Democrats, or even a goes-along-to-get-along type candidate that the DCCC prefers. Ruiz is ten steps ahead of the rest of the pack-- on everything. When I told Bernie Sanders about him, I told him Ruiz had passed the Bernie Sanders test.

When other candidates are arguing about the pros and cons of Austerity, Ruiz is explaining why a hefty increase in the minimum wage and a lowering of the age of retirement are the best ways to fix the economy. He's not going to engage in a discussion of cutting back on Medicare. He favors universal health, single payer health care, in effect, Medicare for all Americans. And yesterday, as his prospects of victory were brightening he sent central Florida voters a message about real progressive governance most of them have never experienced in their lifetimes:

The American legacy should not be one of poverty and abandonment, and yet increasingly, that’s how it is.

The American perspective should not be dogmatized by the singularity of conservative governance, and yet increasingly, that’s what it is happening.

American social justice requires that those that can do more-- do more to help the entirety of the whole. The American story is characterized by the solidly middle class, New Deal legacy that we have reconstituted time after time when facing economic
challenges. But since 1970, the top earners have been taking an ever larger piece of the American pie, as their tax obligations have shrunken to crumbs. The result: social injustice and spreading poverty, as there is less and less capital to go around.

And yet, conservative politicians tell you the top earners need more money.

Why?

And why, amid a national unemployment epidemic, and spreading poverty, would the US lower the lowest federal tax rates for the wealthy in decades, to even lower levels? It’s already evident that lower tax rates and diminished government investment destroy the middle class. So why suggest more of it, as conservative politicians
do?

If we continue to reward conservative politicians with election, they will continue to mock the middle class with condescending rhetoric and policies that lessen equality and opportunity for all.

If we continue to reward a political party apparatus and conservaliberal PACS that do not support New Deal candidates that we know are most inspired and competent to fight for our interests, then they will continue to fund and promote second-rate candidates that will ultimately take orders from the status quo. It's unequivocal
that in the crucial battles to come-- they will flounder, cut and run.

We should be rushing into renewable energy, nor wallowing in dirty tar sands.

We should be rushing home from undeclared wars, not wallowing in deathly defense spending and destructive human chaos.

We should ensure a fair federal minimum wage, conditions of employment and affordable necessity commodities.

Poverty should be eradicated, like the scourge that it is.

It’s not just Republicans that we must hold accountable. Democrats, ourselves must be held accountable.

If you like the way America is today, then you know where to send your money. The status quo is always happy to give you more of the same, and lead America further down the rabbit hole of middle class destruction. They can’t help themselves.

If you are like me, then you will fight back for the New Deal legacy, and you will not take no for an answer.

Progressives aren't going to get far electing corporate hacks in blue t-shirts who are slightly less bad than the corporate hacks in red t-shirts. Steny Hoyer, the Blue Dogs and Debbie Wasserman Schultz may suck less than the Republicans-- or maybe not. On that level of suckage, it hardly matters. If we don't opt for real leadership and real vision... we won't get it. I'm not asking you to put your life on hold and run for office. But how about contribiting to Nick Ruiz's campaign, so he can?

What Districts Like NH-1 and FL-24 Have In Common-- Growing Disdain For Tea Party Extremism

Earlier today we touched on some of the issues around the race between progressive Carol Shea-Porter and teabagger Frank Guinta in New Hampshire's 1st CD, where Guinta managed to unseat her last year 121,655 to 95,503. Democrats were so angry and disappointed-- more at Obama and the conflicted, pointless national party than in Carol per se-- that Democratic and left-leaning independent turnout plummeted in the district. Two years early (presidential election, in which Obama took the 1st, a district Bush won both times, with 53%), 176,435 voters turned out for Carol (and 156,338 for the Republican, former Congressman Bradley). It makes more sense to compared 2010 to 2006, which was also a midterm. That year, when Carol first beat Bradley 100,899 voters cast their ballots for her (as opposed to 94,869 for the Republican). So if we just compare the 2 midterms, 2010 and 2006, the GOP performance was much better in 2010 (up over 26,000 votes and the Democratic performance... just like everywhere in the country-- in the toilet. Over 5,000 of her 2006 voters didn't show up. And over 80,000 people who voted for her in 2008, didn't come to the polls in 2010!

Although Guinta has consistently tried-- both as a candidate and a congressman-- to appeal to the state's teabaggers, he was too much of a political coward to actually join Michele Bachmann's official Tea Party Caucus in the House. Nevertheless, the new Pew polling fits the political profile of the district in a way that should worry the deranged Guinta. Voters are sick and tired of the Tea Party and their disastrous, obstructionist agenda.

Since the 2010 midterm elections, the Tea Party has not only lost support nationwide, but also in the congressional districts represented by members of the House Tea Party Caucus. And this year, the image of the Republican Party has declined even more sharply in these GOP-controlled districts than across the country at large.

In the latest Pew Research Center survey, conducted Nov. 9-14, more Americans say they disagree (27%) than agree (20%) with the Tea Party movement.  A year ago, in the wake of the sweeping GOP gains in the midterm elections, the balance of opinion was just the opposite: 27% agreed and 22% disagreed with the Tea Party. At both points, more than half offered no opinion.

Throughout the 2010 election cycle, agreement with the Tea Party far outweighed disagreement in the 60 House districts represented by members of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus. But as is the case nationwide, support has decreased significantly over the past year; now about as many people living in Tea Party districts disagree (23%) as agree (25%) with the Tea Party.

The Republican Party’s image also has declined substantially among people who live in Tea Party districts. Currently, 41% say they have a favorable opinion of the GOP, while 48% say they have an unfavorable view. As recently as March of this year, GOP favorability was 14 points higher (55%) in these districts, with just 39% offering an unfavorable opinion.

Among the public, 36% now say they have a favorable opinion of the Republican Party, down from 42% in March... [T]he steep decline in GOP favorability in Tea Party districts means that these constituencies now view the Republican Party about as negatively as the Democratic Party. As recently as March, GOP favorability exceeded Democratic Party favorability by 15 points (55% vs. 40%). Today, both parties receive about the same rating from people in Tea Party districts (41% favorable for the GOP, 39% for the Democratic Party).

One far right extremist who wasn't afraid to come out of the closet and join Bachmann's lunatic fringe caucus is Florida teabagger Sandy Adams. But she has more to worry about than just the Pew results. The Republicans who drew up the new districts were unkind to her. Rumors are the Republican Establishment in Tallahassee wouldn't terribly mind seeing, Adams, one of Congress' most ineffectual members, defeated anyway. It probably doesn't matter that the new 24th CD is now also the home of Republican power John Mica; he'll stick with his much redder old district regardless of where he lives. But they actually made it easier for a Democrat to win back the district. McCain won the 24th with 51% of the vote in 2008. Had the new boundaries been in place then McCain would have only won 50% of the vote. In 2008, Democrat Suzanne Kosmas defeated Tom Feeney who seemed on the verge of indictment for his role in the Abramoff scandal. She beat him 211,284 (57%) to 151,863 (41%), a pretty resounding victory with wins in all 4 counties, Brevard (52-46%), Orange (59-40%), Seminole (54-44%) and Volusia (61-37%). After one miserable term of calling herself a Democrat while voting like a Republican and acting in the interests of the Wall Street banksters she was supposed to be watching over the Financial Services Committee she thought of as a piggy bank, she lost 146,129 (60%)-98,787 (40%). Adams killed her in all 4 counties-- Brevard (64-36%), Orange (57-43%), Seminole (62-38%), and Volusia (58-42%). Just pathetic

But this time it won't be a race between a radical right teabagger (Sandy Adams) and a corrupt conservative shill (Suzanne Kosmas). This time a real Democrat is running against Adams, Nick Ruiz. Kosmas spent her two years in Congress having breakfasts, lunches and dinners with the sleaziest Washington lobbyists in town; she didn't deserve a second term. Ruiz is about as far from her as he is from Adams. A month ago he sent voters throughout the district an e-mail that let them know he's not just another garden variety political hack. In fact, if you're idea of a good legislator is Bernie Sanders, Nick Ruiz is someone you're going to swoon over. This morning I asked him about his commitment to take on the onerous and costly task of running for this seat-- and running for it without any help whatsoever from the DCCC. Here's what he told me:

I'm truly looking forward to representing FL-24 because for so long, central FL has had no real chance of contributing progressive ideas to her benefit, nor the national agenda. Aside from Alan Grayson's too short tenure, most of the candidates and representatives of this region have been of horribly right-wing, and repressive origins.

