Monday, October 8, 2012

Romney & Ryan: A Former Republican's Perspective


I received the following today in an email from a friend.  It was written by a mutual acquaintance who lays out in detail why he believes the Romney/Ryan ticket is a bad choice.  The case he puts forth is well-reasoned and heart-felt.

My views on the vote this November:
Since nearly every other phone call these days involves an organization wanting to know how I am going to vote this fall, I decided to put the rationale for my answers in writing and, even though you didn’t ask for it, share it with you to encourage you to develop your personal rationale for however you plan to vote.  As most of you know, I once considered myself a Republican. I was even officially registered as a Republican as recently as 2000, although I increasingly voted for non-Republicans. But I have not found a Republican at any level that I could support since George W. Bush and Carl Rove sabotaged John McCain in the 2000 primary. I’ve concluded that the “new” Republican Party has totally departed from its Lincoln/Eisenhower roots, and I’m not going to follow. Although President Obama is not a perfect leader, he far surpasses his present opponent. In fact, I fear for our country if Romney and Ryan (the 2Rs) should win this election. I have the same view of current Republican senate and congressional candidates. So the reasons why I will vote for Obama and the Democratic slate – and why I will probably not return to the Republican Party as long as I live – follow below:

International relations: The 2 Rs have absolutely no experience in dealing with foreign governments. Romney demonstrated his diplomatic ineptitude in spades during his overseas trip this summer. Romney was in London four days before we arrived there this July. Every British newspaper except one voiced their view that it was incredulous that Romney had been selected as a presidential nominee. Even more important in my opinion is that Romney is of the persuasion that military might is the solution to many of the world’s problems – although he has vacillated on specifics with astonishing frequency. As one who spent two long years in Vietnam and has studied the wars of the past, my view is that all of the wars in which we participated since the Korean conflict could have been avoided if those in our administration had spent the time and effort up front to understand the culture of the countries we eventually decided to fight in, and had acted appropriately on that knowledge. Apparently Romney would skip that step.

Debt: Obama is currently being blamed for increasing the national debt. In fact, Republican administrations have a much worse record at piling up debt – and, in their case, totally without reason. In Obama’s case, at least, there were reasons. The vast majority of economists agree that his $840 billion stimulus (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) saved 2.5 million jobs, boosted the economy by 3.8%, protected the most vulnerable, kept one million in their homes, and kept seven million from falling below the poverty line. Reagan decided to cut taxes to grow the economy – sounds familiar doesn’t it? The national debt tripled under Reagan. George Bush senior added another third to the debt. His son, George W. Bush didn’t learn from their experience; he cut taxes again, passed Medicare Part D, and fought two wars, both poorly conceived, and both very costly in lives and treasure. He took these three actions with no attempt to cover the costs. The debt redoubled due to G. W. Bush’s misguided actions. And, because of his failure to pay attention to the factors that were destroying our economy during his watch, he caused the extremely severe recession that Republican politicians tell us Obama should have taken care of by now. To say the least, the U.S. budget situation has deteriorated significantly since January 2001, (at the end of Clinton’s presidency) when the Congressional Budget Office forecast average annual surpluses of approximately $850 billion from 2009–2012. Eight years later, as of June 2009, the average deficit in each of these years was projected to be approximately $1.215 trillion! A reliable analysis of this roughly $2 trillion "swing", separating the causes into four major categories along with their share, produced this result:
• Recessions or the business cycle (37%) [primarily, in my personal opinion, caused by Bush’s tendency to deregulate and to ignore the economic trend until too late];
• Policies directly enacted by President Bush (33%);
• Policies enacted by President Bush and supported or extended by President Obama, including the reduced tax rates (20%);
• New policies from President Obama including the stimulus and his additional tax cuts (10%).
Unfortunately, the 2Rs would add steroids to the Reagan/Bush strategy that was the main cause of this disaster.

Taxes: Cutting taxes is the battle cry of nearly all Republicans seeking office. This in spite of the fact that, under Obama, the effective Federal tax rates have been lower than under Reagan and in spite of the fact that the U.S. collects less in taxes as a share of the economy than every other industrial country except Chile and Mexico! And, as is apparent from the data above, cutting taxes only leads to an increase in the national debt, not an improved economy. In fact, the best economic activity in recent years was when President Clinton raised taxes. Clinton also provided some budgets with surpluses. As a result of our unreasonable fear of taxes, we spend much less to help the vulnerable than other countries and, to deal with one of my professional frustrations, have caused our once-enviable infrastructure to fall apart through neglect. Addressing the latter, America’s infrastructure has decayed to the point where the American Society of Civil Engineers gives its condition a grade of D. ASCE has repeatedly raised the alarm that decisive action is necessary to immediately invest more than $2.2 trillion dollars in repairs and upgrading to bridges, roads, rail, airports, dams, inland waterways and levies, treatment plants, schools, and utilities before it is too late. The more we delay, the more each repair will cost. At our present insufficient rate of reinvestment, the backlog of public infrastructure deferred maintenance increases $100 billion/year. Yet we have people like Sheldon Adelson, the conservative billionaire Las Vegas casino owner, now intent on plowing $100 million of his money into supporting the 2Rs in the current campaign. Why? Just because under their ill-defined “economic plan” Adelson would expect to save $2 billion in taxes! Apparently the current crop of Republican politicians and their supporters want to return to the pioneer/frontier days before the government provided essential public facilities like roads, bridges, sewage treatment plants, etc. I don’t.

