Senate Reconciliation Now!

The Republican obstructionism on the health care reform agenda is not "principled objections" as Senate minority leader Eric Cantor suggests. It is non-principled, pure nihilistic policy of poisoning the well and deception on behalf of conservatives.

The liberal majority that elected Democrats to office in 2008 has spoken.

The Public Option must survive in a final health care bill, and the process of reconciliation between House and Senate bills is the only avenue by which Democratic representatives can claim to have made any "meaningful reform" come reelection time.

Make it clear that this will not go away, and we the liberal progressives will not be silent.

This push did not come from the White House, or the Progressive Caucus, or from the desk of Sen. Harry Reid. This push for a strong public option through reconciliation came from the people who understand that health care is a moral issue, not merely a budgetary issue.

Both President Obama and Senator Reid remain open to the pursuit of Senate reconciliation, but I believe it important to state that this in itself is the "failure to sell health care reform to the American people" I spoke of before.

Instead, we will have to make perfectly clear that the public option must go forward and does not continue to be the "public optional."

Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) announced on Friday afternoon that he would work with other Democrats and the White House to pass a public option through reconciliation if that's the legislative path the party chooses.

The party has spoken. The ball is their court now in congress, but we must not allow this to fade into the night.

Just as Paul Krugman recently closed an op-ed with, "Health Care Reform Now!" I would say the as he except in different words given the changing of the situation but holding the same meaning:

Senate Reconciliation Now!

Open Letter to Harry Reid (Public Option)

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

Firedoglake has a section entitled "FDL Action" in which I found an easy way to send Senator Harry Reid a little bit of my mind on the health care debate & the matter of the need for a government-run public option intact:

I doubt this message will reach you Senator Reid but it is important to impress that I support reconciliation not as a matter of due course but as pertaining to the current circumstances. The Republican filibuster must not be allowed to further mire the process and they surely intend to continue to pander to anti-government fears using misinformation tactics.

Reconciliation is needed, we cannot proceed without a public option.

Join in the cause to fight for reconciliation!

Also please join with me & Public Option Please (POP) in getting out the word that we need comprehensive health care reform in the U.S.

==========================================================

reconciliation: a legislative process of the United States Senate intended to allow a contentious budget bill to be considered without being subject to filibuster.

filibuster: a form of obstruction in a legislature or other decision-making body whereby one attempts to delay or entirely prevent a vote on a proposal by extending a debate on that proposal.

Too Much For One President?

Under my understanding of American civics current President Obama is by no means taking on more than is possibly sustainable, in terms of policy changes and economic recovery efforts.

In fact in my estimation he has, in regards to national security and financial stability, done exactly what was and is needed to ensure success in our efforts to revive this bankrupt economy.

The issue of undertaking 'too much' comes primarily from the right wing. Though others may question the wisdom of taking on so many issues at once as wise it is exclusively the right wing that declares this unsound policy.

The concept of 'political capital' is primary in understanding the recent actions of President Obama in his first two months in office. Political capital does not remain in any politician’s favor for long.

The willingness to address major issues like Embryonic Stem Cell Research, Enhanced Interrogation and vigorous fiscal stimulus only prove to those who grasp civics that the President intends in make good on the many campaign promises made to voters like myself.

While many more issues abound, and ultimately I am one who says that Obama is not doing enough, the raw fact remains that the current administration is showing a genuine interest in fulfilling the will of the people beyond simply nationalist fever or populist outrage but to rather try and reach attainable goals in our time.

Eric Lightborn

http://americapress.wordpress.com/

March 29th 2009

The R-Word

Recession; In the span of no more a few months the word is now ‘fair game’ in America.

An American Recession, no less. After only a handful months these two words can be freely connected in advertisements and in public media formats.

This after a time in which any Democrat or liberal spoke of a coming recession they were dismissed as ‘kooks’ and ‘doomsayers.’

I was one of those ’doomsayers.’ And I was right. 

While the prevailing wisdom is to downplay a sick economy and a weak dollar I do not believe this to be the correct course of action.

If the economy is sick, we should know about it.

If the dollar is about to drop, we should know about it.

If a stock is about to devalue, we should know about it.

And on, and on.

I believe that one of the reasons we have suffered this recession is due to this very mentality combining with the ‘greed is good’ mentality.

A broadcaster, a stock quote broker, a banker or an economic journalist has no benefit to being truthful to their audience and every benefit to simply remaining mute. Or worse yet, talking up a business, stock or concept that they know to be unsound.

The idea that saying into a camera or many media outlet the raw truth of the economy as being a detriment to that economy is false.

The investors and consumers need to be able to make informed decisions. If those trusted to give honest and credible advise are proven to simply communicate in a ’one answer only’ situation then the reality of market hazards remain the sole property of those already succeeding in market endeavors.

Leaving us, the common people, out in the rain.

Caps-Lock Engaged America

“populist outcry”

“socialist agenda”

“economic outrage”

We are hear these words connected in the Big Buzz of the Media, lately.

We live in a state of economic chaos. Right now, today.

As an internet-blogger I call this state we exist in “Caps-Lock Engaged America.”

My need to translate everything into internet terminology is no doubt why I prefer this way of describing the current state of affairs in America.

These pundits and talk show hosts of the right wing seek to drum up fear in the public, nothing more.

In the absence of logical arguments they simply wish their audiences to suspend all logic and proceed to believe in conspiracies.

The left wing is busying itself with AIG-Hate while shunning these new Populists as madmen and radicals. We are neither.

These are the very same kind of ‘madmen’ and ‘radicals’ who helped to form the Democratic Party of our day, but I digress.

There is no shame in being upset. But direct your anger.

President George W. Bush spent this country broke as if it was his personal play-thing to abuse and mistreat as he would.