But Florida is far more liberal than you could ever imagine-- we have half a million more registered Democrats than Republicans. We have a hugely diverse population that respects diversity and equality. We want better times for more people. We want better jobs and higher wages for everyone. We want a more robust social safety net. We want a future that is sustainable and leadership we can believe in.

My commitment to a representative Congress arises straight out of this mix of cultural freedom, respect for diversity and socioeconomic fairness. When FL-24 elects me, it will be because they know in their heart of hearts - that I will purvey policy that benefits the majority of people. Tea Party Republican Sandy Adams has no vision for central FL, nor America, other than more of the same unequal oppression of the people by predatory wealth and neoconservative dogma.

I need your help to make sure that we can contribute our ideas and leadership to the national agenda, so that Florida's future, and that of America is a future where we invest in our people and collaborate with the rest of the world in a way that is sustainable and beneficial to all.

If you can afford to, invest with your heart. You're not going to find a better candidate than Nick Ruiz... not anywhere. You can contribute here; he was the first candidate endorsed by Blue America for the 2012 cycle.

Do Central Florida Voters Know What Sandy Adams Gave Them When She Rubber Stamped Paul Ryan's Budget?

The congressional election in central Florida's 24th congressional district could be one of the most interesting to watch in the country. So far the race pits a right-wing zombie and notorious healthcare hypocrite, freshman teabagger Sandy Adams, against one of the Democrats' most cutting edge progressives, publisher and educator Nick Ruiz. The district will be subject to considerable redrawing and is likely to shed many of its Orlando suburban areas in Orange and Seminole counties-- including the Adams family home-- and consolidate in Brevard and Volusia counties along the Atlantic coast. The district was originally drawn by state legislator Tom Feeney for his own congressional race, which he won.

In 2008 Feeney's sleaze finally caught up with him and washed out his political career. Unfortunately worthless quasi-Democrat Suzanne Kosmas grabbed the seat, winning all 4 counties. She proceeded to vote with the Republicans on key issues-- like healthcare-- and distinguished herself in the Financial Services Committee with her lack of participation, spending committee meetings out on the town with lobbyists. And she did outraise her opponent 3-1. But it didn't help. This time she lost all 4 counties, Democrats and left-leaning independents simply staying away from the polls in droves, unable to distinguish between two anti-family conservatives, Republican Sandy Adams and Democrat Suzanne Kosmas. Steve Israel would like to see Kosmas run again. I'm sure Sandy Adams would as well. But she's been on a serious bender since her defeat and isn't likely to run again. Nick Ruiz is the first candidate for Congress Blue America endorsed this cycle.

Nick has been successfully presenting Florida voters a tapestry of Republican ideas-- a tapestry another Nick, this one in the NY Times Saturday, showed to point to the U.S. turning into Pakistan. And key to Nick Ruiz' thesis is the Republican attitude-- and specifically Sandy Adams' attitude-- towards health care. Short version, they're against it for anyone who isn't wealthy. Adams voted to repeal healthcare reform and she voted to turn Medicare into an inadequate voucher program that would be a virtual death sentence for hundreds of thousands of Florida seniors. Nick has a very different way of looking at it, a perspective that presumes healthcare is a right of every American citizen, something antithetical to the Ayn Rand/Law of the Jungle approach of the GOP. Nick:

We must decide, once and for all, what sort of society defines America. We have already decided that law enforcement (i.e. the police department) is a guaranteed service for all, regardless of social or economic status. We have also decided that the fire department is a guaranteed service. Our society, rightfully so, honors both of these public features. They are freely available to all, regardless of the size of one's wallet.

Why should healthcare be any different?

Social justice in a lawful commonwealth of society demands that when a person is attacked or threatened by crime or fire, the public will come to his or her aid. And when a person is attacked or threatened by disease, should the public not do the same?

We already employ an integral non-profit, for profit and single payer scaffolding to provide healthcare services. There is no reason to believe that all of these systems may not continue to work side by side in a free society. However, it is difficult to imagine that we can continue to allow profiteering to masquerade as uncontrollable healthcare costs that must consume such a large piece of our national income. Costs will have to be controlled through regulation. What is most important now is to take that final step and declare universal access to comprehensive healthcare as a standard public service, in the same way that fire and police services are a social norm everywhere. When will America realize that it is her ethical, logical, common sense and spiritual duty to provide universal healthcare services to her people?

America must no longer accept the false narrative of scarcity and withholding when it comes to healthcare. Social justice demands that all of our people receive universal access to all of these vital basic services. It is no great nation that denies these basic human services to people. In fact, anything less is uncivilized.

Adams, like most of the zombie Republicans have tried to claim that they didn't vote to kill Medicare, just to fix it. This morning, Paul Krugman examined that lie in the NY Times and concludes that Republicans "don’t want to make Medicare sustainable, they want to destroy it under the guise of saving it... in voting for the House budget plan, Republicans voted to end Medicare."

Last week Democrats on the House Committee on Energy and Commerce put out a report that shows very specifically what the impact of Sandy Adam's vote to kill Medicare would be on the residents of Volusia, Orange, Brevard and Seminole counties that are part of FL-24. It's a chilling picture and it shows what happens when a mindless partisan like Adams just follows along with the herd. She believed Paul Ryan's and John Boehner's lies about how their budget would be "good" for Medicare. But the Ryan budget "raises costs for seniors and individuals with disabilities enrolled in Medicare, reduces their benefits, and puts private insurance companies in charge of the program. For current beneficiaries, important benefits – such as closing the hole in Medicare’s drug coverage – would be immediately eliminated. For individuals age 54 and under, Medicare’s guarantee of comprehensive coverage would be replaced with a “voucher” or “premium support” to buy private health insurance. By design, this federal contribution does not keep pace with medical costs, shifting thousands of dollars in costs onto the individual." This is what Sandy Adams decided to do to her own constituents. This is what she voted for on April 15th; her idea of what's "good" for Medicare would

• Increase prescription drug costs for 8,800 Medicare beneficiaries in the district who enter the Part D donut hole, forcing them to pay an extra $87 million for drugs over the next decade.

• Eliminate new preventive care benefits for 122,000 Medicare beneficiaries in the district.

The Republican proposal would have even greater impacts on individuals in the district age 54 and younger who are not currently enrolled in Medicare. It would:

• Deny 570,000 individuals age 54 and younger in the district access to Medicare’s guaranteed benefits.

• Increase the out-of-pocket costs of health coverage by over $6,000 per year in 2022 and by almost $12,000 per year in 2032 for the 127,000 individuals in the district who are between the ages of 44 and 54.

• Require the 127,000 individuals in the district between the ages of 44 and 54 to save an additional $29.7 billion for their retirement-- an average of $182,000 to $287,000 per individual – to pay for the increased cost of health coverage over their lifetimes. Younger residents of the district will have to save even higher amounts to cover their additional medical costs.

• Raise the Medicare eligibility age by at least one year to age 66 or more for 72,000 individuals in the district who are age 44 to 49 and by two years to age 67 for 438,000 individuals in the district who are age 43 or younger.

No one knows for sure what the new 24th CD will look like. Rumors are flying that Republican powers in Tallahassee want Adams out and that hey plan to create a district she won't rake in a GOP primary. Replacing her with another Republican rubber stamp isn't the answer though. Replacing her with a tough, savvy progressive, Nick Ruiz, is exactly the answer. If you can, please consider contributing to his campaign at the Blue America page. Below is the ad Blue America has been running in the district:

You're Used To The Careful Old Democratic Candidates, Walking On Eggshells Not To Offend Anyone... Now Meet Nick Ruiz (D-FL)

It's time for America to move into the 21st century, and one way to make that happen is by electing leaders unbound by the hypocrisies of the past. Nick Ruiz was the very first congressional candidate Blue America endorsed in this cycle. He's not your father's or grampa's Democratic candidate. If the Democratic Party is going to have a future that doesn't include merging with the GOP, Nick and men and women like him are that future. I kind of wish the music wasn't quite so loud but... well, you know the kids today. Please watch it all the way through. Nick knows full well that "change" can just be a handy slogan. His idea of change means doing things differently, building on lessons we've learned from past mistakes and past successes. Please consider making a contribution to his campaign, even if just $5 or $10.