Jobs:  As you know, Republican administrations have been in power for 28 of the years since 1960, Democrats for 24. The Republicans, with all their talk about creating jobs by reducing taxes and government regulations, created 24 million private sector jobs. Under Democratic administrations, 42 million private sector jobs were created, over twice as many/year. They were created because there are essential roles for government to play in stimulating job growth including funding research and education. Norway understands this. Their unemployment rate is currently 2.7% (1.3% in Telemark where Eric lives!).

Climate Change: Apparently most Republican politicians have signed a pledge to refuse to acknowledge climate change just as they have signed the pledge not to raise taxes. They deny the fact that we are causing the temperature of our planet to rise and therefore refuse to do anything about it. The National Academy of Sciences produced a report 33 years ago stating that there was no doubt that increased carbon dioxide levels would lead to an increase in average global temperature. Since then the evidence has been accumulating: The average Arctic temperature has increased 4ºF in the last 30 years. The rate of rise will increase even more rapidly now since there is much less ice in the summer (the absolute lowest amount remaining occurred early this month, 24%, which is 60% of the amount in the 1980s), causing the sun’s heat to be absorbed over a much greater area. The warming effect causes the jet stream to meander further north and south than normal, causing extremes in temperature. Greenland’s ice sheet is decreasing rapidly. Ice core samples collected from Greenland’s glaciers show the chemical makeup of the atmosphere for thousands of years; the conclusion is that what is going on now has no precedent. As of last year, the 13 hottest years (globally) since 1850 have occurred in the last 15 years. In the U.S., this July was the hottest ever. And much of the U.S. is beginning to see the extremes in weather that have been predicted as a by-product of global warming – drought, floods, and an increase in damaging winds. But Republican politicians have decided that they will ignore science as well as sound economics in order to, they think, improve their chance of election.

Medical Care: Although the Affordable Care Act is deeply flawed and falls far short of the benefits and cost savings of a single payer system, it begins to eliminate some of the abuses by insurance companies, covers many of the uninsured, caps some of the outrageous overhead and profit margins of insurance companies, and, despite what the Republicans claim, should, if fully implemented, reduce costs from what they would be if it didn’t exist. Romney promises to eliminate this act to satisfy the Tea Party, even though he invented the concept. A single payer system would likely provide care for all at a much lower cost than this act. Our present health system costs 17% of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product. Taiwan, whose government studied all existing models, chose a single payer system covering everyone, much like Medicare does for U.S. seniors; Taiwan’s system costs 7% of its GDP, much less than half of ours. Yet Republican politicians claim a single payer system would cost too much, so their opposition prevented the United States from the chance to achieve real health care reform. By the way, military retirees over 65 and their families, like Karen and I, are essentially covered by a single payer system and, based on our experience (which, in our case, does not involve care at any government facility), works nearly perfectly. But we will never see real reform under a Romney administration.

Help for the less fortunate: Christ cared for the poor, the sick and the vulnerable; he taught us to do the same. Obama has tried to provide relief for these and has succeeded to a limited extent, in spite of fierce opposition from Republican congressmen. Romney and especially Ryan (who had required his staff to read the literature of Ayn Rand, an atheist who argued that selfishness is a virtue and the poor are a drag on society) actively solicit the vote of Christians, but their words, proposed policies, and actions are in total opposition to what Christ taught. Amazingly, some still question Obama’s commitment to Christ. I suggest we judge that commitment by policies and actions. Those of Romney and Ryan totally fail the test.

These are just a few of the reasons I have lost faith in the present Republican Party. As is probably apparent, I would have to see a lot of change before I would trust them to guide our nation or state again.

Jim Christenson
September 2012

Sunday, September 9, 2012

Lessons from the Republican Party's Convention


Here’s what I learned from the Republican National Convention: A candidate can tell one lie after another about his opponent’s record and fellow Republicans will still claim he’s a man of integrity.  Their “winning strategy” – repeat the lies until they are accepted as true.

