Mr. President, let me begin by saying what could come as a surprise to some of my colleagues. Personally, I like Jim Nussle. We came to Washington together and I worked with him for 16 years in the House of Representatives. He's smart. He is passionate.
Now, some of my colleagues may say ask, well if you like Mr. Nussle, and you believe that he is smart and passionate, why are you so opposed to his nomination?
That is a very fair question. Let me give you an answer.
Mr. President, my strong opposition to Jim Nussle becoming Director of the Office of Management and Budget has much less to do with Mr. Nussle and much more to do with the current failed trickle-down economic policies of the Bush Administration. The problem is that the president and his advisors have become increasingly isolated and out of touch with the economic realities facing ordinary Americans. While the middle class continues to shrink, poverty is increasing, the gap between the rich and everyone else is growing wider and wider, and millions of Americans are working longer hours for lower wages, President Bush continues to tell the American people how great the economy is doing.
Year after year after year, the President, Members of his Administration and his advisors, have sounded like a broken record on the economy. They have told the American people over and over again that the economy is "strong and getting stronger,"- the economy is "thriving,"- the economy is "robust,"- the economy is "vibrant."- The economy is "solid,"- the economy is "booming,"- the economy is "powerful,"- the economy is "fantastic,"- the economy is "amazing,"- and the economy is just "marvelous,"-
Mr. President, how can the President and his advisors claim that the economy is "robust"- when nearly five million Americans have slipped into poverty since 2000, including over one million children?
How can the President and his advisors claim that the economy is "vibrant"- when median income for working-age families has declined by about $2,400 since 2000?
How can the President and his advisors claim that the economy is "strong and getting stronger"- when the personal savings rate has been below zero for eight consecutive quarters, something that hasn't happened since the Great Depression?
How can the President and his advisors claim that the economy is "healthy"- when 8.6 million Americans have lost their health insurance since 2000, and a record-breaking 47 million Americans are uninsured with millions more under-insured?
How can the President and his advisors claim that the economy is "thriving"- when 35 million Americans in our country, the richest country in the history of the world, struggled to put food on the table last year and the number of the hungriest Americans keeps going up?
How can the President and his advisors claim that our economy is "booming"- when college students are graduating, on average, with about $20,000 in debt and some 400,000 qualified high school students don't go to college in the first place because they can't afford it?
How can the President and his advisors claim that the economy is "fantastic"- when home foreclosures are now the highest on record, turning the American dream of home-ownership into the American nightmare for millions of Americans?
How can the President and his advisors claim that the economy is "powerful"- when the number of working families paying more than half of their limited incomes on housing has increased by 72% since 1997?
How can the President and his economic advisors claim that our economy is "the envy of the world"- when the United States has the highest rate of childhood poverty, the highest infant mortality rate, the highest overall poverty rate, the largest gap between the rich and the poor, and the only country not to have a national health insurance program of any major industrialized nation on earth?
How can the President and his advisors claim that the economy is "amazing"- when we have lost over three million decent-paying manufacturing jobs since 2000, mainly due to our record-breaking $765 billion trade deficit?
How can the President and his economic advisors claim that our economy is just "marvelous"- when 3 million American workers have lost their pensions since 2000, and about half of private sector American workers have no pension coverage whatsoever?
Bernie Sanders is the independent U.S. Senator from Vermont. He is the longest serving independent member of Congress in American history. He is a member of the Senate's Budget, Veterans, Environment, Energy, and H.E.L.P. (Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions) committees.
When talking to those who take the opposite stand on this, you're likely to have to confront the concept that "we don't need no stinking taxes", and the idea that those tax breaks just represent the "natural state" that the economy should reflect. BUT THIS LIBERTARIAN IDEAL IS A TOTAL LIE, which I address in a little mini-article I once wrote, as the focus of such taxes is: who pays for the protection of the assets of the rich _without_ such taxes?!!
----------------------
ON A "FLAT TAX"
While the "flat tax" idea pushed by Conservatives is that a percentage of each dollar of _income_ be taken for support of "public" institutions, a better one would be to flatly tax each dollar of _property_.
The justification: the protection of the status quo benefits the _owners_ of "stuff". Police, the Military, and even "bribery of the poor not to revolt" are _all_ focused on stability and preservation of the status quo. Therefore _that's_ where the payment for that stabilization should come from. (What would it cost? Maybe 1%-2% per year of the value of everything.)
The complaint that such a tax would "confiscate" acquired property is invalidated by the realization that if such "property" is not _producing_ the additional value required to _protect_ it, then such "ownership" is, otherwise, being maintained at a net cost to everyone _else_.
The complaint that "privacy rights" would be drastically compromised would need to be dealt with, but _currently_, the biggest use of "privacy" may well be the obfuscation of crimes against the "common people" of the world.
- Lenny Gray -
by
lenngray (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 61 comments)
on Monday, September 3, 2007 at 11:37:06 AM
Once he knew Bernie Sanders opposed his candidate, it wouldn't surprise me if the Clown Prince blanked out everything he said. Talking sense to George Bush would be tantamount to urinating on an electric fence.
by
Dave Kisor (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 155 comments)
on Monday, September 3, 2007 at 1:55:34 PM
and I applaud and second every damn thing he noted in this article (speech really). But what is missing from it is more telling than all the facts and disclosures of inequity and theft. Where is the solution to the problems Senator Sanders lists with such passion and eloquence?
Do you all really believe that by casting a nay vote for this stooge of Bush and the very wealthy we shall see a miraculous change in our direction? I hope you are not that naive.....Bernie, you are wedded to a corrupt and sick system, bright spot within it though you may be......
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Monday, September 3, 2007 at 9:45:50 PM
Your principled opposition to a personal friend occupying the Directorship of the OMB due to the totally unprincipled economic policies of Dubya and his neo-con cohorts is right on target. Normally my support of a political candidate is the kiss of death, so with my donation, you have broken the jinx by actually winning. Please keep doing what you're doing.
by
L. RETZACK (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 41 comments)
on Monday, September 3, 2007 at 11:06:20 PM
5 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