This morning Nick addressed his concept of the Public Trust, a concept that's at the core of his campaign to responsibly change the way we run our society. You like Elizabeth Warren? Nick Ruiz takes the next step.

In addition to progressive taxation, and military pullback-- we will have to introduce new and creative ways of financing our society’s needs in the face of globalization. Such an idea is a new federal agency called the Public Trust.
 
Let’s use the recent initial public offering (IPO) by LinkedIn as an example. Roughly 100 million shares were ‘floated,’ or made available, for the IPO. The new federal institution I propose, called the Public Trust, would receive 10 million shares by law, or 10% of the float. Within the Public Trust, federal traders would trade (e.g. buy and sell, long and short) for the profit of the people. Just like any other mutual or hedge fund.
 
On the first day of LinkedIn trade, May 19, 2011-- LinkedIn (LNKD) opened at around $80 per share, and closed at around $95-– that’s a $15 per share profit on the day. Therefore, the Public Trust would have earned around $150 million on day one of trading for that particular stock, which is to say, Main Street would have earned $150 million to use for public sector financing of education, community reinvestment, green energy research and development, various aspects of the U.S. Social Safety Net-- even gas subsidies at the pump, to give consumers some pricing relief.
 
Imagine if the Public Trust, by law, received delivery of 10% of every float (e.g. equities, commodities, derivatives, etc.). Main Street would make billions of dollars in annual revenue for the purpose of reinvestment in America. Make sense? It’s that simple. This would provide sorely needed revenue that the Republicans claim is nowhere to be found.
 
In a world of increasingly sophisticated financialization and distribution of everything-- goods and services, labor, research and development-- the broader public must be able to take part in such global commerce in ways previously unimaginable. Our current employment and prosperity model lags behind what is truly necessary and possible today, and needs a new vision in order to bring public income and prosperity to twenty-first century levels. Wall Street has become unhinged from Main Street, and indeed, is cannibalizing Main Street-- that disrepair must be corrected, if the country as a whole is to prosper.
 
America must never lose the ability to imagine a different set of circumstances. Americans don’t have to live in country where all of the tax breaks, subsidies and prosperity go to Big Oil, global traders and corporations.
 
"Change" is not a slogan.
 
"Change" means doing things differently-- put a progressive Democrat in Congress.

You're never going to see a tweet from Sandy Adams, the corporate shill Nick is running against, like this:


You can contribute to his ability to get out his message here, through ActBlue.

This morning, in light of the message Democrats and independents in the Buffalo suburbs sent to the Republican Party last night, Nick had his own message for Paul Ryan and local lemming Sandy Adams.

"The NY-26 election to Congress of Democrat Kathy Hochul over Republican Jane Corwin last night obliterates any doubt some may have had about whether or not Americans want Medicare. Americans, not only want Medicare, but they will vote out anyone who conspires to weaken or destroy it. Paul Ryan (WI-1)-- this is your wake up call; you should renounce the heinous piece of legislation you have crafted as a mistake. And you should instead, support Raul Grijalva and the CPC's People's Budget. In 2012. Every Republican that voted for Ryan's austerity budget in the House stands to replaced-- including all nineteen of the Florida Republican representatives-- with special notice to my opponent, Sandy Adams (FL-24). The Republicans are fond of mandates, this is their mandate, coming home to them in spades."

Will Republican Over Reach At Every Level Tank The Florida GOP In 2012?

As you probably know, Blue America has been more active in House races than in gubernatorial or even Senate races. And we've never found any presidential candidate worthy of asking our donors to contribute to. Blue America looks for solid progressive leaders with a values and principles-driven world view-- like the half dozen we've endorsed so far this cycle. So when we see the constant stream of news about how Scott Walker is destroying the Republican Party brand in Wisconsin and Rick Snyder is doing the same in Michigan, in each case through ideologically-driven over reach, the first thing we start thinking about are the opportunities to win back House seats that Republicans grabbed in 2010. Yesterday the news-- for us-- out of Ohio was good: In One Month, 214,399 Ohioans Sign Petition To Stop Kasich's Anti-Worker Law. And thanks to Paul Ryan's Ayn Rand-inspired attack on Medicare, voters in Ohio know that the problem isn't just with the deranged Kasich but with an entire political party-- the Republicans-- that has gone seriously off the tracks and veered dangerously far from the mainstream of American thought.

Even normally somnolent, complacent Floridians are picking up the vibe that something has gone terribly wrong-- and that they need to rouse themselves and do something about it. Ryan's attack on Medicare is a disaster for seniors in every single state. But guess which state's seniors get hit the hardest-- yes, Floridians, where so many seniors have gone to retire. According to Congress' Joint Economic Committee, out-of-pocket health expenses for the typical Florida 65 year-old traditional Medicare enrollee in 2022 would be $7,145.14. If Ryan's plan-- which virtually every Republican in the House voted for-- is ever signed into law, that same senior would instead be paying $14,528.31-- an increase of $7,383.16. Their out-of-pocket costs more than double! It's cruel that Florida should bear the biggest burden of any state. And every single Florida Republican voted for it; not a single one had the guts to buck their party and stand up for Florida's hard pressed senior citizens. Realistically, this one vote alone should jeopardize the House seats of Daniel Webster, Sandy Adams, Allen West, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, David Rivera, Steve Southerland, Richard Nugent, Bill Young, and Dennis Ross.

And then there's the role that Florida's radical right governor is playing to further tarnish the Republican image in the minds of voters. As the Daily Beast reported Friday, "The cycle of over-reach and backlash is in over-drive these days."

The latest sign: on Tuesday, Alvin Brown became the first Democrat elected mayor of Jacksonville-- Florida's largest city-- in 20 years.

Just seven months ago, Republicans swept the Sunshine State with Tea Party-backed candidate Rick Scott winning the governor's office with a 1.2 percent margin of victory.

But instead of consolidating support by reaching out and winning over the reasonable edge of the opposition, as popular past Republican governors like Jeb Bush and Charlie Crist have done, Scott continued with his campaign posture of refusing to talk to the press. He canceled a $2 billion federal high-speed rail project and is seeking to delay (and functionally deny) implementation of an anti-gerrymandering reform ballot referendum overwhelmingly passed in 2010.

Now Rick Scott finds himself the least popular newly elected governor in Florida history. It's not just a matter of the honeymoon being over-- this looks like a drunken Vegas marriage heading for a shotgun divorce.
 
Fifty-five percent of Florida voters disapprove of Scott's job in office, while only 32 percent approve, according to a mid-April PPP poll. The Suffolk University poll found that 41 percent of respondents said the new gov's first months in office had been "negative and damaging" while only 26 percent described it as "positive and productive." The analysis by Suffolk Political Director David Paleologos is worth quoting at length: "It's taken Gov. Scott less than 100 days to begin a free fall in popularity and to generate negative perceptions about job performance and damaging the state he was elected to lead…There has been a backlash in public opinion on both sides of the aisle in response to his aggressive and uncompromising leadership style."

Reflecting on the upset in the Jacksonville mayor's race, St. Petersburg Political Editor Adam Smith said, "Jacksonville is a Republican stronghold, but even with that relatively conservative electorate polls show Barack Obama more popular than Rick Scott. That election in Florida's largest city was not about Obama or Scott, but there's no question that Scott's talk about draconian cuts to school budgets and other services helped elect a Democrat arguing that cuts need to be targeted and strategic. One of the best days for Democrat Alvin Brown came when Rick Scott came to Jacksonville to campaign for the Republican mayoral nominee at a Tea Party rally."

Back to the Blue America-endorsed candidate for the House seat that includes big chunks of Orange, Volusia, Brevard and Seminole counties in central Florida, Nick Ruiz. He hopes to keep reminding Florida voters about Sandy Adam's unhinged extremism and her eagerness to gut Medicare. He can use some help in getting out his message. This morning, when I asked him for a comment, he said, "We have to understand, no matter how much certain dysfunctional personalities (e.g. Rep. Paul Ryan WI-1) try to make America about personal ambition-- it will never be so. America is not about personal enrichment. America is about community well-being. And that is a concept people like Paul Ryan, or Newt Gingrich, or Rep. Michele Bachmann (MN-6) will never understand. So the Republican budget proposes massive cuts to the U.S. Social Safety Net-- in particular, senior citizens, and their much relied upon Medicare health insurance. Do you think that senior citizens can afford $7,000+ more dollars out-of-pocket for health insurance when they are already on a tight fixed income? Absolutely not. And what's the trade? Some expected brownie points from rich old tyrants for these Republican wealth seekers? In 2012, reject these political careerists, and morally corrupt opportunists-- put a progressive Democrat in Congress."