Lessons from the Republican Party Platform:
• There are self-defined “makers” (the 1%) and they’ve got theirs; the rest of us are “takers” and we’ll be on our own with only a shredded safety net.
• Our children and grandchildren will have to rely on a Medicare substitute with no guarantee they’ll be able to afford the health care coverage they need.
• Reducing the national debt is a priority; but only if the already-wealthy get to keep their privileged tax status and the military budget is off-limits to cuts.
• Prosperity is for the super-rich and their children. The rest of us can expect to shoulder more of the cost of needed infrastructure and services and be content with whatever wage increases happen to trickle down.
• The interests of big energy companies trump our need for clean air and water.
• Freedom of religion is only for those whose beliefs are the same as those of certain Republican fundamentalists.
• All women must be controlled. Women are incapable of making moral choices on their own.  A fertilized egg is to be acknowledged as a person with rights, but the woman involved doesn’t count.
• A good education is for the privileged few; public education should be left to rot and teachers are the enemy.
• It’s okay if tens of thousands in America, most of them children, go without food and shelter, as long as not a single one of “those undeserving people” gets help from a government program.
• Only a few people are welcome to come to America – the ones who have the skills big corporations are looking for and have the “right” skin color.

Perhaps candidate Romney’s views differ a bit from some of what’s in his Party’s platform, but a Republican Congress would make him fall in line.

The Democratic National Convention provided a clear contrast, as speaker after speaker explained why, as noted in the automobile analogy used by former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, "D" stands for moving America forward and "R" means going in reverse.



Thursday, August 30, 2012

Local Candidate Driskell - Hard to Smear, but Her Opponent Will Try


If you are in the 52nd State House District or are interested in seeing Saline Mayor Gretchen Driskell defeat Republican MarkOuimet and regain that historically-Democratic seat for the Democrats and retake the House, you'll want of read this interview by Chris Savage at Eclectablog.


Please consider sharing it with others. We need to defeat Mark Ouimet and help switch the State House back to a Democratic majority.


Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Republicans and the US National Debt

Today, as I was thinking about what little attention is being paid to the effect that two "off the books" wars and the absence of any requirement that the super-rich pitch in to pay for them has had on the national debt, I came a post on the topic by Kevin Drum at Mother Jones.

Here's the link: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/08/republicans-are-responsible-our-soaring-national-debt

Drum reminded me that the Bush-era tax cuts are the biggest contributor to the debt.  To quote him on the role of the Republicans:
Nearly every single thing driving the current increase in public debt — tax cuts, wars, the recession, and measures to fight the recession — was a result of Bush-era policies that were enthusiastically supported by nearly every single Republican currently hanging out in Tampa (at the Republican National Convention). They only got religion after a Democrat won the White House and had to clean up the mess they left behind.
Take a careful look at the Ryan Budget to see how it fails to address the above and instead shifts the burden of reducing the debt to those of us in the 99%.

Friday, August 17, 2012

Does the Back & Forth on Medicare Give You a Headache?

The current debate about the future of Medicare is often reduced to sound bites.  Here are a couple of recent blog posts that might help Involved Voters dig a bit deeper.

From Ed Kilgore at Washington Monthly's Political Animal Blog: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2012_08/waldman_boils_it_all_down_on_m039279.php

From Kevin Drum at Mother Jones: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/08/programming-note-ryan-2013-not-ryan-2012

So, what is government's role when it comes to ensuring access to health and stemming the growth of health care costs?  And what's the value that for-profit insurance companies add?

Wednesday, August 1, 2012

Republicans United in Preserving Tax Cuts for the Super-Rich Despite Increasing the Deficit

Today, House Republicans united to pass legislation extending all of the Bush tax cuts for one year, defeating along the way a Democratic proposal to allow Bush tax cuts benefiting only the wealthiest two percent of earners to expire.

If it seems unbelievable that Republicans would ignore the deficit and hold extension of the tax breaks for middle income people hostage, try to wrap your head around what Mitt Romney is proposing.  Blogger Kevin Drum's analysis can be found here: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/08/mitt-romneys-plan-screw-middle-class  Are Republicans thinking that we won't believe they'd increase the tax burden on middle income Americans to off-set the cost of tax breaks for the super-rich?

From the Congressional Research Service, July 18, 2012:
Compared with permanently extending all of the Bush tax cuts (with more than $7,000 billion in total deficits), (the Obama Administration's) proposal is projected to increase tax revenues by $312 billion over five years and by $789 billion over 10 years. The 10-year reduction in estimated debt service is $140 billion. In total, (the Obama Administration's) proposal could reduce budget deficits by $931 billion over 10 years.
The Obama Administration has proposed to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire at the end of 2012 for high-income taxpayers (single taxpayers with income more than $200,000 and married taxpayers with income more than $250,000—the richest 2% of taxpayers) and permanently extend the tax cuts for other taxpayers (the middle-income tax cuts). The specific proposals are to reinstate the 39.6% tax rate, reinstate the 36% tax rate for high-income taxpayers, reinstate PEP (personal exemption phase-out) and Pease (another phase out) for high-income taxpayers , and increase the long-term capital gains and qualified dividend tax rate to 20% for high-income taxpayers.