One of the primary functions of a President of the United States of America is to be a Steward of the American Economy.

The previous President not only failed in this, he failed so miserably that his actions in this area specifically are in fact criminal.

President Bush had an obligation to use his position to inform America of the coming recession. Yet he joined in the chorus of conservatives who claimed all was well in the economic seas.

The ’proper’ blame doesn’t stop there.

The major leaders of financial institutions, those chairing relevant boards and countless figures in the media all failed in this exact same respect.

These individuals had a duty to the American public to inform them of an impending crisis that would directly effect their home life and personal budget.

These individuals knowingly withheld information from investors and consumers in a clear effort to destroy any chances we had at mitigating the coming storm.

Some moved funds into bonds instead of stocks. Some transferred funds into foreign currencies. Some bought precious metal portfolios.

But many more simply did not know or would not listen to those like myself who warned of this coming American Recession.

The Markets and You

I cannot stress enough that each American can take easy steps to help our nation in tough times.

Many believe that spending the stimulus package funds exclusively on American products and services will serve to boost our markets more directly.

This may be true, but the bottom line is that using the funds along with savings to make wise investments or spending the money in American retailers and outlets is the only method by which any future packages would show any results.

Informing yourself on not only the best prices on the products you enjoy but which major retailers, energy companies and industries are of the best interest to our nation can lead not only to more stable markets but a greater degree of national security.

Economic strength and stability provides the higher quality intelligence services and personnel staying within the American interests.

For an informed American to claim they have their end of the economy handled in share, they would do well to understand a concept rarely addressed in any media format. The overall strength and robustness of any economy comes not from what is tracked as the DOW JONES or other market averages but rather within the actual number of jobs produced and inherent to that economy.

Also understanding that you are indeed putting real assets into the market by paying bills, or with a highly modest fiscal investment, and need not make rash expensive purchases or risky investments to help build the economy up. In fact such actions may further degrade the once monolithic American markets.

Building a smart economy from the ground up is not outside the ability of any single American to help contribute towards.

Starting a small business, taking on a second or third job and hiring on more staffers to an existing business are not easy options for most Americans in the recession of 2008.

Nonetheless, these three options pose the greatest chance of enhancing the American economy in a very real way in days to come.

The last aspect of the market discussions in American newsmedia that is mainly unaddressed, is that each President cannot be held as strongly in referendum over the number of jobs created or lost under their Presidency as to the issue of the national budget or foreign policy affairs.

Job loss, or creation, is a vital element of reviewing how well any President has governed over the United States of America but an epidemic of job loss, or explosion of jobs, could occur well outside the powers of office and at any time.

It is not to say that actions in office cannot hamper or stimulate job creation but rather that each job market is wholly unique.

Eric Lightborn
http://americapress.wordpress.com
December 20th 2008

Lobbys, Lobbyists and Interest Groups

“One study of eighty-three (primarily liberal) public-interest groups found that one-third of them received half or more of all their funds from foundation grants; one-tenth received over 90 percent from such sources. In one ten year period the Ford Foundation alone contributed about $21 million to liberal public-interest groups. Many of these organizations were law firms that, other than staff members, had no members at all. The Environmental Defense Fund is supported almost entirely by grants from foundations such as the Rockefeller Family Fund. The more conservative Scaife foundations gave $1.8 million to a conservative public-interest group, the National Legal Center for the Public Interest.” [Wilson, DiIulio 2008]

The concept of using public interest groups to promote the agendas and ideals of a movement is, by this source, not exclusive to the liberal movement but heavily favored by it thus far.

President-elect Barack Obama may ultimately isolate himself from major liberal movement members if the proposed audit of Washington politics were to take a lasting toll on the liberal lobbies. The next four years will certainly answer just how far this coming administration is willing to go to remove corruption in public interest group finance and practice, but four years from now there will also once again be a national referendum on the highest office.

Should the effort ultimately take power from once strong lobbies for popular liberal agendas, the informed American Democratic Voter could potentially face a struggle at the polls when considering a vote for the incumbent President.

The power of an interest-group, in a classic design, should expand as the number of members and contributors expands. The ‘funded & unoccupied lobby’ described in quote above as a law firm is a critical element of what causes the real disruptions in Washington politics.

The figures and organizations that form the American lobbies and public-interest groups of today are not necessarily the root of the problem so much as the agendas of the highest funded public interest groups overriding the highest agendas of the wills of the people.

--

If the National Legal Center for the Public Interest (a weak lobby) were to receive a large increase in both number of members and in contributions. they should rightly increase in the voice and recognition in Washington and receive foundation grants in turn.

If the Environmental Defense Fund (a strong lobby) were to lose both member and public support their voice as a lobby should rightly decrease and even though they do not receive a majority in foundation grants they should be kept from taking them if they lacked any significant support in the public domain.

This is all within a classic definition of how the public interest groups should work. Any number of factors can increase or decrease the power of a single lobby and for this reason most of us limit our discussion on public-interest groups, or lobbies, to the number of members that are well-known or outspoken and the money behind the group.

--

Lobbyists are not are always motivated by ill or by good, despite the fact the lobby they work for is focused on a critical social issue or an important national matter that concerns you--or perhaps for a group with which you disagree strongly.

To speak broadly, they are like salesmen of political stances a person in Washington should take.

They are not invested into the case they are making in every single case but rather deliver the best argument in favor of the lobby that they can devise.

Politicians and lobbyists are very much the same, in many ways.

Without means to search the hearts of others to know for sure if they really believe what they contend or if they are simply going with the popular ideology to gain your favor, we will never know for certain if they stand for the people or if they stand for their own private interests.
We can only judge their actions in office as solid statements of policy.




Eric Lightborn

http://americapress.wordpress.com/

December 2008