Not just a Democrat-- FL-24 tried that with conservative corporate shill Suzanne Kosmas and it went terribly wrong-- but a progressive Democrat, in the mold of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt, people who understood the use of government to make the lives of ordinary citizens better and more rewarding.

Are Democrats Still Concerned With Guns... At All-- Even In The Hands Of Terrorists?

Deranged right-wing gun shill and ex-rocker Ted Nugent was on CNN with Piers Morgan the other night to rant and rave about how much he hates President Obama:

"Anybody that wants to disarm me can drop dead. Anybody that wants to make me unarmed and helpless, people that want to literally create the proven places where more innocents are killed called gun-free zones, we're going to beat you. We're going to vote you out of office or suck on my machine gun."

When Morgan told him that 80 people across America die each day from a gunshot wound, Nugent obfuscated and started spouting hackneyed NRA talking points, "...78 of those 80 are let out of their cages by corrupt judges and prosecutors who know the recidivism is out of control, know that they'll commit the crimes again, and they let them walk through plea bargaining, early release, and programs. Kiss my ass. Where you have the most armed citizens in America, you have the lowest violent crime rate. Where you have the worst gun control, you have the highest crime rate... More guns equals less crime. Period."

A couple nights ago I went to hear Assemblyman Anthony Portantino, the thoughtful and independent-minded progressive running against rubber stamp Republican David Dreier in California's 26th CD in the L.A. suburbs just east of the city. When Anthony spoke passionately about the need for keeping guns out of the hands of criminals it occurred to me how few Democrats ever bring this up any longer. Yet his audience roared it's approval. The mindless hatred, fear-monger and commercial hucksterism of the Ted Nugents of this country has been going unanswered for too long. I was proud to hear Anthony pick up the challenge, regardless of the fact that gun advocate thugs have advocated the murder of him and his family. Another Democrat, on the other side of the side of the country, who's addressing sane gun policy as an issue in his campaign is Blue America-endorsed Nick Ruiz in central Florida. Last week Nick penned an editorial, Don't Need A Gun I want to share with you:

They always say that truth is stranger than fiction, and that is because fiction, largely, with a few relative and often literary exceptions, simply dramatizes the truth.

So when NRA darling, Republican Sandy Adams (FL-24) of Oviedo, Florida votes against a House Judiciary measure that would block those on the FBI’s watch list from buying guns, it should come as no surprise to Democrats. Such is the state of radical Republican disrepair. Are Republicans tough on terror? Yeah, sure, as long as it doesn’t interfere with selling guns, which is always-- so in other words, no, Republicans are not tough on terror or anything else-- except the poor and the unfortunate, who cannot adequately defend themselves.

It’s obvious to Democrats that federal law should be able to prevent a person from buying guns if that person is a terror suspect. It’s also a fact that the more guns a nation has, more murders and suicides as a result of gun sales will occur. The U.S. of course, is at the pinnacle of that list. In this regard, we outpace everyone.

On healthcare, we drag behind. On distribution of commodity necessities, we drag behind. On education, we drag behind. On jobs, we drag behind. On our social safety net, we drag behind.

But we sure know how to sell some guns.

According to the Orlando Sentinel-- “'Since 2004, over 1,300 persons on the terrorist watch list have been allowed to purchase firearms or explosives because federal law is so weak that being a known or suspected terrorist is not itself sufficient to prohibit someone from buying guns’ said Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign, a gun control group, in a statement.”

Americans love our Second Amendment rights-- but this is ridiculous.

Sandy Adams of course, has nothing to say-- because she is wrong-- and voted against the gun control measure anyway. An America that allows gun sales to known or suspected terrorists to proceed unchecked by federal law, makes a mockery of justice and moral conscience.

America needs better gun policies-- put a progressive Democrat in Congress.

On his website, where Nick originally posted this, he illustrated it with a cool video clip of Billy Idol doing "Don't Need A Gun." Go take a listen here and please consider making a contribution to Nick's campaign, especially if you agree that law enforcement should keep guns out of the hands of terrorists. And, for your listening and viewing pleasure... here's a video of the Self Destruction Mix of Depeche Mode's "Barrel of A Gun."

So How's Florida Healthcare Hypocrite Sandy Adams Been Doing In Congress So Far?

Monkey in the middle... Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right

You're not likely to find a more persistent, outspoken voice for the conservative consensus than the Orlando Sentinel's in any newsroom in America. And in central Florida they are the echo chamber for the country's ruling elite. So, no matter what it might mean to you, their headline yesterday, Freshman Rep. Sandy Adams Is A Vocal Conservative In Congress, was anything but pejorative. They have their own Inside-the-Betway reporting, Mark Matthews, covering the local delegation, insurance that it will always be written with the appropriate Beltway spin rather than anything that could possibly be organic to the 24th congressional district.

Although Adams is, if anything, a fifth rate backbencher with zero influence, Matthews builds her up a little bit for the local rubes: "In just four months, rookie U.S. Rep. Sandy Adams of Orlando has made clear she intends to be more than a quiet foot soldier in the Republican revolution of last year. Since joining Congress, the former Orange County deputy sheriff and eight-year state legislator has grown into a full-throttle supporter of every major GOP initiative, even picketing outside the Democratic-controlled Senate when Congress was on the verge of a government shutdown."

True enough Adams has already cemented her reputation as a mindless rubber stamp zombie for the deranged right-wing, Koch-financed counter-revolution. Like Webster and Mica, the areas' 2 other Republican congressmembers, she's determined to overturn the New Deal and shred the social contract that has made America work for the past 75 years.

She has co-sponsored legislation to neuter the new health-care law, fought efforts to reduce greenhouse gases and joined the crusade to slash the federal budget, positions consistent with the tea-party backers who helped her win a landslide victory over U.S. Rep. Suzanne Kosmas, D-New Smyrna Beach, last year.

"It's a drop in the ocean the reductions that we've made in this year's budget," said Adams, who voted against the budget deal that would fund the government through the remainder of 2011-- while slashing an estimated $38 billion-- because the cuts weren't deep enough. Last week, she voted for the budget plan by U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., that, among other things, would slice future funding for Medicare and Medicaid.

Not a hint in Matthews' reportage of how Paul Krugman describes the extremist budget-- "a cause," according to it's author Paul Ryan-- a budget that will upend the lives of hundreds of thousands of people in central Florida, almost all of them for the worse, and which was voted for with gusto by Ms. Adams.

Consider the Ryan budget proposal, which all the Very Serious People assured us was courageous and important. That proposal begins by warning that “a major debt crisis is inevitable” unless we confront the deficit. It then calls, not for tax increases, but for tax cuts, with taxes on the wealthy falling to their lowest level since 1931.

And because of those large tax cuts, the only way the Ryan proposal can even claim to reduce the deficit is through savage cuts in spending, mainly falling on the poor and vulnerable. (A realistic assessment suggests that the proposal would actually increase the deficit.)

...Wait, there’s more. The core of the Ryan proposal is a plan to privatize and defund Medicare. Yet this would do nothing to reduce the deficit over the next 10 years, which is why all the near-term deficit reduction comes from brutal reductions in aid to the needy and unspecified cuts in discretionary spending. Tax increases, by contrast, can be fast-acting remedies for red ink.

And that’s why the only major budget proposal out there offering a plausible path to balancing the budget is the one that includes significant tax increases: the “People’s Budget” from the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which — unlike the Ryan plan, which was just right-wing orthodoxy with an added dose of magical thinking — is genuinely courageous because it calls for shared sacrifice.

Adams voted against the People's Budget... instead she wants to do away entirely with progressive taxation, which taxes the wealthy at a higher rate than the middle class, and replace it with a national sales tax which puts the burden even more fully than it already is, on working people.

Matthews may have seen our Sandy Adams coverage, since he referred to "One left-leaning blogger" who "labeled Adams a 'healthcare hypocrite' for rejecting her congressional health plan, even though she is still covered by a government policy through her husband, John, an Orange County circuit judge." He didn't mention the radio ads we ran all over the sprawling district. Give it a listen:



It's part of the reason Blue America's first endorsed candidate of the 2012 cycle was her progressive Democratic opponent, Nicholas Ruiz. Matthews, true to Orlando Sentinel tradition, doesn't mention Ruiz in his puff piece on Adams, let alone ask him to rebut her nonsense. He writes that Adams defended the hypocritical healthcare "arrangement as 'just a personal decision' and said it's not hypocritical because she never intended it as a protest against the health-care plan that passed Congress last year." So we reached out to Nicholas for them and asked him how he feels about the congressmember representing his district. He interpreted Matthews' article far more positively than I did:

I'd say the Orlando Sentinel is spot-on. Adams' sponsorship of lame legislation and her voting record make it clear to Florida and America: she doesn't care about the environment, she does not want to invest in America, she doesn't believe in comprehensive universal healthcare as a basic human right. Sandy Adams is a real tea party dream.

Adams is an order taker for the radical right, along with Marco Rubio (R-FL), Daniel Webster (FL-8), Bill Posey (FL-15), Allen West (FL-20) and all the other 'all night' tea partiers. It's a way of life for them. Like Bernie Sanders, and others have pointed out-- for these kinds of representatives, it's the politics of Robin Hood in reverse: starve the poor to feed the rich."

Nicholas is running an entirely grassroots campaign. He isn't taking money from the kinds of special interest corporate PACs that have been financing Adams. If you can help out, every small donation helps him to get his message out. You can contribute here. Every contribution that comes in today with an additional .01 (one penny) gets an autographed CD by Middle States (Happy Fun Party) as a little happy fun thank you from DWT.

Games Without Frontiers-- A Guest Post By Nicholas Ruiz III And A Video By Peter Gabriel

Nicholas Ruiz ran for Congress in central Florida as a Green in 2010. This year he's running as a Democrat and he's been endorsed by Blue America. Here's another is a series of posts he's written for DWT that paint a picture of what kind of a congressman he'd be if he wins in 2012. Try imagining fewer like Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor and John Boehner and more like Nick Ruiz.

In the following, I aim to present some progressive ideas for America's future. Taking a deep look at our national commitments, we see that for too long our consideration of the vulnerable, that which is equitable, what might be just and conscientious-- are values that have fallen into neglect and disrepair.

I believe that we must first acknowledge that no social status is superior. No gender is superior. No race is superior. No sexual orientation is superior. No age is superior. No religion is superior. No ability, or disability, is superior. Legal equality is the foundation of democracy. Our laws must reflect such truths, and not trample upon the freedom and civil rights of our people. Our commonwealth must lift up all people.
 
Problems? We have more than a few; most of them caused by the callousness and undemocratic philosophy of the past thirty years, beginning with the carelessness of Ronald Reagan. Here’s how we mend them.
 
Social security-– raise FICA with no limit-– that’s how we pay for it. Lower the retirement eligibility age to 55. Open up the opportunity for a new influx of workers. Raise the social security benefit by 15-20%-- encourage people to retire sooner and enjoy the fruits of society’s labor. Society has a new, better future.
 
Universal healthcare-– national security starts with police, fire-– and health protection. Obamacare is not a dirty word. Let’s say Obamacare is the beginning, but certainly, not the end. It ends when everyone is comprehensively covered, universally, without exception. Just like the fire department and the police department cover everyone, without exception. We remember how to manage progressive taxation-– that’s part of the reason the boomtown 1950s were possible, there was a generous tax base from which to pay for government-– we reapply past lessons learned, and correct the mistake of Reagan’s fairy tale of ever increasing tax cuts that lead to nowhere over the rainbow. And runaway healthcare costs are controlled by regulation of the healthcare industry in the same sense that any municipality is regulated. Whether by single-payer or multi-payer, healthcare must be comprehensively and reasonably distributed, and prices must be more reflective of fundamental costs, as in the example of the healthcare systems employed by many of our international friends. Healthcare cannot be subject to rampant profiteering, any more than police or fire department services. That’s how we pay for it.
 
The minimum wage must be a livable wage: $15 per hour. Bubble profits for a tiny fraction of society ala capital gains, dividends, mergers and acquisitions, property and royalty income and so on-- reported via quarterly statements, quarter after quarter, year after year, while wages are artificially suppressed with regulatory restrictions that do not allow wages to rise according to the cost of living is tantamount to indentured servitude for Main Street. People make more-– corporations make less… that’s how we pay for it.
 
Wall Street owes Main Street. Not the other way around. We create a federal Public Trust. Every issuance of equities, commodities, debt instruments and so on-– delivers 10% of the float to the Public Trust, which federal traders trade for the people, long and short. Quarterly earnings now bring benefits for Wall Street and Main Street. Profits from the Public Trust are used to subsidize anything from healthcare to gas prices to green energy incentives. When gas prices go through the roof because oil futures hit $120 per barrel-- Main Street is entitled to some relief, no? The Public Trust will provide that relief. Wall Street must be Main Street’s partner, not its master. As the Wall Street economy and its service analogs represent an ever larger share of U.S. output, Main Street must be allowed to participate in that economy, not simply shuffled off via job-outsourcing and outright tax evasion by corporations.
 
War is a sponge that absorbs half of our tax revenue. Get out of Iraq. Get out of Afghanistan. Help Libya’s people, but don’t drop bombs on them. Cut the trillion dollar per year defense budget by 25%. The war industry must be better regulated. This is how we do it.
 
Workers have rights-– regardless of unions. We have to extend labor laws so that shared governance and collective bargaining are deemed basic civil rights. Union membership continues to plummet. They cannot hold the line alone. Why not? Because U.S. manufacturing infrastructure and labor are disappearing; the bedrock of union organizations, is disappearing. But U.S. service sectors are expanding. More and more, workers are employed in jobs that have zero union presence. Temporary and part-time work is becoming the norm. Workers must be protected with 21st century labor laws. Better wage laws that are tethered to the consumer price index, and better benefit and shared governance structures must be written into law. Workers must be protected whether or not they belong to a union.
 
America deserves a better future. This is simply part of how we get it done.
 
America is more than a corporation. America is more than its wealth. America is a concept. If you believe in it-– then fight for it.
 
Put a progressive Democrat in Congress.
 
In other words, that’s how we roll:

WRONG-- A Guest Post By Nicholas Ruiz III (D-FL)

Asleep at the wheel, the Reaganite zombies continue their stride toward the undemocratic past. They speak in the language of deregulation-- but only for narrow selfish interests.

The people, of course, they want regulated indeed. From stiff individual rules and fees for trade, bank, credit, insurance, health and investment accounts to the lowest minimum wage and rapidly decreasing civil rights and benefits in American moral history-- in the eyes of the conservatives, the people shall be, quite liberally, regulated-- while the philosophy of their conservatism shall apply, quite judiciously, to their own self interested, and pompously declared, pageantry and entitlements.

Emboldened by the complicit lack of Democratic resolve in resistance to the Republican attempt to deconstruct the collective solidarity of the American workforce, plutocratic interests in America are sharpening their blades for the only thing that stands between us and them-- the obligation of shared governance via collective bargaining between the working class and the self-proclaimed ruling class. There is nothing peaceful or diplomatic about their thrust. On the contrary, the Reaganites are doing everything in their power by taking the sword to the scaffolding of American democracy: shared governance. If they succeed, it will mark the greatest leap backward in a hundred years.

Americans may parry this attack. But we must not hesitate. The willing mindlessness of the Republicans to destroy shared governance must be met by the direct and steely clash of the strongest Democratic will and resolve.

Support truly progressive Democrats. Not careerists and opportunists, whom are unreliable, and are sure to bend like a reed in the wind to save their own hides.

FDR said in 1934: “Our frontiers of today are economic, not geographic. Our enemies today are the forces of privilege and greed within our own borders.” A near century later, that early truth is even truer today.

So the Reaganite zombies will stop at nothing to reduce America to a carnival of economic violence, via a cannibalistic hatred of shared governance, and the hypocrisy of selfish addictions, prejudices and special interest contradictions. The next moment they envision will be that of pure medieval filth: the working man and woman, drawn and quartered by economic horse and carriage. The end result being the creation of an American citizenship of docile bodies: citizens who are economic cogs in the wheels of financiers’ carriages, and whom have zero political power. How far are we from that place?

Considering the political sphere today, everyone acts surprised, but truly no one is; but the worse that it gets, no one will act surprised and everyone will be: surprised that America could get it so wrong.

America can never be dry-cleaned; it never was to clean to begin with. But to paraphrase something FDR said in 1936, we must purvey, and work to better, a government that lives in a spirit of charity, rather than tolerate the consistently crueler, omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference to the destiny of its citizens. Such is the difference between us and them.

The future is ours to take, America-- but it will require your strength, love and good conscience. Bring the light.

But for those in the Republican vehicle that is traveling backward in democratic time and space-- get out of the car:



***********************************************

Nicholas is running for the central Florida congressional seat (FL-24) currently held by teabagger Sandy Adams. He's the first candidate endorsed by Blue America for the 2012 cycle. As you can see from his post above, he doesn't think like a better version of an Inside the Beltway automoton. When he gets into Congress he's going to make quote an impression. If you'd like to give him a hand achieving that, you can do so here, at our Blue America page.

The Republican Rapture-- Guest Post By Nicholas Ruiz III

As you probably know, Nicholas Ruiz is the first congressional candidate endorsed by Blue America for the 2012 cycle. He's running against a right-wing fanatic and egregious hypocrite, Sandy Adams, in FL-24. Yesterday we looked at Jerrold Nadler's analysis of the GOP push to wreck the social safety net. Since the well-being of NASA, one of the victims of the GOP spending jihad, is so critical to the economic recovery in Broward County, the heart of FL-24, I asked Nicholas if Adams was at least going to stand up for her own constituents on this matter. I had a feeling I knew the answer. Nicholas' guest post:

Never mind that the Arctic Sea ice and arctic snow are at the lowest levels recorded-- ever. Never mind that the year 2010 (tied with 2005) was the hottest world year recorded-- ever. And the ten hottest years ever recorded-- have all occurred within the last ten years, or so.

This is a result of a process science reveals as global warming – and it’s why research of the phenomenon is justified, desirable, and deserving of continued, if not expanded funding. It’s also why we need to pursue solar power, wind power, and other avenues of green energy policy in order to reduce the usage of a potent contributor to global warming: fossil fuel.

Apparently, Republicans like Sandy Adams (FL-24) and Bill Posey (Fl-15) don’t believe in global warming. Sort of like the way Republican Darrell Issa (CA-49) may not believe in the EPA or the USDA. If he did, why the quest to deregulate the Earth, the Sun and the Moon? If they do, why would they try to defund NASA’s global warming research?

Adams in her recent press release of Feb. 8, 2011:

“…[I]t is imperative that we ask ourselves: What is the future of NASA? …it is time to refocus NASA’s mission towards space exploration…that is why I am encouraging Chairmen Rogers and Wolf to reduce funding for climate change research, which undercuts one of NASA’s primary and most important objectives of human spaceflight.”

In the same press release Posey says:

“NASA’s primary purpose is human space exploration and directing NASA funds to study global warming undermines our ability to maintain our competitive edge in human space flight.”

Nonsense. NASA is a leader in global warming research and space exploration. And that is why other federal agencies frequently collaborate with NASA on global warming research projects. Here is a link to NASA’s climate work.

There is no reason to believe that NASA’s climate work need come at the expense of its space work; in fact, the two go hand in hand. The visionary thinking that fuels NASA’s eyes on the Earth is of the same source that NASA utilizes to research space. Much of NASA’s satellite technology developed over the past few decades has helped to research myriad phenomena from global warming and El Niño to atmospheric aerosols to sea and ice levels, hurricanes and the effects of solar radiation.

In 2010, Howard Dean told ABC News:

“One of the most disturbing things about the Republican Party over the last couple of decades is that just they don’t believe in science any more. And that is not an approach that is likely to generate any kind of creative thinking. Or any serious thinking about the future. People that use a snowstorm as an example of why global warming doesn’t exist don’t understand the science and they just don’t care.”

In 2010, NASA spent less than 10% of its budget on global warming and climate change research. Hardly excessive. Why in the world would Republicans seek to strip it from NASA’s budget?

Because the less we know about global warming the better? Or perhaps, because according to a 2010 poll by the Pew Research Center, greater than 80% of Republicans don’t believe that human activity causes global warming. Astonishingly, of those that identify as Tea Party Republicans, 70% do not think the Earth is warming at all! But such is the state or experience of a Republican Party being carried away by overwhelming emotion and underwhelming logic. Call it the radicalization of the American right.

Think about that the next time you consider the ‘merits’ of Republicanism.

At any rate, we move forward, with or without them. If the Republicans are eager to defund NASA, or defund Social Security, or defund healthcare initiatives, and strip workers of jobs, wages, rights and dignity-- Democrats need not let them. And we won’t-- but we need your help. Support progressive Democrats.

Defunding NASA’s global warming research is not the answer to saving and reinvesting in America. And pitting NASA’s space exploration against its global warming research is a false choice that only serves to defund knowledge itself. The Republican quest to defund, deregulate, depress and distort truth and social justice, will truly only materialize an America defined by a hollow. And that is the hallmark of a politics and philosophy of decay.

There are plenty of ways to save and reinvest in America’s projects, from space exploration to social welfare-- like cutting corporate tax loopholes, and reenacting New Deal era progressive taxation, and raising the minimum wage while tethering it to the consumer price index, so that perhaps, not so many households would require two full-time workers to make ends meet.

Or I guess we could leave it all in Republican hands-- since they’ve done such a remarkable job with healthcare. But as we recently learned and were reminded of-- they don’t believe in that either:



UPDATE: The Public Balking At Drastic Budget Cuts

Brevard County hasn't been polled about the cuts to NASA Sandy Adams and Bill Posey are demanding. But a poll was just released by Pew that shows the public is against this drastic-- and wrong-headed-- approach to fiscal stability.

Conservatives are fighting amongst themselves about how deep spending cuts should be this year. But they seem blithely unaware that there is little public support for spending cuts, much less deep cuts... At some point you’d think conservatives would realize that they and the public are not on the same page when it comes to cutting government spending. But that would require looking beyond ideology to actual realities.

An out right majority or a plurality want to see increases in areas being targeted by Republicans, such as public education, veterans benefits, college financial aid, aid to the needy, healthcare. When it comes to scientific research 73% of Americans want it either increased or left alone. Only 23% agree with Adams and Posey that it should be cut. The numbers were exactly the same on energy funding.

Blue America Has A First Congressional Candidate For 2012-- Meet Nicholas Ruiz (D-FL)

Although Blue Dog honcho Heath Shuler and ex-Blue Dog DCCC honcho Steve Israel are running around Florida looking for conservative Democrats to run for the GOP-held congressional seats that were lost in November-- primarily by conservative Democrats-- Blue America is happy to offer a forum for a progressive Democrat who is already officially in the race against healthcare hypocrite Sandy Adams. This afternoon Digby, John and I will be live blogging with Nicholas Ruiz III, the first congressional candidate endorsed by the Blue America PAC for the 2012 cycle.

The session starts at 2pm (ET/11am on the West Coast). You may be aware that Nicholas ran as a Green Party write-in candidate in 2008. This time he's re-registered as a Democrat, but very much NOT of the conservative variety. If reactionary Republicans seek, for example, to push back the Social Security retirement age to 70 and conservative Democrats want to just slow that down or even keep in where it is, Nicholas has a completely different-- progressive-- approach: encouraging people to retire with dignity even earlier as a way to increase employment opportunities for younger people unable to find jobs. Blue America is very interested in the way he thinks through problems and comes up with out-of-the-box solutions that are not necessarily part of the agendas of either of the national political parties but, instead, benefit ordinary working families.

Yesterday Nicholas helped define the difference bwteen progressives and the transpartisan conservative coalition that's been running the show:

The Democrats used to be leaders on labor. What happened? Now they want to freeze government workers' wages. The Democrats used to be leaders on child welfare. Now Florida ranks 47th in child healthcare. But perhaps we can explain that-- Florida is governed mostly by Republicans and Republicrats. It goes to show you what happens when Democrats stop holding the line and retreat. The time has come for Democrats to live up to their name. FDR once said: "A conservative is a person with two perfectly good legs, who however, has never learned to walk forward." We're not conservatives-- we're Democrats, and by definition, we're progressive.

Last month when I asked him how he differed with the rabid anti-healthcare conservatives Suzanne Kosmas (D), who voted against the healthcare bill and was defeated because Democrats didn't come to the polls, and Sandy Adams (R) who just voted to repeal the bill-- even though she and her family get government-subsidized healthcare through his job as a circuit court judge he sent me this:

We must decide, once and for all, what sort of society defines America. We have already decided that law enforcement (i.e. the police department) is a guaranteed service for all, regardless of social or economic status. We have also decided that the fire department is a guaranteed service. Our society, rightfully so, honors both of these public features. They are freely available to all, regardless of the size of one's wallet.

Why should healthcare be any different?

Social justice in a lawful commonwealth of society demands that when a person is attacked or threatened by crime or fire, the public will come to his or her aid. And when a person is attacked or threatened by disease, should the public not do the same?

We already employ an integral non-profit, for profit and single payer scaffolding to provide healthcare services. There is no reason to believe that all of these systems may not continue to work side by side in a free society. However, it is difficult to imagine that we can continue to allow profiteering to masquerade as uncontrollable healthcare costs that must consume such a large piece of our national income. Costs will have to be controlled through regulation. What is most important now is to take that final step and declare universal access to comprehensive healthcare as a standard public service, in the same way that fire and police services are a social norm everywhere. When will America realize that it is her ethical, logical, common sense and spiritual duty to provide universal healthcare services to her people?

America must no longer accept the false narrative of scarcity and withholding when it comes to healthcare. Social justice demands that all of our people receive universal access to all of these vital basic services. It is no great nation that denies these basic human services to people. In fact, anything less is uncivilized.

By selecting Nicholas as our first endorsee, Blue America is putting the bar very high, much higher than we have ever done before. No more fooling around; let's put progressive Democrats in Congress. Please consider helping here.

Healthcare Hypocrites

Healthcare hypocrite Sandy Adams (R-FL) opposes healthcare for our families, but she and her family get subsidized government healthcare from her husband's government-funded plan for judges.

The plush taxpayer-subsidized congressional healthcare plans kick in tomorrow, February 1. Anti-healthcare fanatic Andy Harris (R-MD) will finally be able to stop whining about not having government-funded healthcare for himself and his family. Harris has become the posterchild for the healthcare hypocrites who won election by demonizing healthcare and then insisting he get it for himself and his family. He's far from a minority. In fact, only 15 Republicans-- every single one of whom voted to repeal healthcare for regular Americans-- have turned down the congressional healthcare plans for themselves. It's ironic that Harris -- who defeated Blue Dog Frank Kratovil 55-41% (one of only 39 Democrats to have voted against the historic healthcare reform bill on November 7, 2009)-- hasn't done anything noteworthy since coming to Washington except whine about not getting his healthcare fast enough.



But like we've been saying, virtually all the Republicans are on the same page as Harris, even if most of them are being less promiscuous about flaunting it. Watch the video Think Progress made about one Republican congressman after another admitting their families will get healthcare while their constituents' families shouldn't. One, Ron Paul, admitted it "could be" hypocritical of the GOP Members of Congress to take healthcare after voting to repeal it for the country.

So Blue America got together with our friends at Daily Kos, the Americans for America PAC and Americans United For Change and did some radio ads that feed into polling data that shows Americans are opposed to congressmembers who voted for repeal taking government-subsidized healthcare for themselves.

Only 33% think they should accept the health care they get for being a member of Congress while 53% think they should decline it and 15% have no opinion... Republicans and independents-- who put these folks in office in the first place-- strongly think they should refuse their government-provided health care. GOP voters hold that sentiment by a 58/28 margin and Indies do 56/27.

Blue America decided to highlight two Members of Congress whose Democratic opponents we support, Sandy Adams in central Florida and Leonard Lance in central New Jersey. Adams wriggled out of it by turning her congressional healthcare down, but she signed up for the healthcare her husband-- a circuit court judge with the government plan-- gets! Nicholas Ruiz is the Blue America-endorsed candidate running in FL-24 against the wily Adams. He penned a guest post, "Republican Anorexia Economica," for us before we found out that Adams had wormed her way out of the hypocrisy conundrum. Our candidate in New Jersey's 7th District against Lance, Ed Potosnak, also did a guest post, "Healthcare Is For Members Only, Members Of Congress That Is." We did radio ads for both districts, and we have been raising money, along with Daily Kos, to run some.

But there are literally dozens of Republican healthcare hypocrites to choose from. Last week the Charlotte News Observer had another sad story about one, freshman teabagger Renee Ellmers, who is married to a wealthy doctor and now makes $174,000 a year but was whining that she had to take government-subsidized healthcare, despite campaigning against it and despite voting to repeal it for her constituents (some of whom may make less than $174,000 a year), because living in DC is just so damn expensive.

“Unfortunately, being here in Washington is very expensive,” said Ellmers. “Yes we do have a salary and we do have benefits. It costs a lot of money to be here. I've signed on to the private plan, just like so many in America are on. The benefit is available to me. People need to understand out there it costs a lot money to be here in Congress.”

If you'd like to offer suggestions about which Members deserve to have ads like these run in their districts, Daily Kos has a page for that. Every single Republican voted to repeal the bill, as did 3 slimy Blue Dog hypocrites, Dan Boren (OK), Mike McIntyre (NC) and Mike Ross (AR), each of whom takes government healthcare, of course. That actually makes them even worse than the 15 Republicans who voted against it and aren't taking it-- Cory Gardner (CO), Mike Kelly (PA), Joe Walsh (IL), Sandy Adams (FL), Robert Dold (IL), Chris Gibson (NY), Paul Gosar (AZ), Frank Guinta (NH), Nan Hayworth (NY), Bill Johnson (OH), David McKinley (WV), Rich Nugent (FL), Scott Rigell (VA), Bobby Schilling (IL) and Daniel Webster (FL).

Last week, Blue Arkansas showed how this plays out in a red state filled with conservative hypocrites in office.

Despite their calls to repeal the Affordable Care Act, only fourteen Republicans in Congress have been willing to give up their taxpayer funded health insurance. And guess what. You won’t find the names Rick Crawford, Tim Griffin, Steve Womack, or Mike Ross for that matter on that list... There’s no excuse for politicians who want to take our health insurance away while living off the tax payer dole. If they want ours, give up their own. And that doesn’t just go for members of Congress, it goes for state politicians as well. After all, state legislators get a nice little health insurance packet, partially subsidised by you, me, and everyone else in Arkansas that puts money into the system. As such, we at Blue Arkansas are asking politicians like Rep. David Meeks and Rep. Denny Altes, the cosponsors of HB1053, the state version of ACA repeal, to give up their own tax payer funded health insurance. After all, if they’re going to ask us to sacrifice, shouldn’t they be doing the same?

No matter where you live, please consider voting for which healthcare hypocrites to target and consider helping out with the costs of running the radio spots. Here's the one we did for Leonard Lance in New Jersey:

Which Way Social Security-- And Which Way Democratic Party?

Standard polling that is capturing this moment in time shows Obama's re-election prospects looking very good. The only two prospective GOP candidates who even look plausible, Romney and Huckabee, are both down by 5%-- and Obama leads teabagger favorites Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann by 17% and 18% each, which would amount to the biggest landslide's in American history. But Fox has barely even begun to crank up their hate machine yet and Romney's vulture capital firm raped and pillaged billions of deployable dollars that will amount to something. And then there's Obama and the Democrats.

A week ago we looked at how one of the big third rails of American politics, Social Security, could work against Obama and even destroy the Democratic Party. Regardless of what clueless, well-heeled Inside-the-Beltway consultants and think tanks want to believe, for those of us in America, Social Security is still the most popular and beloved government program ever, even after 75 years of conservative attacks against it. I don't think Obama's reelection prospects would survive him getting on the anti-Social Security transpartisan bandwagon being floated by Inside-the-Beltway hacks like John Podesta of the ultra richly-funded Center for American Progress, Obama's anti-Social Security Cat Food Commission, and the equally suspect corporate shill outfit, Third Way.

Dan Froomkin was ringing the alarm bells for Obama at a column, Obama's Social Security Talk IS Turning Voters Off at the Huffington Post yesterday.

President Barack Obama's apparent willingness to consider cuts in Social Security benefits may be winning him points with Washington elites, but it's killing him with voters, who see the program as inviolate and may start to wonder what the Democratic Party stands for, if not for Social Security.

That's the conclusion of three top progressive pollsters who spoke to reporters Wednesday at a briefing sponsored by the Economic Policy Institute, the Century Foundation and Demos.

"For the public, cutting benefits is the problem, not the solution," said Guy Molyneux, a partner at Hart Research Associates.

As a result, the pollsters said that any Democrat seeking elected office in 2012 should be begging Obama not to say anything about Social Security cuts in his State of the Union address later this month.

A post-election poll by Celinda Lake's Lake Research Partners found that, by a margin of 3 percentage points, Americans now trust Republicans in Congress more than Democrats when it comes to Social Security-- surely the first time since the program became a signature issue for the Democratic Party in the 1930s.

The poll found confidence in Democrats on the issue dropping 14 points just since January 2007, accompanied by a 13-point increase for Republicans.

The public favors congressional Republicans over Obama on Social Security by an even larger 6-point margin. Obama's 26-percent rating is not only less than half Bill Clinton's (53 percent), it's even lower than that of George W. Bush (37 percent), whose proposal to privatize the program went down in flames.

It's hard to overstate how shocking this new dynamic is. In the two previous low points for Democrats-- June 1995 and April 2002-- Democrats still had a 10-point advantage on Social Security.

That the public would trust Republicans more on this issue was, until recently, inconceivable.

Inconceivable, but not non-exploitable by the Republicans. And while Inside-the-Beltway you find nothing but out-of-touch fat cats protecting their Guccis and Louboutins, the real fire for the middle class is as far as you can get from DC and the despised elites. In a run-up to the State of the Union, Amy Dean called on the President and all who care about the middle class to look outside of Washington for the real battleground and effective solutions to the economic crisis facing-- with apologies to Palin-- REAL AMERICANS, who wear neither Guccis nor Louboutins. And, she writes, another campaign slogan from 2008, "Hope," is not enough this time. "Presidential speeches and the hoped for newly moderated rhetoric of the Congress will not suffice to deliver results. Because while we are focused on Washington, Republicans backed by big business interests are undertaking a coordinated attack, rooted at the state level, on middle class employees. This attack could bring the end of the middle class as we have known it."  

Republican legislatures in ten states across the country are pushing "right to work" laws that undermine the ability of employees who vote to join a union to have their choice respected. And even some states with Democratic governors are less focused on creating jobs than adopting measures that scapegoat those in the middle for economic problems caused by those at the top. The Republicans have been very smart tactically by framing the debate around these issues. We can only hope that people will not fall for their misdirection.
 
At the national level, Republicans will be talking about reducing the deficit and controlling spending. Their arguments are more about rhetoric than real action. Not only do their proposals stand little chance of being enacted, they are two-faced: even while talking about budget cuts, Republicans advocate huge tax cuts for the wealthy and seek to repeal the cost-saving measures and patient protections of healthcare reform. In truth, their still-heated rhetoric is primarily designed to give Republicans a message to take back into the districts in the next election cycle. We already know what they will be saying in six months or a year: "We tried to save you money, but the Democrats won't let us." The time to start responding to this disingenuous narrative is now.
 
We must recognize that the national posturing is a smoke screen designed to conceal the real battle, which is happening in the states.
 
At this very moment, conservatives are prepared with a scapegoat for the economic woes: unions and public employees. They have been very shrewd in using this time of crisis as an opportunity to drive a stake through the heart of the very organizations that have created the American middle class.
 
Masquerading their proposals as efforts to liberate working people from the yoke of big government, the right is attempting to systematically undermine the institutions that have historically allowed average people to attain a decent standard of living. Rather than seeking to bring everyone up to the standard of living wages and relative economic security that public employees have gained, Republicans are focused on bringing down those few people in our society who still have jobs that afford ordinary people hopes for health care and dignified retirement.
 
As a result, the campaign for the future of our country is now on. This is not about something as narrow as reelecting Barack Obama in 2012, or about the political future of any individual elected official. It is much bigger than that. We are in the fight of our lives.
 
So what do we do?
 
First, we can't focus all of our time and resources on the Congressional debate. The proposals being floated by the Republican House of Representatives make for good grandstanding, but, by and large, they stand no chance of actually being enacted. They are just being used to set the stage for the next election cycle. Therefore, we need to be building our own infrastructure in the districts, not treating local- and state-level politics as something that we can engage in for a few months at the end of each election cycle. We need to begin our conversation with voters in the districts today.
 
Second, we must make clear that initiatives like wage freezes and "right to work" laws are measures that are handcrafted by the Chamber of Commerce's lobbyists. Big business is pumping huge amounts of money into the effort to attack public employees and scale back regulations, with billionaires like the Koch brothers leading the way. That is who is really behind these drives. The extent to which the right is able to frame their message as a populist one is a measure of our failure to reveal the wealthy financiers backing their agenda.
 
Republicans frame their proposals as policies that will "get government and unions off your back." But what is actually being created as a result? Time and time again, these policies have not led to "trickle-down" prosperity, but have taken away gains made by average Americans and given them to corporations and those at the very top. By showing the interests that stand behind each side, we must demonstrate who is really the best advocate for Main Street.
 
Third, we draw a line in the sand with politicians-- and demand that the president lead the way in recognizing the crisis of the middle class. Whether they have a "D" behind their name or not, politicians should not receive one penny from progressives unless they are for increasing standards of living for average people and defending their rights to organize. Unfortunately, since the Clinton years, we have elected leaders who are taking our campaign money on one day and then distancing themselves from employees' organizations and public interest groups the next. These politicians must see that this will no longer fly. They must understand that Main Street is in a fight for its life, and they must act accordingly.
 
In America, the pot of rampant individualism and neglect of community has been roiling at a low boil for a long time. Ultimately, we must ask as a society: Do we want to be a place where the fire department comes if we have a fire in our homes? Is this a country where you can get care when you're sick, even if you're elderly or lose your job? Is America a place where, regardless of the town or neighborhood you live in, you can send your kids to a decent public school, with qualified professionals teaching our kids? Such things are the reason we agree to pay taxes and contribute to the common good.
 
At the end of the day, dismantling the government and attacking public servants means undoing these things. The President will articulate his vision in this fight on Tuesday and is even backing up words with actions like the NRLB’s steps to protect organizing via majority sign-up. It’s outside of Washington where we face the eliminations of people’s ability to voluntarily come together in their workplace to have a say in the conditions of their employment. That would mean creating a country that has a huge gulf between the wealthy and everybody else. It means ending middle class America as we have known it. And that is not something we should let happen without a fight.

Blue America is high on a new, progressive young leader running for Congress in Florida's 24th congressional district, Nicholas Ruiz, who we highlighted yesterday in the debate over repealing healthcare reform. On his campaign website, Nicholas introduces himself by defining what progressive politics is all about at this juncture in time:

The Republican sweep of the U.S. House of Representatives in 2010 is confirmation that the Democratic Party is at a crossroads. The Democratic electorate, uninspired by non-progressive
Democratic candidates and officials, did not show up at the polls in sufficient numbers to support them, and retain a Democratic majority in the U.S. House. Citizens that believe in a progressive agenda, are losing their enthusiasm for Democratic leaders, because too many of these leaders think and act more like the other side each day.


Progressives have to look forward. Almost everyone I met on the campaign trail that supported my platform and views-- identified themselves as a "Democrat." There is a huge independently progressive and Democratic constituency that is not being adequately represented by the Democratic Party as it stands today. Constituents on the Left are hungry for the real thing.

And his idea of the real thing is not a conservative agenda being espoused by Obama and a reactionary agenda being espoused by the Republicans and the Tea Party. Nicholas, much the way Alan Grayson did in a neighboring central Florida district, is looking outside the box for solutions to the basic problems and for directions our country needs to move. Watch this debate video from when he ran on the Green Party line. Because he's correct-- Social Security benefits need to be increased, not decreased and not kept the same, for the country to move forward. Retirement age needs to be lowered, not raised. What should be raised, are our voices, for progressive leadership. And if you like what you hear... Nicholas Ruiz is Blue America's first endorsed congressional candidate of the 2012 cycle.



UPDATE: Yes, There's A Progressive Way To Address Social Security As A Postive

I was just on the phone with Nick Ruiz. This was what he told me:

"The Social Security debacle is the perfect example of 21st century political difference in America-- the Republicans want to perpetrate a social crisis, where there is not one. The Democrats are the party of the people-- it is imperative that we remind ourselves that we have the vision to make social justice stand. It's simple: we remove the wage cap, and/or subject capital gains to a bit of FICA withholding, and/or subject property income to a bit of FICA withholding, or perhaps a bit of all three. There are other ways to get this done. It's more a matter of Republicans wrongly advocating the methodical destruction of a vital component of the U.S. Social Safety Net, whereas Democrats must work to sustain and further develop the Democratic legacy of widespread generational progress."